4 ms·

I have so much admiration for anyone who protests a regime as oppressive and brutal as theirs. Just by being involved, I imagine they’re in serious danger. So

I have so much admiration for anyone who protests a regime as oppressive and brutal as theirs. Just by being involved, I imagine they’re in serious danger. So far, more than 550 people have been killed and 20k detained by security forces.[1] Godspeed. Edit: these death numbers are from an older protest and are inaccurate. Please see article / comments below :) [1]https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3kl56z2l4o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3kl56z2l4o

quietbritishjim 10mo ago
That article says "at least 19 protesters and one member of the security forces have been killed", although that was as of a few days ago. The numbers you quoted are from the end of the article, which is about the previous demonstrations in 2022. (In fairness, it's confusing because BBC News articles put almost every sentence into its own paragraph, which I think is intended to help low literacy people read them. But it does make it hard to follow the connections between sentences that really ought to be together in a paragraph, like in this case.)
- Esophagus4 10mo ago
  Oh, oops… thanks for the correction. Must’ve skimmed it too quickly.
  - deleted 10mo ago
    [deleted]
Alupis 10mo ago
Unfortunately we've seen protests like this before in Iran (perhaps not this widespread, however). Shouting in the streets won't end the regime. The regime will either just wait it out, or clamp down with violence. The people will need to take more direct action if they hope for any change to come out of this - which unfortunately likely means more death. Without weapons, the people of Iran will have a difficult time overthrowing the regime. This may highlight to some folks abroad the importance of the US's 2nd Amendment, and an armed civilian population - things we take for granted in the US, and some wish to abolish. It's a nasty, depressing situation. The regime needs to end. The people of Iran, and the people of the world will be far better off without this regime. I hope the best for the people of Iran.
- embedding-shape 10mo ago
  > This may highlight to some folks abroad the importance of the US's 2nd Amendment, and an armed civilian population I don't think this highlight that at all. Judging by what has happened so far, the people who have the guns join the tyranny rather than oppose it. Why would it be any different in Iran?
  - Alupis 10mo ago
    You can look at historical revolutions - going back to the beginning of time - to see your statement is obviously false. An armed civilian population is one that can enact revolution. A disarmed population is one that gets killed, beaten and controlled.
    - hannasanarion 10mo ago
      No rebellion or revolt had ever been successful without arms supplied from outside sponsors. Random personal small arms that a bunch of people just happen to have at home are not enough to win a revolutionary war against a professional military. Self defense pistols and hunting rifles don't win wars, artillery does.
      - zozbot234 10mo ago
        > Random personal small arms that a bunch of people just happen to have at home are not enough to win a revolutionary war against a professional military. They're absolutely enough to tip the scales in favor of those within that professional military who would rather support the prospective revolution. Such people will definitely exist given a widespread revolt against a violently oppressive regime.
      - WillPostForFood 10mo ago
        Russian Revolution? French Revolution?
        9mo ago

quietbritishjim 10mo ago

That article says "at least 19 protesters and one member of the security forces have been killed", although that was as of a few days ago. The numbers you quoted are from the end of the article, which is about the previous demonstrations in 2022. (In fairness, it's confusing because BBC News articles put almost every sentence into its own paragraph, which I think is intended to help low literacy people read them. But it does make it hard to follow the connections between sentences that really ought to be together in a paragraph, like in this case.)

Esophagus4 10mo ago
Oh, oops… thanks for the correction. Must’ve skimmed it too quickly.
- deleted 10mo ago
  [deleted]

Alupis 10mo ago

Unfortunately we've seen protests like this before in Iran (perhaps not this widespread, however). Shouting in the streets won't end the regime. The regime will either just wait it out, or clamp down with violence. The people will need to take more direct action if they hope for any change to come out of this - which unfortunately likely means more death. Without weapons, the people of Iran will have a difficult time overthrowing the regime. This may highlight to some folks abroad the importance of the US's 2nd Amendment, and an armed civilian population - things we take for granted in the US, and some wish to abolish. It's a nasty, depressing situation. The regime needs to end. The people of Iran, and the people of the world will be far better off without this regime. I hope the best for the people of Iran.

embedding-shape 10mo ago
> This may highlight to some folks abroad the importance of the US's 2nd Amendment, and an armed civilian population I don't think this highlight that at all. Judging by what has happened so far, the people who have the guns join the tyranny rather than oppose it. Why would it be any different in Iran?
- Alupis 10mo ago
  You can look at historical revolutions - going back to the beginning of time - to see your statement is obviously false. An armed civilian population is one that can enact revolution. A disarmed population is one that gets killed, beaten and controlled.
  - hannasanarion 10mo ago
    No rebellion or revolt had ever been successful without arms supplied from outside sponsors. Random personal small arms that a bunch of people just happen to have at home are not enough to win a revolutionary war against a professional military. Self defense pistols and hunting rifles don't win wars, artillery does.
    - zozbot234 10mo ago
      > Random personal small arms that a bunch of people just happen to have at home are not enough to win a revolutionary war against a professional military. They're absolutely enough to tip the scales in favor of those within that professional military who would rather support the prospective revolution. Such people will definitely exist given a widespread revolt against a violently oppressive regime.
    - WillPostForFood 10mo ago
      Russian Revolution? French Revolution?
      - 9mo ago