5 ms·
For the prospects of the freedom and subsequent prosperity of the oppressed Iranian people, peace in the Middle East, and safety of the commercial shipping rout
by hereme888 8mo ago
For the prospects of the freedom and subsequent prosperity of the oppressed Iranian people, peace in the Middle East, and safety of the commercial shipping routes, I fully approve my tax dollars to the matter.
- danny_codes 8mo agoYeah that’s the likely outcome given our track record /s
- hereme888 8mo agoVenezuela is undergoing tremendous freedom and hope. My fellow Venezuelans and I are super grateful for the well-planned, surgical mission of the US. They can have all the oil they want and help restore our industries in exchange for their financial benefit and partnership, which is the most recent track record.
- lukas099 8mo agoI think that interventions in the region of interest, the middle east, are more relevant data points than Venezuela.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- RiverStone 8mo agoEvery Iranian I know has the same sentiment right now. Feeling very conflicted in that 1) their country is being attacked, and 2) thankful that the oppressive regime is being destroyed. Cautiously optimistic about the future.
- leosanchez 8mo agoFor Pakistanis as well ?
- hereme888 8mo agoI'm honestly not informed about what's happening with Pakistan. I know there's a ton of tweets about this, but it's not in my scope at the moment.
- LAC-Tech 8mo agoThat is an unrealistic goal. Likely the actual goal, as dictated by Israel and the Jewish Lobby in the US, is to destabilise Iran long term in a sort of Syria situation, so they cannot threaten Israeli hegemony in the region. Remember even a non Islamic Iran is still a threat to Israeli power if it remains unified and intact.
- hereme888 8mo agoI don't agree with your perspective, but I do support Iran no longer being a threat to anyone else in the region, no matter what.
- don_esteban 8mo agoDo you support Israel no longer being a threat to anyone else in the region, no matter what?
- hereme888 8mo ago[flagged]
- collinmcnulty 8mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip_famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip_famine
- don_esteban 8mo agoLast I checked, International Court of Justice and International Criminal Court tend to disagree. To say nothing about overuse/abuse of the term 'terrorist' and weasel words 'terrorist aligned ideologies'. To say nothing about being randomly in the vicinity of a person Israel might consider terrorist might put you in mortal danger, simply because they do not care about 'collateral damage'. To say nothing about being Palestinian child being a 'future terrorist'. To say nothing about trying to document what they are doing might put you in mortal danger (just look up the number of journalists killed by Israel).
- mekdoonggi 8mo agoWould you still approve if the cost is 20x, the Iranian people are worse off, and the shipping routes and Middle East are dramatically less safe due to drones? Because that is a realistic possibility.
- hereme888 8mo agoNo, I would not. But so far I don't see that outcome.
- threetonesun 8mo agoOK, I don't. I wonder if we could set up some sort of legislative system that could debate this on our behalf and make a reasonable plan that accounts for our differing viewpoints.
- hereme888 8mo agoI've found that if two people sit together and are willing to talk long enough, they'll eventually be able to actually hear each other, and usually they are more in agreement than the media-installed reactions and assumptions we have. Only with a few would we vehemently disagree. I'm talking about reasonable people though, like your calm reply.
- hypeatei 8mo agoYou completely missed the point: Trump unilaterally started this chaotic war without going to Congress. This isn't a matter of "if we just talk we can be friends" type of situation. He stated a war on his own (after campaigning on the opposite no less) meaning our representatives had no say in this. It's completely unacceptable.
- hereme888 8mo agoI did not miss any points. You are uninformed. Iran was less than a month away from having a viable nuke, and they've been swearing to use it against America and Israel for the past 47 years. In the last set of negotiations, Iran refused to rule out building the nuke. That's the official information, and if you think they're lying, you have no alternative sources of trustworthy information besides terrorist-aligned ideologies. Presidents can take such defensive actions. It's legal.
- hypeatei 8mo ago> Iran was less than a month away from having a viable nuke Oh, I see, you've bought the propaganda that Iran is close to a nuke. That's been the scare tactic for decades. Did you already forget the strike we did on their nuclear facilities months ago that supposedly set them back? There was no justification for this war, the official US position is that we needed to get involved because Israel striked first and Iran was going to retaliate against us. Israel is wagging the dog here since this is likely the last puppet they'll have in office and Iran threatens their power in the ME.
- nprz 8mo agoDo you really believe killing 175 children[0] will bring peace and prosperity to the Iranian people? [0]https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/01/world/middleeast/girls-school-strike-iran-video.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/01/world/middleeast/girls-sc...
- hereme888 8mo agoThat news piece was officially dismissed after investigation by the IDF and CENTCOM. I would bring to your awareness that you're using an emotional argument with no substance, and it discounts the decades of complex history in the region.
- aeve890 8mo ago>investigation by the IDF and CENTCOM this has to be bait, right?
- richardfeynman 8mo agoPerhaps the original comment, putting forth debunked IRGC propaganda, and presenting it as definitely true, was bait.
- verteu 8mo agoWhat part is debunked? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_airstrike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_airstrike
- richardfeynman 8mo agoThe main source in that Wikipedia article is "According to the IRGC." Trusting any belligerent in a war is silly, but given its history, trusting the IRGC during wartime is even sillier. No independent body like the Red Crescent (which is counting casualties in Iran) verified this. It's all "trust me, bro." USCENTCOM and the IAF both rejected these assertions. You should demand some evidence for the IRGC's claim. If the claim is that the US or Israel did it, why doesn't the IRGC show the munition used? Or any OSINT data, like where the munition was fired from, its trajectory, etc. The IRGC has been firing from the IRGC base where this school was located. It could just as easily have been a failed IRGC munition. Also, was this "school" by an IRGC base actually a school, or did it serve a military purpose? Surely you can't know the answer to this, so it's tough for you to judge the military necessity of the strike. Finally, what's the claim, really? That western powers intentionally struck a school and killed these kids to advance their war aims? Or that it was an accident? If the former, an explanation for "how" is required; and if the latter (and if it did indeed happen) it's the kind of collateral damage that occurs in all wars.
- carefulfungi 8mo agoIraq. Afghanistan. Iraq, again. Syria. Libya. Iran. Iran, again. Yeah - this is totally gonna work this time.
- karmakurtisaani 8mo agoIn theory it could work. In practice you'd at most get a bloody civil war that would give rise to a new form of ISIS. But if you believe what Fox News tells you, it's probably too late to argue about it.
- hereme888 8mo agoLet's re-evaluate in one month; the projected time-frame given by POTUS and Israel for Iranians to reclaim their country.
- lukas099 8mo agoDo you believe that those goals will be achieved? Given the historical track record of these kinds of interventions, I do not.
- nitwit005 8mo agoIt's genuinely difficult to see this sort of claim as being an honest statement, given that everyone knows the outcome with Afghanistan and Iraq.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]