3 ms·

> Wikipedia The link provided comes from the BBC. Wikipedia simply acts as an aggregator on certain topics, which is convenient to share in such debates. Your

> Wikipedia The link provided comes from the BBC. Wikipedia simply acts as an aggregator on certain topics, which is convenient to share in such debates. Your ad hominem against the BBC is laughable, please provide a list of correct media sources then. And don't try to debate the content of course! > Iran evil The US and Israel have no goal to change that, so the population will in the end have a destroyed infrastructure, and a hardliner regime even more brutal than ever. Mission accomplished!

spwa4 7mo ago
> > Iran evil > The US and Israel have no goal to change that Even if you believe in the most absurd conspiracy theories you could still accurately classify US efforts as "trying to change Iran's behavior to the world for the better". So this is entirely, 100%, false. And, yes, we all hope for more, which may or may not happen.
- Saline9515 7mo ago
  Ah yes, US efforts along with their actions against Venezuela, Lybia, Cambodia, Syria, Vietnam, Irak or North Korea. It totally worked, and those countries were much better than before the bombing! When you think about it, every country between Pakistan and the mediterranean sea was bombed by the US in the last 30 years. How did it end up? At some point the people in power very well know what's happening. Bombing schools, bridges, universities and hospitals don't create better regimes. They just prove that hardliners of the IRGC were right from the start. Moderates have nothing to show, since the Trump admin never wanted to negociate. Yet another massive US self-own. And I don't see why it is a conspiracy theory. Trump showed with Venezuela that he didn't care at all about democracy. And Israelis don't either. You are the one absorbing the blatant propaganda lies of the Trump administration.
  - spwa4 7mo ago
    ... and then, of course, we switch moral fallacies. The supposed superiority of doing nothing. Hope you never need an ambulance, because of course, clearly, according to your reasoning the moral action would be to let you die. And btw: your motivation, obviously that you want Iran hardliners to win inside Iran, is showing. Carefully placing the blame for the actions of the hardliners with the US. Needless to say, that is not a moral position at all. There's many problems. First: every agent with agency is of course responsible for their own actions. Which means Iran's regime, islamists and islamic clergy are despicable monsters because of what they did. That there is a reason they did what they did does not explain their actions in any moral sense. It makes it worse, of course. It means that they're indeed fully responsible for their actions, that they're not insane, made a choice, and their choice shows them to be truly despicable, immoral and disgusting human beings.
    - Saline9515 7mo ago
      You are conflating "doing something" with "doing something useful". The US could have chosen not to kill the supreme leader (who was the only one able to drive a change), a large part of the moderates in the government and negociators. It could have chosen to send other people than crooked incompetent real estate managers to negotiate with Iranians about complex nuclear issues. It could have chosen to propose an acceptable plan to Iranians that allowed room for negotiation, not just a blanket capitulation and surrender. Your view of foreign policy is immature, similar to a child trying to wash the dishes and breaking them as he does. When the parents arrive, he cries and says "but I'm trying to help!". And I don't like the IRGC but I also would prefer to avoid the humanitarian and refugee crisis and civil war in a 90M pop country. Which will happen after the US "liberates" them by bombing civilian infrastructure such as water treatment or electricity plants. Did they ever say "thank you"? Because I know that others will pick up the pieces after the US and Israeli meatheads in power will come back home. Just like it happened in Irak, Syria, and Lybia.
      - spwa4 7mo ago
        All of those are choices the US government DID make, and Iran threw into their face before we switched to this. Which of course changes whose view of foreign policy is immature, but who cares? This is just a discussion forum.
        Saline9515 7mo ago
        Iran, the US and many other countries had a perfectly working deal under the JCPOA, until Trump, pressed by the Israelis, exited it. Which led to the current situations as Iranians weren't forced to limit their uranium enrichment. Once again, a massive self-own by the US.

spwa4 7mo ago

> > Iran evil > The US and Israel have no goal to change that Even if you believe in the most absurd conspiracy theories you could still accurately classify US efforts as "trying to change Iran's behavior to the world for the better". So this is entirely, 100%, false. And, yes, we all hope for more, which may or may not happen.

Saline9515 7mo ago
Ah yes, US efforts along with their actions against Venezuela, Lybia, Cambodia, Syria, Vietnam, Irak or North Korea. It totally worked, and those countries were much better than before the bombing! When you think about it, every country between Pakistan and the mediterranean sea was bombed by the US in the last 30 years. How did it end up? At some point the people in power very well know what's happening. Bombing schools, bridges, universities and hospitals don't create better regimes. They just prove that hardliners of the IRGC were right from the start. Moderates have nothing to show, since the Trump admin never wanted to negociate. Yet another massive US self-own. And I don't see why it is a conspiracy theory. Trump showed with Venezuela that he didn't care at all about democracy. And Israelis don't either. You are the one absorbing the blatant propaganda lies of the Trump administration.
- spwa4 7mo ago
  ... and then, of course, we switch moral fallacies. The supposed superiority of doing nothing. Hope you never need an ambulance, because of course, clearly, according to your reasoning the moral action would be to let you die. And btw: your motivation, obviously that you want Iran hardliners to win inside Iran, is showing. Carefully placing the blame for the actions of the hardliners with the US. Needless to say, that is not a moral position at all. There's many problems. First: every agent with agency is of course responsible for their own actions. Which means Iran's regime, islamists and islamic clergy are despicable monsters because of what they did. That there is a reason they did what they did does not explain their actions in any moral sense. It makes it worse, of course. It means that they're indeed fully responsible for their actions, that they're not insane, made a choice, and their choice shows them to be truly despicable, immoral and disgusting human beings.
  - Saline9515 7mo ago
    You are conflating "doing something" with "doing something useful". The US could have chosen not to kill the supreme leader (who was the only one able to drive a change), a large part of the moderates in the government and negociators. It could have chosen to send other people than crooked incompetent real estate managers to negotiate with Iranians about complex nuclear issues. It could have chosen to propose an acceptable plan to Iranians that allowed room for negotiation, not just a blanket capitulation and surrender. Your view of foreign policy is immature, similar to a child trying to wash the dishes and breaking them as he does. When the parents arrive, he cries and says "but I'm trying to help!". And I don't like the IRGC but I also would prefer to avoid the humanitarian and refugee crisis and civil war in a 90M pop country. Which will happen after the US "liberates" them by bombing civilian infrastructure such as water treatment or electricity plants. Did they ever say "thank you"? Because I know that others will pick up the pieces after the US and Israeli meatheads in power will come back home. Just like it happened in Irak, Syria, and Lybia.
    - spwa4 7mo ago
      All of those are choices the US government DID make, and Iran threw into their face before we switched to this. Which of course changes whose view of foreign policy is immature, but who cares? This is just a discussion forum.
      - Saline9515 7mo ago
        Iran, the US and many other countries had a perfectly working deal under the JCPOA, until Trump, pressed by the Israelis, exited it. Which led to the current situations as Iranians weren't forced to limit their uranium enrichment. Once again, a massive self-own by the US.