4 ms·

What do the Americans get for their relatives murdered by IRGC throughout the years?

by reliabilityguy 2mo ago

hilariously 2mo ago
What do the Iranians get for us overthrowing their government in the 50s? (we are not the good guys here)
- reliabilityguy 2mo ago
  There is a difference between overthrowing the government and blowing up civilian targets.
  - 8note 2mo ago
    installing a brutal puppet dictator to torture and murder civilians counts as what exactly? and protecting them from being tried criminally after theyve been deposed? the US continues to blow up civilian infrastructure, and those WMDs that sadam was supposed to have were american made, for the purposes of using on iranian civilians.
    - reliabilityguy 2mo ago
      The US didn’t install the shah to torture and murder civilians. It was shahs choice to do so. To blow up civilian target is a choice. I know nuance is unpopular nowadays but I do see a difference between bad decisions with unintended consequences and bad decisions with intended terrible results.
      - hilariously 2mo ago
        You are saying this in a thread about an impact of a war we just made up and did not do in any sane way.
toomuchtodo 2mo ago
At some point, as an American, we must accept the consequences for being warmongers. If we want less harm, we should stop causing it all around the world for no objective gain (prove me wrong, I see no gains, only trillions of dollars incinerated and countless lives lost). But the US keeps lobbing stones expecting no consequences for doing so. Something about insanity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. “Just one more conflict bro” as the kids would say.
- reliabilityguy 2mo ago
  You can say the same thing about Iran. They can mind their own business, but they chose not to. Islamic regime carried out a lot of covert ops against civilian targets all around the globe, so what’s happening now is expected.
  - toomuchtodo 2mo ago
    You can say the same, neither Iran nor the US is the good guy. It’s about as sane as the Star Trek episode where deaths are mandated by simulation outcome. It is what it is until political turnover provides an opportunity, but not a guarantee, of change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon https://www.npr.org/2026/07/18/g-s1-134037/why-is-it-so-hard-for-the-u-s-to-win-wars https://www.npr.org/2026/07/18/g-s1-134037/why-is-it-so-hard... (“… the U.S. has been acting like an empire without wanting to be an empire.”)
    - reliabilityguy 2mo ago
      I would say that as the form of government and the legal landscape of a country as a whole US fares much better than the Islamic Republic.
      - toomuchtodo 2mo ago
        My children will avoid any form of participation in US military operations, and I legally avoid paying as much US federal tax as possible ("how many of my tax dollars have contributed to killing innocent people?"), so I don’t have a strong opinion on the topic beyond as a scholar of history and predicting the future. Old men sending young innocent people to die is a tale as old as time, and I expect it to continue long after I’m gone (regardless of nations, boundaries, etc, which are also fluid over time), so the best one can do is manage your personal risk accordingly. We must assume it to be a constant of some sort until change occurs where that assumption would change. If tail risk catches you (“wrong place at the wrong time” through no fault of your own), c'est la vie. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30908249 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30908249 https://usafacts.org/articles/how-have-military-deaths-changed-over-time/ https://usafacts.org/articles/how-have-military-deaths-chang...
nickpinkston 2mo ago
Let's do it fairly. Like 100s (?) of Americans killed by Iran ever. Compare to Iranians: Affected by the aftermath of the American coup of Mosaddegh (ultimately leading to IRGC's existence), providing weapons to Iraq for the Iran-Iraq War (200K deaths), etc. + decades of stupid policy trying to take their oil in the name of "regional security" (for "our" oil).
- reliabilityguy 2mo ago
  > Let's do it fairly. How would it work? Do you expect a 1:1 casualty list? 1:1 list of events? Should the US citizens allow for a coup on US soil carried out by the IRGC?
  - bonesss 2mo ago
    I do so wish everyone espousing 1:1 casualty ratios as necessary & fair, and that anything else is immoral, would take stock of where they live and specifically how those countries avoided falling to the axis powers in WW2… And, courage of their convictions, if their own people are so inherently evil for making “the other bastard die for his” they should be renouncing citizenship, yielding their ill-gotten wealth, and self-immolating for their nations eternal shame. Categorical reasoning as applied to war does not yield a tit for tat, its category versus category. All of column B to preserve any column A. “Not worth the bones of a single British Grenadier”.
- strictnein 2mo ago
  ~250 alone on one day in 1983. 300-400 total from their terrorist networks. Thousands of casualties (wounded and killed) in Iraq that are directly attributed to Iran.
inigyou 2mo ago
If we're being perfectly fair, they would have to get the same thing Hamas gets

What do the Americans get for their relatives murdered by IRGC throughout the years?

hilariously 2mo ago

What do the Iranians get for us overthrowing their government in the 50s? (we are not the good guys here)

reliabilityguy 2mo ago
There is a difference between overthrowing the government and blowing up civilian targets.
- 8note 2mo ago
  installing a brutal puppet dictator to torture and murder civilians counts as what exactly? and protecting them from being tried criminally after theyve been deposed? the US continues to blow up civilian infrastructure, and those WMDs that sadam was supposed to have were american made, for the purposes of using on iranian civilians.
  - reliabilityguy 2mo ago
    The US didn’t install the shah to torture and murder civilians. It was shahs choice to do so. To blow up civilian target is a choice. I know nuance is unpopular nowadays but I do see a difference between bad decisions with unintended consequences and bad decisions with intended terrible results.
    - hilariously 2mo ago
      You are saying this in a thread about an impact of a war we just made up and did not do in any sane way.

toomuchtodo 2mo ago

At some point, as an American, we must accept the consequences for being warmongers. If we want less harm, we should stop causing it all around the world for no objective gain (prove me wrong, I see no gains, only trillions of dollars incinerated and countless lives lost). But the US keeps lobbing stones expecting no consequences for doing so. Something about insanity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. “Just one more conflict bro” as the kids would say.

reliabilityguy 2mo ago
You can say the same thing about Iran. They can mind their own business, but they chose not to. Islamic regime carried out a lot of covert ops against civilian targets all around the globe, so what’s happening now is expected.
- toomuchtodo 2mo ago
  You can say the same, neither Iran nor the US is the good guy. It’s about as sane as the Star Trek episode where deaths are mandated by simulation outcome. It is what it is until political turnover provides an opportunity, but not a guarantee, of change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon https://www.npr.org/2026/07/18/g-s1-134037/why-is-it-so-hard-for-the-u-s-to-win-wars https://www.npr.org/2026/07/18/g-s1-134037/why-is-it-so-hard... (“… the U.S. has been acting like an empire without wanting to be an empire.”)
  - reliabilityguy 2mo ago
    I would say that as the form of government and the legal landscape of a country as a whole US fares much better than the Islamic Republic.
    - toomuchtodo 2mo ago
      My children will avoid any form of participation in US military operations, and I legally avoid paying as much US federal tax as possible ("how many of my tax dollars have contributed to killing innocent people?"), so I don’t have a strong opinion on the topic beyond as a scholar of history and predicting the future. Old men sending young innocent people to die is a tale as old as time, and I expect it to continue long after I’m gone (regardless of nations, boundaries, etc, which are also fluid over time), so the best one can do is manage your personal risk accordingly. We must assume it to be a constant of some sort until change occurs where that assumption would change. If tail risk catches you (“wrong place at the wrong time” through no fault of your own), c'est la vie. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30908249 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30908249 https://usafacts.org/articles/how-have-military-deaths-changed-over-time/ https://usafacts.org/articles/how-have-military-deaths-chang...

nickpinkston 2mo ago

Let's do it fairly. Like 100s (?) of Americans killed by Iran ever. Compare to Iranians: Affected by the aftermath of the American coup of Mosaddegh (ultimately leading to IRGC's existence), providing weapons to Iraq for the Iran-Iraq War (200K deaths), etc. + decades of stupid policy trying to take their oil in the name of "regional security" (for "our" oil).

reliabilityguy 2mo ago
> Let's do it fairly. How would it work? Do you expect a 1:1 casualty list? 1:1 list of events? Should the US citizens allow for a coup on US soil carried out by the IRGC?
- bonesss 2mo ago
  I do so wish everyone espousing 1:1 casualty ratios as necessary & fair, and that anything else is immoral, would take stock of where they live and specifically how those countries avoided falling to the axis powers in WW2… And, courage of their convictions, if their own people are so inherently evil for making “the other bastard die for his” they should be renouncing citizenship, yielding their ill-gotten wealth, and self-immolating for their nations eternal shame. Categorical reasoning as applied to war does not yield a tit for tat, its category versus category. All of column B to preserve any column A. “Not worth the bones of a single British Grenadier”.
strictnein 2mo ago
~250 alone on one day in 1983. 300-400 total from their terrorist networks. Thousands of casualties (wounded and killed) in Iraq that are directly attributed to Iran.

inigyou 2mo ago

If we're being perfectly fair, they would have to get the same thing Hamas gets