General News Thread

[Jon the Hat]

11 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Of course they are, and Trump will carpet bomb Iranians until they are free. I’m sure they’ll be suitably grateful.

 

I’m not trying to make any such case. It’s quite possible to be disgusted by both sides (in this case all 3). The real losers here are the Iranian and Palestinian people. Trump & Hegseth are psychopaths, Netanyahu has unleashed some of the worst messianic nutters on the planet. The fact that that the theocratic monsters in the Iranian regime actually sound more reasonable just emphasises that there aren’t any good guys amongst them.

 

No one is carpet bombing anyone.  Of course the school was a huge error and appalling tragedy, but Iran has killed more Iranians this year than the US and Israel have.  Their bombing is very much targeted and planned to limit civilian impacts.  They have not damaged the power infrastructure, or the oil production infrastructure.  Very few civilians in fact have been killed for the amount if bombing we have seen.

[Jon the Hat]

9 hours ago, danny. said:

Pretty wild people are openly flying the Taliban flag in the middle of London, and celebrating the Iranian regime.

 

A couple of charter flights to Tehran in order I think.  

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

No one is carpet bombing anyone.  Of course the school was a huge error and appalling tragedy, but Iran has killed more Iranians this year than the US and Israel have.  Their bombing is very much targeted and planned to limit civilian impacts.  They have not damaged the power infrastructure, or the oil production infrastructure.  Very few civilians in fact have been killed for the amount if bombing we have seen.

Which I'm sure is a comfort to those who are dead, and also to those that aren't considering such bombing is not fulfilling the stated purpose of regime change in a "better" direction and, more to the point, was never intended to in the first place. 

 

Lack of (stated) intent (though personally I think that itself is up for debate) and exporting various methods of destruction doesn't necessarily make a lesser evil than keeping hideous brutality in house in the name of religious lunacy. 

[Jon the Hat]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Which I'm sure is a comfort to those who are dead, and also to those that aren't considering such bombing is not fulfilling the stated purpose of regime change in a "better" direction and, more to the point, was never intended to in the first place. 

 

Lack of (stated) intent (though personally I think that itself is up for debate) and exporting various methods of destruction doesn't necessarily make a lesser evil than keeping hideous brutality in house in the name of religious lunacy. 

Trump has stated about 10 different objectives by now I think, so who knows, but regime change was always optimistic, although the balance of power is certainly shifted with the IRGC putting their man in the hotseat. 

 

I think three clear objectives of 1) reducing Iran's ability to fire ballistic missiles and drones has been mostly achieved, 2) their ability to produce a nuclear weapon and use it to destroy Israel again much reduced, and 3) their ability to prevent future bombing of their country to take out any future nuclear program is also much reduced.  

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Trump has stated about 10 different objectives by now I think, so who knows, but regime change was always optimistic, although the balance of power is certainly shifted with the IRGC putting their man in the hotseat. 

 

I think three clear objectives of 1) reducing Iran's ability to fire ballistic missiles and drones has been mostly achieved, 2) their ability to produce a nuclear weapon and use it to destroy Israel again much reduced, and 3) their ability to prevent future bombing of their country to take out any future nuclear program is also much reduced.  

Quite right, so this always was all about geopolitics and self interest, rather than the (legitimate) plight of the Iranian people after all. They're clearly expendable to all the powers that be who are involved. 

 

Glad there is agreement on that. 

Edited 16 March by leicsmac

[st albans fox]

11 hours ago, Clogger_ said:

Personally think Trump would get behind that chainsaw-wielding idiot if he decided to go for it. Luckily Argentina are more skint than we are

 

On the hyperbole about the Navy, it seems that we were not consulted on the Israeli/US decision to go to war. Not sure how we'd be ready to sail on day one. When lives are at stake it's a little bit more complicated than shouting "SNOWFLAKES"

 

Have you served, filthyfox?

the supreme leader of the west was quoted on AF1 saying that he asked the British to deploy an aircraft carrier but we declined. This was some time before the first attack.  There is no getting away from the fact that some people in our defence ministry/foreign office/govt were found wanting by not having assets at the very least ‘ready to go’. We don’t know where the fault lies. 
 

was thinking yesterday evening - the straits of Hormuz are international waters.  Surely the Indian /Chinese navies are able to escort their tankers through without being attacked.  Similarly the Spanish and any other nations that have specifically prevented the Americans from using their territories. 

[Robo61]

14 hours ago, st albans fox said:

I’m wondering if I’ve wandered into another dimension 

 

trump is a lot of things but he’s not murdering tens of thousands of his own citizens within a week 

 

trying to make a case for the Iranian regime being anything but disgusting murderers is indefensible  

America and Israel have been killing tens of thousands of Iranian and Palenstian citizens so I am struggling to see a great difference or are you saying a nations own citizens are worth more than another nations.  Unfortunately I do think that is the way most of the workd see's it,  which is why there will always be wars.  

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

America and Israel have been killing tens of thousands of Iranian and Palenstian citizens so I am struggling to see a great difference or are you saying a nations own citizens are worth more than another nations.  Unfortunately I do think that is the way most of the workd see's it,  which is why there will always be wars.  

yes, imo, a country killing its own citizens is worse.  That’s not a comment about worth - every innocent life is worth the same as another. 

 

pedantically, tens of thousands of Iranians have not been killed at this time.  Unless you’re speaking about those who may have died due to sanctions which is not something I’m knowledgeable about. 

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

yes, imo, a country killing its own citizens is worse.  That’s not a comment about worth - every innocent life is worth the same as another. 

 

pedantically, tens of thousands of Iranians have not been killed at this time.  Unless you’re speaking about those who may have died due to sanctions which is not something I’m knowledgeable about. 

Begging pardon, but those first two sentences, on first glance, look like they directly contradict each other. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Trump has stated about 10 different objectives by now I think, so who knows, but regime change was always optimistic, although the balance of power is certainly shifted with the IRGC putting their man in the hotseat. 

 

I think three clear objectives of 1) reducing Iran's ability to fire ballistic missiles and drones has been mostly achieved, 2) their ability to produce a nuclear weapon and use it to destroy Israel again much reduced, and 3) their ability to prevent future bombing of their country to take out any future nuclear program is also much reduced.  

But the desire to do these things, that will be very much increased.

[bovril]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

yes, imo, a country killing its own citizens is worse.  That’s not a comment about worth - every innocent life is worth the same as another. 

 

Trying to rank such things is pretty grotesque but I'd say exporting death on a large scale is probably worse than doing it within your own borders. Not that Iran doesn't export it, just compared to the US and Israel they seem like Switzerland. 

[st albans fox]

19 minutes ago, bovril said:

Trying to rank such things is pretty grotesque but I'd say exporting death on a large scale is probably worse than doing it within your own borders. Not that Iran doesn't export it, just compared to the US and Israel they seem like Switzerland. 

I was asked 

it’s my opinion 

that’s your opinion

 

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Begging pardon, but those first two sentences, on first glance, look like they directly contradict each other. 

‘Innocent’ 
those responsible for the killing outside their borders will justify it (especially to themselves) on the basis that it’s targeting those who are not innocent. Those innocents who die are accepted (by them) as the dreadful ‘collateral damage’.
 

I struggle to understand killing many thousands of your own citizens. 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

 

‘Innocent’ 
those responsible for the killing outside their borders will justify it (especially to themselves) on the basis that it’s targeting those who are not innocent. Those innocents who die are accepted (by them) as the dreadful ‘collateral damage’.
 

I struggle to understand killing many thousands of your own citizens. 

Appreciate the clarification. 

 

I think the mentality of those in the first paragraph and those in the second paragraph here are pretty much entirely equal in terms of their depravity, tbh, simply because their attitude towards innocent life as expendable is pretty much identical. 

[bovril]

15 hours ago, Clogger_ said:

Personally concerned the political Right's current alignment with Judaism/Israel is insincere and transactional. There are currently more votes (and more money) in demonising other minorities. History shows it can flip on a sixpence

A lot of the European right especially southern and eastern European seems to me more anti US and Israel, pro Palestine. And the far right in America seems to be becoming very anti Israel and indeed anti semitic. This is based on observations and vibes of course. 

[st albans fox]

56 minutes ago, bovril said:

A lot of the European right especially southern and eastern European seems to me more anti US and Israel, pro Palestine. And the far right in America seems to be becoming very anti Israel and indeed anti semitic. This is based on observations and vibes of course. 

You’re better placed (geographically) than us to make that first judgement. I assume the reason would be a lack of Muslim immigration into Eastern Europe. So the far right in this region retains its primary anti semitic basis. 
America is interesting - the far right have always been anti semitic.  In areas of high Muslim concentration, are the far right more obviously Islamophobic?   Is there strong white supremacist grouping in Michigan as opposed to Wyoming ?  I think clogger made the point about the facists (and moreso the real facists rather than the wannabe ones) going for the easy Muslim targets before they turn their attention back to their more traditional foes. 

Edited 16 March by st albans fox

[Clogger_]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

I was asked 

it’s my opinion 

that’s your opinion

 

‘Innocent’ 
those responsible for the killing outside their borders will justify it (especially to themselves) on the basis that it’s targeting those who are not innocent. Those innocents who die are accepted (by them) as the dreadful ‘collateral damage’.
 

I struggle to understand killing many thousands of your own citizens. 

You're tying yourself in knots here. The actions of Iran and Israel have been vile, and that's really all that needs to be said. Both are truly evil regimes on a historic scale.

 

The above said, I really appreciate that you provide an Israel-aligned perspective on current affairs. I share your hopes that the forthcoming election can lead to positive change in Israel, but I'd simply note that (i) a population gets the government that it votes for (ii) recent actions in Gaza and the wider Middle East cast a long shadow. Pandora's box is well and truly open.

[Clogger_]

6 minutes ago, Clogger_ said:

You're tying yourself in knots here. The actions of Iran and Israel have been vile, and that's really all that needs to be said. Both are truly evil regimes on a historic scale.

 

The above said, I really appreciate that you provide an Israel-aligned perspective on current affairs. I share your hopes that the forthcoming election can lead to positive change in Israel, but I'd simply note that (i) a population gets the government that it votes for (ii) recent actions in Gaza and the wider Middle East cast a long shadow. Pandora's box is well and truly open.

 

All of this is to laboriously note that the populations of Israel and Iran shouldn't be blamed for the actions of their evil leaders, unless of course they are active supporters or participants

[Clogger_]

23 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

You’re better placed (geographically) than us to make that first judgement. I assume the reason would be a lack of Muslim immigration into Eastern Europe. So the far right in this region retains its primary anti semitic basis. 
America is interesting - the far right have always been anti semitic.  In areas of high Muslim concentration, are the far right more obviously Islamophobic?   Is there strong white supremacist grouping in Michigan as opposed to Wyoming ?  I think clogger made the point about the facists (and moreso the real facists rather than the wannabe ones) going for the easy Muslim targets before they turn their attention back to their more traditional foes. 

The far right are poison - always have been, always will be. Their popularity goes up and down, but the need to push back against their ideology never goes away. FWIW I've been just as concerned about the drift towards extremity the 'mainstream' Right. For example, many positions taken by the current Conservative party are hard to tell apart from NF of the 80's.

 

(That the catalyst appears to have been alignment with cranks of dubious intellect in the US is...alarming and astounding in equal measures. It never ceases to amaze me about the lack of intellectual rigour behind RW positions. Nearly everyone on the current political hard right across the globe seems to be completely thick! But it's certainly possible to be thick and cunning! Fascinating.)

Edited 16 March by Clogger_

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Clogger_ said:

The far right are poison - always have been, always will be. Their popularity goes up and down, but the need to push back against their ideology never goes away. FWIW I've been just as concerned about the drift towards extremity the 'mainstream' Right. For example, many positions taken by the current Conservative party are hard to tell apart from NF of the 80's.

 

(That the catalyst appears to have been alignment with cranks of dubious intellect in the US is...alarming and astounding in equal measures. It never ceases to amaze me about the lack of intellectual rigour behind RW positions. Nearly everyone on the current political hard right across the globe seems to be completely thick! But it's certainly possible to be thick and cunning! Fascinating.)

To look at this from an angle bereft of political conpassing, there will always be people who believe themselves and their "tribe" to be superior to all or most others and be willing to back up and demonstrate that belief with acts of both indirect and very, very direct harm to those they seem "inferior". Not all of these people are smart, but those who are often have power and are very, very dangerous to everyone who crosses them in the short term, and absolutely everyone in the long term. 

 

Neutralising such sentiment is (probably) not possible, but neutralising the power they have to cause that harm is both possible and entirely necessary. Not just as a moral duty, but as a pragmatic way forward to guarantee the future of our civilisation itself. 

 

 

[Jon the Hat]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Quite right, so this always was all about geopolitics and self interest, rather than the (legitimate) plight of the Iranian people after all. They're clearly expendable to all the powers that be who are involved. 

 

Glad there is agreement on that. 

Yes I doubt he gave the Iranian people a moments thought.  I think stopping Iran being a threat is also a legitimate basis for this action though, even if it’s not as well thought out as it could have been.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Yes I doubt he gave the Iranian people a moments thought.  I think stopping Iran being a threat is also a legitimate basis for this action though, even if it’s not as well thought out as it could have been.

If that's true then there's quite a few other "threats" around as well.

 

So the US leadership appears to be highly hypocritical as well as self interested liars. Funny, that.

 

 

[Sampson]

A lot of countries allies or not coming out now and basically saying they aren’t going to back the US up - China, UK, Germany, Japan, France, Australia, Netherlands, Norway. Even South Korea very non-committal. 
 

This is starting to feel a bit like America’s own Suez crisis when they’re starting to see first hand they don’t have neither the hard nor soft power on that they used to have.

Edited 16 March by Sampson

[bovril]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

You’re better placed (geographically) than us to make that first judgement. I assume the reason would be a lack of Muslim immigration into Eastern Europe. So the far right in this region retains its primary anti semitic basis. 
America is interesting - the far right have always been anti semitic.  In areas of high Muslim concentration, are the far right more obviously Islamophobic?   Is there strong white supremacist grouping in Michigan as opposed to Wyoming ?  I think clogger made the point about the facists (and moreso the real facists rather than the wannabe ones) going for the easy Muslim targets before they turn their attention back to their more traditional foes. 

Muslim population in some parts of Eastern Europe is high. Bulgaria I think has the highest per capita in Europe. But having been colonised themselves throughout history there's a tendency to identify with Palestine in the same way the Irish do I guess. Also the legacy of being part of the Soviet sphere when Britain, America and to a lesser extent Israel were portrayed as the oppressor and workers were encouraged to directly support liberation movements.

 

Having said that the far right like the far left is not that coherent here or anywhere really. 

 

America I am going mostly off social media to be honest which is not the best indicator I know. But it seems there is a large and ever growing subset of MAGA which are like "the US is in the pockets of Israel" which is a position I tend to agree with but also one which is a wafer thin line away from lurid antisemitic conspiracy theories. 

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

A lot of countries allies or not coming out now and basically saying they aren’t going to back the US up - China, UK, Germany, Japan, France, Australia, Netherlands, Norway. Even South Korea very non-committal. 
 

This is starting to feel a bit like America’s own Suez crisis when they’re starting to see first hand they don’t have neither the hard nor soft power on that they used to have.

Oil prices aside, the real danger for Europe now is that Trump rules out ever helping defend Europe when Putin’s tanks start rolling across Central Europe, Finland, Sweden and the Baltics and his missiles start smashing in the UK. Because realistically, the USA is the only thing that deters him. 

[Tommy G]

At least this thread made it to over 500+ pages this time before being locked.