FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > US launches strikes on Iran.
US launches strikes on Iran.
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *ots OP Man 5 weeks ago
Higham |
US warplanes have bombed three nuclear sites in Iran, Donald Trump has announced.
“We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan,” the US president posted on Truth Social.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not."
I know some people will know a lot more about this situation than I do, but I can’t see why the UK should get involved in this fight. Certainly not at this stage anyway. Should it happen however we might find that our enemies are already here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not."
It doesn't take 'spine' to bomb other countries.
You don't need backbone to drop bombs on people.
Let's hope he makes decisions in the best interest of the people of the U.K. and the world and shows spine not by doing the easiest thing but by doing the right thing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm impressed that he's actually done something he'd promised:
Post election promise: 'I will stop the Ukraine war in the first day I'm in office.''It will be a beautiful day.'
What actually happened: Signed a peace agreement in exchange for rare earth minerals. Is the equivalent of placing a fire grate made out of chocolate, next to an open fire. While allowing your best mate, to invade the country you've just signed the best mineral agreement ever, with. Couldn't make it up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA. "
Spot on  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not.
It doesn't take 'spine' to bomb other countries.
You don't need backbone to drop bombs on people.
Let's hope he makes decisions in the best interest of the people of the U.K. and the world and shows spine not by doing the easiest thing but by doing the right thing"
1000 per cent agree.
Especially with that that last sentence |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not.
It doesn't take 'spine' to bomb other countries.
You don't need backbone to drop bombs on people.
Let's hope he makes decisions in the best interest of the people of the U.K. and the world and shows spine not by doing the easiest thing but by doing the right thing"
What is the “right thing” to for the UK to do?
Does it make any difference to anyone what the UK does? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not."
Why politicise the uk’s role (or not) in what is likely to be an event, ‘which’ may well signal a fundamental redirection (however destructive) in global affairs? Ffs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Once the dust settles the satellites will give an idea of if the objective has been achieved. We certainly can’t take Trump’s word for it. Let’s see if they go again over the next few days "
Whatever happens next looks like they are well prepared. Two US and one UK carrier, between them capability of 150 warplanes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not."
No spine. He will do whatever it takes to maximise profits for the arms industry. As per nearly all politicians. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not.
No spine. He will do whatever it takes to maximise profits for the arms industry. As per nearly all politicians."
More likely do whatever the US asks to keep favourable trade deals. Arms industry is unlikely to be a major concern in this decision. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA. "
Is this the latest Leftist line, that Trump has “started a war”?
I thought Israel started it on October 8th 2023.
At least make some effort to be consistent.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm impressed that he's actually done something he'd promised:
Post election promise: 'I will stop the Ukraine war in the first day I'm in office.''It will be a beautiful day.'
What actually happened: Signed a peace agreement in exchange for rare earth minerals. Is the equivalent of placing a fire grate made out of chocolate, next to an open fire. While allowing your best mate, to invade the country you've just signed the best mineral agreement ever, with. Couldn't make it up."
Didn't Russia invade when Biden was in power. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm impressed that he's actually done something he'd promised:
Post election promise: 'I will stop the Ukraine war in the first day I'm in office.''It will be a beautiful day.'
What actually happened: Signed a peace agreement in exchange for rare earth minerals. Is the equivalent of placing a fire grate made out of chocolate, next to an open fire. While allowing your best mate, to invade the country you've just signed the best mineral agreement ever, with. Couldn't make it up.
Didn't Russia invade when Biden was in power."
Yes, and trump stopped the invasion 24 hours after being elected.
Oh ... Wait ...
Did he ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm impressed that he's actually done something he'd promised:
Post election promise: 'I will stop the Ukraine war in the first day I'm in office.''It will be a beautiful day.'
What actually happened: Signed a peace agreement in exchange for rare earth minerals. Is the equivalent of placing a fire grate made out of chocolate, next to an open fire. While allowing your best mate, to invade the country you've just signed the best mineral agreement ever, with. Couldn't make it up.
Didn't Russia invade when Biden was in power.
Yes, and trump stopped the invasion 24 hours after being elected.
Oh ... Wait ...
Did he ?"
I never said that. Am no fan of Trump, but if people right things that are wrong, it needs to be questioned. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *I TwoCouple 5 weeks ago
near enough |
"I'm impressed that he's actually done something he'd promised:
Post election promise: 'I will stop the Ukraine war in the first day I'm in office.''It will be a beautiful day.'
What actually happened: Signed a peace agreement in exchange for rare earth minerals. Is the equivalent of placing a fire grate made out of chocolate, next to an open fire. While allowing your best mate, to invade the country you've just signed the best mineral agreement ever, with. Couldn't make it up.
Didn't Russia invade when Biden was in power.
Yes, and trump stopped the invasion 24 hours after being elected.
Oh ... Wait ...
Did he ?
I never said that. Am no fan of Trump, but if people right things that are wrong, it needs to be questioned. "
People right things that are wrong ?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not.
No spine. He will do whatever it takes to maximise profits for the arms industry. As per nearly all politicians.
More likely do whatever the US asks to keep favourable trade deals. Arms industry is unlikely to be a major concern in this decision."
I mean, arms industry (and other industries that serve the military) profits are the only reason for getting involved in conflicts like this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the next few days or weeks we'll know whether Sir Keir Starmer has a spine or not.
No spine. He will do whatever it takes to maximise profits for the arms industry. As per nearly all politicians.
More likely do whatever the US asks to keep favourable trade deals. Arms industry is unlikely to be a major concern in this decision.
I mean, arms industry (and other industries that serve the military) profits are the only reason for getting involved in conflicts like this."
You need to look deeper.
Trump is a Zionist puppet. This whole escapade is being controlled by Zionists.
There are lots of Jews in New York. Trump did a lot of business in New York.
I rest my case. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA.
Is this the latest Leftist line, that Trump has “started a war”?
I thought Israel started it on October 8th 2023.
At least make some effort to be consistent.
"
Oh, so this is the latest right-wing line that we quibble over the meaning of "war"?
What I said about MAGA is true. They say one of the things they love about Trump is that he is a man of peace and hasn't started any new wars. I have heard numerous members of his cult say exactly this. This clearly shows he is not a man of peace, as did his delight at bombing Houthis.
So fine, nobody has formally declared war. He just bombed another country who were not a threat to America and joined in a war another country started. If you find semantics consoles you then good for you. Everybody can see that the reputation of Trump just wanting peace is shattered.
And still he can't bring himself to condemn Putin for invading Ukraine or defend the invaded nation, but bombing Iran is just fine, eh? Peace-loving, my arse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Trump claims that the three sites were "completely and totally obliterated".
I'm just looking on AP at a satellite image of Fordow after the attack. It looks pretty intact to me.
It looks like the Iranians filled in the tunnel entrances in advance. Too neat to be blast damage.
Sky News shows an image from Thursday with lots of trucks so they were obviously anticipating an attack and probably evacuated the place days ago.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA.
Is this the latest Leftist line, that Trump has “started a war”?
I thought Israel started it on October 8th 2023.
At least make some effort to be consistent.
Oh, so this is the latest right-wing line that we quibble over the meaning of "war"?
What I said about MAGA is true. They say one of the things they love about Trump is that he is a man of peace and hasn't started any new wars. I have heard numerous members of his cult say exactly this. This clearly shows he is not a man of peace, as did his delight at bombing Houthis.
So fine, nobody has formally declared war. He just bombed another country who were not a threat to America and joined in a war another country started. If you find semantics consoles you then good for you. Everybody can see that the reputation of Trump just wanting peace is shattered.
And still he can't bring himself to condemn Putin for invading Ukraine or defend the invaded nation, but bombing Iran is just fine, eh? Peace-loving, my arse. "
Which wars had Trump started?
I’d like to think that if the UK were being randomly bombed night after night by a nearby country that was developing nuclear weapons and had some deranged desire to wipe the Uk off the face of the earth and the only two options were: 1. The UK undertaking risky military operations that may not be effective or 2. Asking an ally which has the necessary technology to eradicate the threat, that maybe the UK might be able to enlist US assistance.
I’ve no doubt we are soon going to see mass demonstrations on our streets against the attack, and “Gays for the Ayatollahs” on display.
The effects of TDS and antisemitism are quite extraordinary. The Left would actually rather support deranged terrorist nutjobs if it means they can criticise Trump. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I dont usually agree with what trump do, but he did the right thing here, with irans extreme views towards israel and america, it is understandable why they did it."
Is Iran any more extreme in its view than the US or Israel's views towards Iran? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I dont usually agree with what trump do, but he did the right thing here, with irans extreme views towards israel and america, it is understandable why they did it.
Is Iran any more extreme in its view than the US or Israel's views towards Iran?"
Yes the Allies did have a fairly extreme view of Hitler. Pretty unreasonable position.
I’m sure if Hitler and Churchill had just had a chat over a cigar their differences could have been swiftly resolved.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I dont usually agree with what trump do, but he did the right thing here, with irans extreme views towards israel and america, it is understandable why they did it.
Is Iran any more extreme in its view than the US or Israel's views towards Iran?
Yes the Allies did have a fairly extreme view of Hitler. Pretty unreasonable position.
I’m sure if Hitler and Churchill had just had a chat over a cigar their differences could have been swiftly resolved.
"
As aggressive as the US and Israel are, I don't think it's fair to compare them to Hitler. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Trump claims that the three sites were "completely and totally obliterated".
I'm just looking on AP at a satellite image of Fordow after the attack. It looks pretty intact to me.
It looks like the Iranians filled in the tunnel entrances in advance. Too neat to be blast damage.
Sky News shows an image from Thursday with lots of trucks so they were obviously anticipating an attack and probably evacuated the place days ago.
"
It looks very much like it did before apart from what are being described as possible bomb entry points and subsidence at those..
It's under a mountain and only Iran knows the depth of the facility so yes but will look pretty much intact.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks very much like it did before apart from what are being described as possible bomb entry points and subsidence at those..
It's under a mountain and only Iran knows the depth of the facility so yes but will look pretty much intact.."
Yeah, there's now some higher resolution MAXAR images on the BBC News website that show the six MOP entry points. In two bunches of three.
It's difficult to judge the actual level of damage as it depends on so many factors but complete and total obliteration is probably just Trump gassing off.
Plus as I've said before the Iranians won't have stored their stockpile there and even if many centrifuges were damaged it's not going to end their programme.
Next year Netanyahu will still be saying we need to destroy Iranian facilities because there is still an existential threat. He's been going on for 30+ years like a broken record.
Next thing I expect is for Iran to withdraw from the NPT citing Article 10. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It looks very much like it did before apart from what are being described as possible bomb entry points and subsidence at those..
It's under a mountain and only Iran knows the depth of the facility so yes but will look pretty much intact..
Yeah, there's now some higher resolution MAXAR images on the BBC News website that show the six MOP entry points. In two bunches of three.
It's difficult to judge the actual level of damage as it depends on so many factors but complete and total obliteration is probably just Trump gassing off.
Plus as I've said before the Iranians won't have stored their stockpile there and even if many centrifuges were damaged it's not going to end their programme.
Next year Netanyahu will still be saying we need to destroy Iranian facilities because there is still an existential threat. He's been going on for 30+ years like a broken record.
Next thing I expect is for Iran to withdraw from the NPT citing Article 10."
I'm not sure it will make any difference what Iran do now as regards the NPT ..
Trump won't back down from this action till they comply, the damage to him politically is too risky..
I can't imagine that Iran had their estimated 400 kg of enriched material at the Fodor site ..
There are likely to be things that Mossad don't know, how little or not that is remains to be seen..
The region doesn't want a nuclear armed Iran and they won't shed any tears over Hezbollah, Hamas and the other proxies being isolated and slowly destroyed by any country.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm not sure it will make any difference what Iran do now as regards the NPT ..
Trump won't back down from this action till they comply, the damage to him politically is too risky..
I can't imagine that Iran had their estimated 400 kg of enriched material at the Fodor site ..
There are likely to be things that Mossad don't know, how little or not that is remains to be seen..
The region doesn't want a nuclear armed Iran and they won't shed any tears over Hezbollah, Hamas and the other proxies being isolated and slowly destroyed by any country.."
I agree with the bulk of that. Just a couple of points...
I don't think Trump thinks that deeply. If he's in the news then he's a happy bunny. It doesn't seem to matter much whether it's good or bad news. He just gets off on seeing his name in the headlines.
I know his fans think he's a genius four-dimensional chess player but I'm close to certain that he never learnt to play regular chess.
My point about the NPT is based just on my personal analysis of the Iranian leadership's mindset. They are very much into technical concepts of legality and how Iran will be judged several hundred years from now. You need to look at it from a religious POV. History really matters to them.
By withdrawing from the NPT under Article 10 they can, in their minds, legally pursue a nuclear weapons program in response to what they see as an existential threat from Israel and the USA.
They'll long ago have looked at the US, Russia, UK, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea and conclude that they need to join the club to prevent Iran disappearing off the map. Now they have a real incentive to do so.
Don't get me wrong. I'm under no illusions about Iran being a benign player. As a loud-mouthed liberal, left-wing, progressive, atheist, bisexual, trans-allied kinkster into BDSM I'm pretty sure I'd be in prison having my toe nails pulled out if I lived in Iran. If I was lucky.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It was wrong and was also wrong of Israel to start the war against Iran. It was Trump who cancelled the agreement in place with Iran, during his first presidency, that's resulted in this.
Presumably global nuclear radiation levels will now increase.
Not a smart move but one that validates the Israeli leadership scum's objectives 
Can't feel safer from this approach |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA.
Is this the latest Leftist line, that Trump has “started a war”?
I thought Israel started it on October 8th 2023.
At least make some effort to be consistent.
Oh, so this is the latest right-wing line that we quibble over the meaning of "war"?
What I said about MAGA is true. They say one of the things they love about Trump is that he is a man of peace and hasn't started any new wars. I have heard numerous members of his cult say exactly this. This clearly shows he is not a man of peace, as did his delight at bombing Houthis.
So fine, nobody has formally declared war. He just bombed another country who were not a threat to America and joined in a war another country started. If you find semantics consoles you then good for you. Everybody can see that the reputation of Trump just wanting peace is shattered.
And still he can't bring himself to condemn Putin for invading Ukraine or defend the invaded nation, but bombing Iran is just fine, eh? Peace-loving, my arse.
Which wars had Trump started?
I’d like to think that if the UK were being randomly bombed night after night by a nearby country that was developing nuclear weapons and had some deranged desire to wipe the Uk off the face of the earth and the only two options were: 1. The UK undertaking risky military operations that may not be effective or 2. Asking an ally which has the necessary technology to eradicate the threat, that maybe the UK might be able to enlist US assistance.
I’ve no doubt we are soon going to see mass demonstrations on our streets against the attack, and “Gays for the Ayatollahs” on display.
The effects of TDS and antisemitism are quite extraordinary. The Left would actually rather support deranged terrorist nutjobs if it means they can criticise Trump."
Firstly, Iran was not bombing America, so your analogy utterly fails. Secondly Iran only started bombing Israel after it was attacked first. You should also realise that Israel has nuclear weapons and Iran doesn't. Your argument is total crap, but that's typical of somebody with TDS (Trump Devotion Syndrome) and refuse to see what an absolute monster the man is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 5 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA.
Is this the latest Leftist line, that Trump has “started a war”?
I thought Israel started it on October 8th 2023.
At least make some effort to be consistent.
Oh, so this is the latest right-wing line that we quibble over the meaning of "war"?
What I said about MAGA is true. They say one of the things they love about Trump is that he is a man of peace and hasn't started any new wars. I have heard numerous members of his cult say exactly this. This clearly shows he is not a man of peace, as did his delight at bombing Houthis.
So fine, nobody has formally declared war. He just bombed another country who were not a threat to America and joined in a war another country started. If you find semantics consoles you then good for you. Everybody can see that the reputation of Trump just wanting peace is shattered.
And still he can't bring himself to condemn Putin for invading Ukraine or defend the invaded nation, but bombing Iran is just fine, eh? Peace-loving, my arse.
Which wars had Trump started?
I’d like to think that if the UK were being randomly bombed night after night by a nearby country that was developing nuclear weapons and had some deranged desire to wipe the Uk off the face of the earth and the only two options were: 1. The UK undertaking risky military operations that may not be effective or 2. Asking an ally which has the necessary technology to eradicate the threat, that maybe the UK might be able to enlist US assistance.
I’ve no doubt we are soon going to see mass demonstrations on our streets against the attack, and “Gays for the Ayatollahs” on display.
The effects of TDS and antisemitism are quite extraordinary. The Left would actually rather support deranged terrorist nutjobs if it means they can criticise Trump.
Firstly, Iran was not bombing America, so your analogy utterly fails. Secondly Iran only started bombing Israel after it was attacked first. You should also realise that Israel has nuclear weapons and Iran doesn't. Your argument is total crap, but that's typical of somebody with TDS (Trump Devotion Syndrome) and refuse to see what an absolute monster the man is. "
I think you’re way off the mark when you say Iran only started bombing Israel after it was attacked first. Iran fund Hamas, and all the other unsavoury proxies that have launched missiles into Israel.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA.
Is this the latest Leftist line, that Trump has “started a war”?
I thought Israel started it on October 8th 2023.
At least make some effort to be consistent.
Oh, so this is the latest right-wing line that we quibble over the meaning of "war"?
What I said about MAGA is true. They say one of the things they love about Trump is that he is a man of peace and hasn't started any new wars. I have heard numerous members of his cult say exactly this. This clearly shows he is not a man of peace, as did his delight at bombing Houthis.
So fine, nobody has formally declared war. He just bombed another country who were not a threat to America and joined in a war another country started. If you find semantics consoles you then good for you. Everybody can see that the reputation of Trump just wanting peace is shattered.
And still he can't bring himself to condemn Putin for invading Ukraine or defend the invaded nation, but bombing Iran is just fine, eh? Peace-loving, my arse.
Which wars had Trump started?
I’d like to think that if the UK were being randomly bombed night after night by a nearby country that was developing nuclear weapons and had some deranged desire to wipe the Uk off the face of the earth and the only two options were: 1. The UK undertaking risky military operations that may not be effective or 2. Asking an ally which has the necessary technology to eradicate the threat, that maybe the UK might be able to enlist US assistance.
I’ve no doubt we are soon going to see mass demonstrations on our streets against the attack, and “Gays for the Ayatollahs” on display.
The effects of TDS and antisemitism are quite extraordinary. The Left would actually rather support deranged terrorist nutjobs if it means they can criticise Trump.
Firstly, Iran was not bombing America, so your analogy utterly fails. Secondly Iran only started bombing Israel after it was attacked first. You should also realise that Israel has nuclear weapons and Iran doesn't. Your argument is total crap, but that's typical of somebody with TDS (Trump Devotion Syndrome) and refuse to see what an absolute monster the man is. "
Iran is a regional trouble-maker, exporting terrorism through proxy armies like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis. They killed and maimed thousands of Coalition soldiers with their exported IEDs. Moreover, they are pledged to the total elimination of Israel. The regime deserves not an ounce of sympathy. The victims are the hapless citizens of Iran who (mostly) despise the regime. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Israel dies have nukes, as Mordecai Vanunu what happened to him when he disclosed that and Israel has blood on its hands in it's treatment of the innocent Palestinians yes..
But what they don't have in their constitution is a stated wish to destroy another country which Iran does have..
Iran can't be allowed to have nuclear weapons that's accepted by the vast majority of all their neighbours and is globally shared ..
The last five US Presidents have all said Iran can't develop a nuclear weapon and now one has acted and we wait to see the response..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One of the big things MAGA cult-members say about their dear-beloved leader is that he only wants peace and will never start any new wars.
What a load of horse shit.
Explain this one, MAGA. "
It's irrelevant who is the president or which party is in power, if you look beyond the emotion and social media rhetoric they all do the exact same things.
They have been desperate to get involved in Iran going back through the last few administrations, they all deport illegals etc it's all pantomime.
Something like 80% of all US political figures get funding from AIPAC then try to keep the pretence that they are impartial |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Iran only started bombing Israel after it was attacked first. "
Sorry but that is simply not true. Iran have been behind all the terrorist attacks on Isreal for decades.
Isreal sending missiles into Iran wasn’t the starting point, this war has been going on for what seems like forever |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The idea that the constitution of Iran calls for the destruction of Israel is a myth.
The relevant sections are...
"Article 152:
The foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is based upon the rejection of all forms of domination, both the exertion of it and submission to it, the preservation of the independence of the country in all respects and its territorial integrity, the defence of the rights of all Muslims, non-alignment with respect to the hegemonist superpowers, and the maintenance of mutually peaceful relations with all non-belligerent States.
Article 154:
The Islamic Republic of Iran has as its ideal human felicity throughout human society, and considers the attainment of independence, freedom, and rule of justice and truth to be the right of all people of the world. Accordingly, while scrupulously refraining from all forms of interference in the internal affairs of other nations, it supports the just struggles of the mustad'afun against the mustakbirun in every corner of the globe."
Mustazafin (the weak) and mustakbirin (the proud and mighty) are essentially just Arabic translations of the Marxist terms oppressed and oppressors.
So the constitution allows for the support of the oppressed against their oppressors but this is little different to saying that Iran supports freedom and justice throughout the world, a sentiment that I think is present in many constitutions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 5 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"The idea that the constitution of Iran calls for the destruction of Israel is a myth.
The relevant sections are...
Article 152:
The foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is based upon the rejection of all forms of domination, both the exertion of it and submission to it, the preservation of the independence of the country in all respects and its territorial integrity, the defence of the rights of all Muslims, non-alignment with respect to the hegemonist superpowers, and the maintenance of mutually peaceful relations with all non-belligerent States.
Article 154:
The Islamic Republic of Iran has as its ideal human felicity throughout human society, and considers the attainment of independence, freedom, and rule of justice and truth to be the right of all people of the world. Accordingly, while scrupulously refraining from all forms of interference in the internal affairs of other nations, it supports the just struggles of the mustad'afun against the mustakbirun in every corner of the globe.
Mustazafin (the weak) and mustakbirin (the proud and mighty) are essentially just Arabic translations of the Marxist terms oppressed and oppressors.
So the constitution allows for the support of the oppressed against their oppressors but this is little different to saying that Iran supports freedom and justice throughout the world, a sentiment that I think is present in many constitutions. "
You do walk a fine line… Do you recognise the wish to end Israel by Iran, or not? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You do walk a fine line… Do you recognise the wish to end Israel by Iran, or not? "
A country doesn't have a wish. I made a factual statement about the Iranian constitution.
To be honest I'm getting pretty tired of your ad hominem attacks.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Quds day in Iran often has banners calling for the destruction of Israel..
So whilst it might not be word for word in their constitution, their actions for decades has been towards that aim with supporting Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis (to the detriment of the people in those areas)..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Quds day in Iran often has banners calling for the destruction of Israel..
So whilst it might not be word for word in their constitution, their actions for decades has been towards that aim with supporting Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis (to the detriment of the people in those areas).."
In no way do I support calls for the destruction of Israel. Nor am I a supporter of Iran.
I'm interested in the truth so when someone says that the Iranian constitution calls for the destruction of Israel I will point out that this isn't true.
My main interest in posting on these matters is to try and persuade people that they need to shift position to a more realistic ground. As most of the narrative is so anti-Palestinian and so anti-Iranian that might make me look one-sided but I'm not. I want peace and prosperity for all.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Quds day in Iran often has banners calling for the destruction of Israel..
So whilst it might not be word for word in their constitution, their actions for decades has been towards that aim with supporting Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis (to the detriment of the people in those areas)..
In no way do I support calls for the destruction of Israel. Nor am I a supporter of Iran.
I'm interested in the truth so when someone says that the Iranian constitution calls for the destruction of Israel I will point out that this isn't true.
My main interest in posting on these matters is to try and persuade people that they need to shift position to a more realistic ground. As most of the narrative is so anti-Palestinian and so anti-Iranian that might make me look one-sided but I'm not. I want peace and prosperity for all.
"
Thanks but I'm all good with the ground I'm on..  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thanks but I'm all good with the ground I'm on.."
When I pointed out that what you said about the Iranian constitution wasn't true, I wasn't addressing you so much as others who might have believed you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thanks but I'm all good with the ground I'm on..
When I pointed out that what you said about the Iranian constitution wasn't true, I wasn't addressing you so much as others who might have believed you."
its a minor issue, the fact that it's not in their constitution..
given their actions since they overthrew the Shah..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’m not attacking you I’m challenging the messaging you use, you seem to ignore the realities by saying it isn’t written down, semantics.
You didn’t answer my question, again this is common.
Trust that I’m not interested in attacking you, but I will challenge misrepresenting the whole picture"
Ad hominem is a logical fallacy where the person rather than their argument is addressed. Very often you question my motives or beliefs and ignore my argument.
"saying it isn’t written down, semantics". Seriously? Someone is saying that it's written down when it is not.
The use of the word semantics as a dismissal of an argument really annoys me. Semantics is about the meaning conveyed by language. It's like saying that meaning isn't meaningful.
You can look at it lexically, syntactically or semantically. The Iranian constitution doesn't call for the destruction of Iran. Saying it does is simply dishonest.
I addressed your question "Do you recognise the wish to end Israel by Iran, or not?" by saying a country doesn't have wishes. If you meant does the Iranian government wish to "end Israel" then my understanding is that they do not recognise Israel as a legitimate state. Given that the Israeli government has maintained an ambiguous position about what territory Israel actually consists of then it's not a straightforward question. Where is Israel? Does it include Gaza, the West Bank and parts of Syria?
Is the Iranian government looking to kill everyone inside the Green Line (for the sake of argument) then no I don't think so.
I believe what they want is for the political state of Israel to be replaced by a Muslim one. Would they settle for a two-state solution? I don't know, but maybe.
Ultimately I don't believe that the Iranians or Israelis are much different to any other people on the planet. They might be frustrated, angry and confused but are basically looking for peace and prosperity if given the chance.
They have been fed hate-filled propaganda for generations and the future looks bleak but careful honest analysis of the history and politics of the situation might, just might, be helpful.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 5 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"I’m not attacking you I’m challenging the messaging you use, you seem to ignore the realities by saying it isn’t written down, semantics.
You didn’t answer my question, again this is common.
Trust that I’m not interested in attacking you, but I will challenge misrepresenting the whole picture
Ad hominem is a logical fallacy where the person rather than their argument is addressed. Very often you question my motives or beliefs and ignore my argument.
"saying it isn’t written down, semantics". Seriously? Someone is saying that it's written down when it is not.
The use of the word semantics as a dismissal of an argument really annoys me. Semantics is about the meaning conveyed by language. It's like saying that meaning isn't meaningful.
You can look at it lexically, syntactically or semantically. The Iranian constitution doesn't call for the destruction of Iran. Saying it does is simply dishonest.
I addressed your question "Do you recognise the wish to end Israel by Iran, or not?" by saying a country doesn't have wishes. If you meant does the Iranian government wish to "end Israel" then my understanding is that they do not recognise Israel as a legitimate state. Given that the Israeli government has maintained an ambiguous position about what territory Israel actually consists of then it's not a straightforward question. Where is Israel? Does it include Gaza, the West Bank and parts of Syria?
Is the Iranian government looking to kill everyone inside the Green Line (for the sake of argument) then no I don't think so.
I believe what they want is for the political state of Israel to be replaced by a Muslim one. Would they settle for a two-state solution? I don't know, but maybe.
Ultimately I don't believe that the Iranians or Israelis are much different to any other people on the planet. They might be frustrated, angry and confused but are basically looking for peace and prosperity if given the chance.
They have been fed hate-filled propaganda for generations and the future looks bleak but careful honest analysis of the history and politics of the situation might, just might, be helpful.
"
Do you believe Iran’s supreme leader refers to the constitution?
Do you recognise these statements: Israel should be “wiped off the map” or “cease to exist.”
The Supreme Leader and military officials have openly called for Israel’s destruction and it is their intent that matters.
You’re correct it isn’t in the constitution, but the intention and ambition is real.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 5 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Explosions in Doha
What will Trump bomb next "
Actually… the Qatari airbase is the least worrying.. just because basically the us base there has been “evacuating” personnel for the last week
If they wanted to surprise people they would more likely have gone after the bases in Bahrain, Kuwait or UAE
If this is “one and done” this is as measured as it gets… |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Explosions in Doha
What will Trump bomb next
Actually… the Qatari airbase is the least worrying.. just because basically the us base there has been “evacuating” personnel for the last week
If they wanted to surprise people they would more likely have gone after the bases in Bahrain, Kuwait or UAE
If this is “one and done” this is as measured as it gets… "
This attack has been an open secret for a while. It might be their "face saving" attack to attempt to ramp down. They have done this previously. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan 5 weeks ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Explosions in Doha
What will Trump bomb next
Actually… the Qatari airbase is the least worrying.. just because basically the us base there has been “evacuating” personnel for the last week
If they wanted to surprise people they would more likely have gone after the bases in Bahrain, Kuwait or UAE
If this is “one and done” this is as measured as it gets…
This attack has been an open secret for a while. It might be their "face saving" attack to attempt to ramp down. They have done this previously."
What is being said is interesting
It looks like Iran did give Qatar prior notice of incoming …
They are saying they used the same number of missiles that the US used in the B2 attack on the nuclear facilities …..
So… question… measured response?
Does trump retaliate? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Have spent many a time in Doha just tried to ring my friend call not connecting
Strange place to target considering that Qatar could be considered a middle man and even a friend of Iran especially when Saudi closed the border they relied a lot on them for goods. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Do you believe Iran’s supreme leader refers to the constitution?
Do you recognise these statements: Israel should be “wiped off the map” or “cease to exist.”
The Supreme Leader and military officials have openly called for Israel’s destruction and it is their intent that matters.
You’re correct it isn’t in the constitution, but the intention and ambition is real.
"
Yes, Ali Khamenei refers to the Iranian constitution.
I've already addressed your other points and said that I don't think the Iranian government wants to kill everyone inside the Green Line.
You appear to disagree and that's fine if you do.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Do you believe Iran’s supreme leader refers to the constitution?
Do you recognise these statements: Israel should be “wiped off the map” or “cease to exist.”
The Supreme Leader and military officials have openly called for Israel’s destruction and it is their intent that matters.
You’re correct it isn’t in the constitution, but the intention and ambition is real.
Yes, Ali Khamenei refers to the Iranian constitution.
I've already addressed your other points and said that I don't think the Iranian government wants to kill everyone inside the Green Line.
You appear to disagree and that's fine if you do.
"
Those in power in Iran want to kill all infidels, Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What is being said is interesting
It looks like Iran did give Qatar prior notice of incoming …
They are saying they used the same number of missiles that the US used in the B2 attack on the nuclear facilities …..
So… question… measured response?
Does trump retaliate?"
It does look kind of like a face saving response.
I'm sure there will be many who disagree but technically the USA broke international law and has been given a slap on the wrist in return.
I'm hoping that nobody on the US base was hurt as that will make it slighty less likely that the US will escalate. But I wouldn't be surprised if Trump decides to bomb the cr*p out of Iran in return. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Does trump retaliate? "
*Hopefully* someone has explained how this works to Trump. It's great that the US is there, but it's far, far preferable that they don't get involved (unless it's really, truly unavoidable). There is a time and place for US involvement, but it isn't now. Iran needs to sort themselves out internally, the more external pressure, the harder it will be for them to change. Any activity in Iran moving forward (one actual threats are eliminated, if not already) should be solely for the benefit of Iranian people.
Now isn't the time for egos. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I suspect the Iranians are going to get bombed, it would be in the US calculations. If the Iranians had nothing to hide then they would have agreed a deal with the US and made them look stupid 'nothing to see here' I would not be surprised if they made an example of Iran and destroyed the whole country to illustrate what happens if Americans are attacked.
If you think for one moment Russia and China will support Iran then think again, they want shot of the regime and would prefer a more amenable leadership in place. Iran wanted to eliminate Israel, and control the middle east from Iran through to the Mediterranean. They would also control the price of oil, Opec would have no say, and the price demanded would be paid by Russia and China along with the rest of the world. Anything China and Russia could do about it, not really, if Iran had a nuclear weapon.
Interesting times ahead it seems. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I suspect the Iranians are going to get bombed, it would be in the US calculations. If the Iranians had nothing to hide then they would have agreed a deal with the US and made them look stupid 'nothing to see here' I would not be surprised if they made an example of Iran and destroyed the whole country to illustrate what happens if Americans are attacked.
If you think for one moment Russia and China will support Iran then think again, they want shot of the regime and would prefer a more amenable leadership in place. Iran wanted to eliminate Israel, and control the middle east from Iran through to the Mediterranean. They would also control the price of oil, Opec would have no say, and the price demanded would be paid by Russia and China along with the rest of the world. Anything China and Russia could do about it, not really, if Iran had a nuclear weapon.
Interesting times ahead it seems."
Russia benefits from high oil prices, they are net sellers of fossil fuels, not buyers.
They previously controlled a pathway through Syria and Lebanon. Syria is now an adversary and Lebanon, shockingly, condemned Iran for their attack on Qatar. Which would've been unthinkable two years ago. The Middle East has changed immensely in three years.
Back to Russia... What they need is a weakened West. That has been working well for a few years, but the Sunni states are slowly moving away from authoritarianism as they want to be more than gas stations of the world, and the Shi'ite "axis of resistance" is crumbling. Russia needed that Middle Eastern theatre, and they're fast being shut out. Saudi/UAE/Jordan/Egypt are generally aligning closer to Israel than Iran, for example.
Russia and China will likely want to ride the wave of rebuilding Iran. Whether they do or not depends on what the governing refine looks like over the next decade. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
What's worrying is that so much depends on what side of bed Trump gets out of.
It's looking increasing like Iran told Qatar they were going to fire six missiles at these times on these flight paths at the US base in the hope that they would be intercepted. Then Iran could say they responded to the six MOPs on Fordow (or Fordo or Fordor, I'm pretty sure it will end up being called Mordor on Fox News). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So far it looks similar to post Suleimani in 2020..
A token response then as they knew if they went big against the USA the consequences would be severe..
They're weaker and more vulnerable now and want to keep as much of the military and more importantly the IRG intact as they know the effect they have if any further public protests get serious..
It could be they're biding their time of course.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 5 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"So far it looks similar to post Suleimani in 2020..
A token response then as they knew if they went big against the USA the consequences would be severe..
They're weaker and more vulnerable now and want to keep as much of the military and more importantly the IRG intact as they know the effect they have if any further public protests get serious..
It could be they're biding their time of course.."
I expect they’re struggling with this turn around, they’ve been called out and don’t have the resources or response that they projected.
You’re right in my opinion, they’ve will now be focused on civil obedience, they have Iranians fleeing and that means a loss of control in the rural areas.
The next few days are going to be pivotal and I’m more than interested in how Israel play this out |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Does trump retaliate?
*Hopefully* someone has explained how this works to Trump. It's great that the US is there, but it's far, far preferable that they don't get involved (unless it's really, truly unavoidable). There is a time and place for US involvement, but it isn't now. Iran needs to sort themselves out internally, the more external pressure, the harder it will be for them to change. Any activity in Iran moving forward (one actual threats are eliminated, if not already) should be solely for the benefit of Iranian people.
Now isn't the time for egos."
Ho, hum. Someone probably *did* tell him that you're not really supposed to say it all out loud, but he couldn't help himself:
Iran has officially responded to our Obliteration of their Nuclear Facilities with a very weak response, which we expected, and have very effectively countered. There have been 14 missiles fired — 13 were knocked down, and 1 was “set free,” because it was headed in a nonthreatening direction. I am pleased to report that NO Americans were harmed, and hardly any damage was done. Most importantly, they’ve gotten it all out of their “system,” and there will, hopefully, be no further HATE. I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice, which made it possible for no lives to be lost, and nobody to be injured. Perhaps Iran can now proceed to Peace and Harmony in the Region, and I will enthusiastically encourage Israel to do the same. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Well... Where is that Nobel Peace Prize that Pakistan nominated him for?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Fair play to Trump IF this ceasefire holds.
First thing is the discrepancy, Iran going first (12 hours?) Israel better play nice during that period?
It also seems to leave the regime in power in Iran. So yeah, they may heed Trump’s call to ditch the hate. Or, they may keep their heads down & develop nukes secretly anyway. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
