Spyke

beacon of democracy? when was that?

They should have put that phrase in quotation marks.

Just because the US calls themselves that doesn't make it true.

12

The US briefly tried out democracy during Reconstruction but the white terrorists quickly defeated that experiment.

5

We can already ascertain (I trust certain sources) that the US has likely lost more military personnel than the Iranians, to say nothing of the trade in production (including trade war limits making some hardware functionally irreplacable), cost, depletion of stockpiles, economic leverage of the strikes. They're really "smoking 'em while they've got 'em" since the Mossad network and Starlink strategy collapsed. Seems like they lost hope.

If anything this attack could be one last stab to slow the development of Iran, which is intruding into very high tech industries dominated by the US and western Europe, such as pharmaceuticals and even nuclear fusion in due time.

The west fears having to unleash the power of certified genius women (and men, but it's much more pronounced how their talents benefit Iranian industrial capacity and affect this war, they are a huge driver of the missile program) the way Iran and China have. Girlbossing and slaying is more about inflating the size of the high value service industry.

The future is bright, actually. Our horizons were limited. I think humanity will become something unrecognizable. One day all people will understand death on their own terms, without metaphor. Do not fear the genius women. Sexual selection is the reason we aren't scraping bugs out of tree bark. This will be even better.

19
lemmy.world

And even weirder that EU condemns Iran's attacks and not USA's. Only Spain had some dignity, the rest are crap.

5
Damagereply
feddit.it

You mean there same country that vaporized two cities' worth of civilians?

3

Yeah, firebombing of Japanese towns and cities was more atrocious given the majority of housing materials. As well easier for the USA to do at that time.

10
joostjakobreply
lemmy.world

The strikes against Qatar and UAE are hardly military in purpose though...

-9
joostjakobreply
lemmy.world

The usa shouldn't have started this war, for sure, but that's a pretty heartless statement.

0
joostjakobreply
lemmy.world

Lots of the collateral damage affected plenty of civilians then. I must admit I've saw so much about that aspect that I assumed it was intended.

-1

IDK about civilians.
I do know Iran doesn't target civilians.
But also that the US military nearly completely abandoned their bases in those countries.
They got housed in 'civilian' hotels, appartements, etc in those countries.
If you've seen so many videos you surely saw the american filming from a flat right? Same happens in ukraine where the news was complaining evil Russia hit a civilian hotel and so many innocent civilians.
While the videos show victims carried away in uniform and 2 days later the ukro army fires the guy responsible for holding a military meeting so close to the frontline. Military using civilian infrastructure makes them a legitimate target.
Iran has very good intel on where they are since the population doesn't see them as enemies unlike their sell-out governments.
If anything, it's another warcrime by the US since they shouldn't put military targets among civilians.

2
lemmy.world

Iran already had a water shortage, this is pushing a wounded critter into a corner and expecting it to not fight for its life.

105
lemmy.world

Oh they are counting on it fighting for its life. Ideally an audacious "terrorist" strike on some liberal city before midterms.

7

I would question if it's even top 5 when you take into account the atrocities committed by Amerikkka in Vietnam, Korea, Iraq etc.

5

At this point Iran needs to realize this won't be an occupation, it's an extermination. They'll level all the critical infrastructure and watch them suffer.

3

US war crime.
nobody cares what face is in charge of that terrorist country

10

Attacking desalination plants is not a front the US wants to open. Another horribly idiotic strategic decision by the burger reich. Iran is 3% dependent on desalination, meanwhile US vassals in the region are at 40-90%.

41

As an Iranian, I hope that Iran can show restraint here. Please do not target desalination plants, and be mindful when attacking power plants in the Gulf region. These countries are extremely weak and fragile, power outages and water shortages could cause massive widespread suffering that I wish upon no-one.

With that said, pipelines in KSA and Azerbaijan should probably get a visit from a 136 as soon as possible.

7

Looks like the vassal states are abandoning their US masters.
Just as the US is running from every base there.

3
lemmy.ml

Iran so far has been the adult in the room. I get that a lot of things are fucked up there from economy to freedoms, but boy that's nowhere close to what the US/Palestine occupiers are trying to do to them. I come from a shithole too and I keep shitting on our government for a good reason, but I would definitely prefer them over being holocausted by US/Palestine occupiers.

39
orc girlyreply
lemmy.ml

Iran's issues are literally because of US imperialism. Their economy isn't doing great because of insane illegal sanctions, and their paranoia comes from having been under siege their whole existence. I believe things will get a lot better for Iranians after the aggressors leave the region.

25

I get that a lot of things are fucked up there from economy to freedoms, but boy that's nowhere close to what the US/Palestine occupiers are trying to do to them.

🧐

7

The economic issues were a direct result of US foreign policy.

​In a January 2026 interview at the World Economic Forum and his February testimony before Congress, Scott Bessent took credit for engineering a "dollar shortage" that triggered a currency crisis and mass protests in Iran.

Bessent used phrases such as "Making Iran broke again" and described the resulting economic turmoil as "economic statecraft with no shots fired."

Through sanctions, the dollar shortage and currency crisis/hyperinflation led to the collapse of one of Iran's major banks, which led to the protests prior to the war starting.

5
feddit.org

Few acts say "crimes against humanity" better than bombing a country's water supply.

38

There's a certain dam in Iraq which could have been targeted at any point during the Iran-Iraq war. Doing so would have guaranteed ended the war in Iran's favor, killing hundreds of thousands of people in a single act in the process.

Some things are not worth doing. Winning like that is not winning.

11
lemmy.world

Ah yes, because nothing says "sound military strategy" like depriving civilians of fresh water.

38
smeenzreply
lemmy.nz

Remember that cruelty is the point with this administration

Stealing truckloads of cash from the working class isn't enough, they need to also see the poor and defenceless suffer needlessly in order to get their kicks.

11

Cruelty is the point with ANY administration when it concerns brown people.

10

Standard US tactic.
They've starved millions for decades with sanctions everywhere. This is just more blatant

9

the only ones that need to be worried right now are Iranians that think they're gonna live.

Pete Hegseth, US Secretary of War

32
lemmy.world

Ah yes, desalination plants - the top priority military targets when invading a country to free its people.

30

They also made a wise decision preemptively taking out the elementary schoolgirls.
More dangerous than even Khammaaazzz!

2

"We are going to help Iranians with their water problems which are caused by their governent!"

Bombs desalination plant

29
lemmy.world

Something something Collective Punishment something something Geneva Conventions

27

finally the US is safe from Iranian unsalted water! mission accomplished Orange man

26
feddit.org

Conventions on war crimes are a mutual agreement on restraints both parties place on themselves. They work, as long as neither party wants to lose face or support by being the one to break their word, and as long as both parties can afford to.

Trump never gave a shit about keeping his own word, let alone anyone else's.

I'm not sure Iran can afford to keep theirs now.

25
lemmy.world

He is actively hoping for retaliatory action from literally anyone so he can justify calling for martial law and suspending the constitution.

12
vfreire85reply
lemmy.ml

and the democratic party establishment will actively oppose him, saying "just wait and see until you lift martial law, we'll vote you out so bad, and then keep sending money and weapons to israel just like you did".

14
lemmy.world

I think we re-enter the middle east in some capacity every 5-10 years since like desert storm. Its not new. People are just sick of it. It could be weapons, it could be troops. We never really take our hand off the wheel over there.

13

It's military keynesianism and the US economy has been running off of it since world war 2.

1

that was real fighting with troops, even if with disproportionate means.
there is zero possibility of boots on the ground here. This is the standard US tactic of cowardly bombing from a distance they use since then to avoid another US casualties trauma.

7
lemmy.world

I thought we arent supposed to hurt civilians in a war according to international laws but yelp it is indirect and also US is above all those things

21
facelessbsreply
lemmy.world

Oh that’s because this isn’t a war. I mean come on learn the difference.

Since it isn’t a war there are less rules and we ( the USA) can just do as we please with no repercussions at all. None at all.

10

Oh my bad, i think i read the wrong definition of war. It is a special defensive military operation.

1

Every other country in region, Israel included, is much more dependent on desalination for water than Iran as a country. Unclear why they want as many dick moves as possible.

IIUC, on same day Iran apologized for attacking neighbours, this attack was launched from Bahrain, one of the/the most dependent desalination country on earth, that is a rock throw away from Iran.

16
lemmy.ml

In response to OPs question. I am really wondering if this the point at which the US, especially under Trump, plays the "blame the Jews" card.

We've been watching the right wing shift towards anti Israel views. The tucker Carlson crowd etc.

Maybe Trump is too demented. But, I feel like his defining characteristic is to be good at "reading the room".

I just don't know where it goes with the evangelical Christians that think this needs to happen to bring back Jesus. That's literally the 20% of people that always agree with Trump. But, honestly, at this point. I think they will follow Trump and the pastors will give them a reason to hate the "the Jews".

I just don't see how Trump gets out of this otherwise.

14

they will 100% turn against Jews, even all those "I love Israel apartheid and genocide, if you're against it, you're antisemitic and hate jews"

13

They (bipartisan USA plus UK, Germany and so on) have zero scruples right now about persecuting the antizionist Jews for opposition against Israel, so when the cannibalising of vassals finally hits Israel they will immediately drop all the pretense and go openly antisemitic.

13

Israel is a piece. If this war ends up threatening the one true ruler of the US, Capital, it won't matter what Israel wants.

I think this is the part that a lot of people will eventually be shocked by. Because they are following the wrong "leader".

Israeli interest and Israeli leaders are absolutely interwoven in American foreign policy. But, if the interest of capital see it within their best interest to drop Israel, they will.

Now, I think this will be mostly symbolic, I don't think US military support would ever drop. Or even much in terms of capital investments in Israel. But, I can definitely see them using Israel, specifically Benjamin Netanyahu, as a scapegoat for the failures that have already occurred because of the war with Iran.

And, this would bring support in from a lot of Trump's base that he has lost to the Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, and Candace Owen narratives. If Trump played it well enough to capture their antisemitism, while at the same time, not entirely alienating his Christian Zionist base by using Netanyahu as "the problem" instead of directly blaming it on Israel.

It's just my though. My brain is rotted at this point though. I hate all of these people but am way too aware of how they shift and manipulate their narrative when things don't go as planned. It's a path forward I could see him taking.

14

Destroying critical infrastructure like that is a terrible idea. Like, I hate this war, fuck Israel and Trump/GQP but if you're invading somewhere, you don't want that infrastructure damaged/destroyed for your own use.

12
pigupreply
lemmy.world

Are they trying to invade with the purpose of taking over? I know it sounds stupid, but I consider this all a distraction from the Epstein files. I think they just want to take shots at somebody for a distraction and then leave a mess. It's the billionaire way.

2
RiverRockreply
lemmy.ml

From a US military perspective, this is actually perfectly in line with standard procedure. Holding ground, especially ground so far away, is costly and difficult. So the new strategy these last 15 years has just been to destroy civic infrastructure and collapse the state. It removes a country's ability to resist resource extraction, it creates a long-term "frontier" combat zone that's highly profitable for arms companies, and it serves as a petri dish for incubating new proxy forces to be used later, either as goons or scapegoats (or both).

17
discuss.tchncs.de

It removes a country’s ability to resist resource extraction

i'd say resource extraction requires political stability, actually, since mining sites are big and difficult to defend and also immobile, so they can't just be moved out of the way when there's danger. and also the long transport lines for minerals are long and therefore difficult to protect.

-1
RiverRockreply
lemmy.ml

That low level of area-specific stability can be achieved with proxy forces or mercenaries guarding corporate facilities

1
lemmy.world

Fuck off, thousands of people are dead this is not a 'distraction' its peoples lives.

2

You fuck off. I was putting myself in the rapist president's mindset. Not speaking from my own heart about the totality of the horror of the situation.

0
lemmy.ca

It literally is a distraction. And your outrage at that is exactly parent poster's point.

The Republican Apparatus (and Conservatives around the world, for that matter) have discovered that they can continuously manufacture new outrage to distract from the actual policies they care about.

With the Tea Party, a couple of decades ago, they mastered weaponized wedge issues to distract. (The "War on Terror" was a manufactured war, and that strategy goes back decades.) But they have since escalated to crimes against humanity.

And it's working. I haven't seen many headlines about ICE or Epstein recently because the average American is bored of hearing about it.

Meanwhile, they are enacting policies to further concentrate wealth and power amongst the 0.1%.

-1

I haven't seen many headlines about ICE or Epstein recently because the average American is bored of hearing about it.

Or more burnt out than bored maybe.

2

USSA has been terrorizing Iran long before anyone knew who Epstein was.
That whole cancer country is to blame.

1

Hitting critical civilian infrastructure like schools, hospitals and desalination plants are all war crimes. As are double tap strikes where you bomb the same place later to kill aid workers. I imagine Israel asked the US to join in Israels ongoing campaign of war crimes so they dont have to be alone in that. When the US whitewashes its crimes in a few years I suppose Israel will hope to blame the US for all of their years of war crimninaity and sleeze their way out of their own accountability.

10

Don't worry. It appears that there is a plan to help all of us with that, and it began a few days ago 😞

1

Iran, contact me if you're ever somehow able to start targeting the US mainland.

I'll adjust your fire.

5

oh they’ll strike back. eventually. they’re hopefully gifting flight sim steam keys to an entire generation of newly radicalized teenagers.

1
lemmy.world

I mean ... Good. Fuck Israel. I hope the entire country goes without water. And food. And medicine. And weapons. And electricity. Take the fucking air from their lungs if you can

-7
Fishnoodlereply
lemmy.world

The article stated that this could set a precedent for Iran to strike Israel's desalination plants, and it is real relied on desalination for up to 70% of its water

5

You provided zero context for that quote in the first statement and it looked like you simple were commenting on the title, which of course refers to the current real scenario in which the US and Israel did another war crime.

5

In a stunning turn of events, Iran reveals rather than nukes they spent decades developing the ultimate WMD, Mega Maid.

11
matlagreply
sh.itjust.works

It's understandable to be pissed at Israel for what they do to Palestine, Iran, Lebanon, but just like the critics of this very dick move: killing civilians is not going to solve anything. It just creates more resentment and hate.

4
0x0reply
lemmy.zip

killing civilians is not going to solve anything.

Israel has a draft, both genders.
Most israelis support the Gaza genocide.
"Civilians" are a minority over there.

3
matlagreply
sh.itjust.works

When Russia invaded Ukraine, a lot of Russians bought the "special operation to de-nazify Ukraine" narrative. Some still do today.

When the US invaded Iraq, a lot of Americans thought it was to free Iraqis and destroy WMD.

It took the end of WWII for a lot of Germans to realize what was happening in the concentration camps.

Israel is not a special place with people fundamentally different from the rest of the world. People are pretty much the same everywhere, and propaganda works everywhere.

0

When Russia invaded Ukraine, a lot of Russians bought the “special operation to de-nazify Ukraine” narrative. Some still do today.

A lot of Western media believed it until the day of the invasion.

Previously. Previously.

3