I haven't seen a single post say it is a bad thing to remove Khamenei. What people are saying is that there needs to be a plan in place for it to be a success. And right now there isn't one.
Your desire to defend Trump is also very transparent.
No it isn't. It is dressed up as being concerned about new leadership. In reality there has been next to no criticism of the regime, historically and up until this point, with some even trying to make arguments (or inferring) that it is a bad thing they have been removed. There is little concern about new leadership coming in to other countries, and there are infinite posts about the orange man every day. It is very transparent.
I don’t get what you’re saying hereSome of you on this thread are completely lost. The ignorance about the history of Iran, and the latest regime is staggering.
The hatred for Trump and the Americans is outshining any sensible conversation here as well. Whilst their actions are pretty hardcore, because it was them that did it, it is hard to read between a lot of posts which are almost acting as if Khamenei was a good bloke and should have stayed on for a few shifts. It has very little to do with any (ordinarily fair) concerns about potential new leadership. It's quite transparent.
What do you expect the Iranian people to do? Despite some false claims and ignorance on here, their people were killed in the tens of thousands for standing up to the regime. Something many of you said nothing about. Of course it is going to be a mess.
Many of the people also too scared to criticise ever criticise Islam, of which the regime in Iran was a textbook example of some of the worst of it, are straight down the throats of a Christian as well. What a surprise.
This is what I wrote on that at the time. One of my best friends was terrified over not knowing if his family in Iran were alive. It’s bizarre and untrue to say I wasn’t bothered about it. As I write there, some of his relatives working in universities there were nearly killed in Trump’s air strikes last year too.You seem more upset about people being killed in this offensive that was commissioned by Trump, than you were by 30x the amount of people (and the rest) being killed by the regime.
Some of his family were nearly killed in those bombings Trump/Israel ordered last year, now he doesn’t even know if they’re alive. It’s pretty terrifying.
As I said, he feels pretty certain it will end with regime change.
I haven't seen a single post say it is a bad thing to remove Khamenei. What people are saying is that there needs to be a plan in place for it to be a success. And right now there isn't one.
Your desire to defend Trump is also very transparent.
This is what I wrote on that at the time. One of my best friends was terrified over not knowing if his family in Iran were alive. It’s bizarre and untrue to say I wasn’t bothered about it. As I write there, some of his relatives working in universities there were nearly killed in Trump’s air strikes last year too.
It is possible to be opposed to both the Ayatollah and the US/Israel killing Iranians.
This is what I wrote on that at the time. One of my best friends was terrified over not knowing if his family in Iran were alive. It’s bizarre and untrue to say I wasn’t bothered about it. As I write there, some of his relatives working in universities there were nearly killed in Trump’s air strikes last year too.
It is possible to be opposed to both the Ayatollah and the US/Israel killing Iranians.
What is it with the deflection? I haven't defended Trump.
As per usual, this is an attempt to focus on something else as there isn't a counter argument. The fact is that none of you wanted to know about Iran. When it has come up it has made you uncomfortable because you cannot criticise anything remotely Islamic. The fact it was Trump who went in is largely irrelevant, but because it was him, it is the only thing you can find yourselves able to talk about.
What are you on about? I said Khamenei is (was) an abhorrent piece of shit who deserved to die.
And in what possible way is the fact it was Trump going in irrelevant, he's the one that decided to do it so of course it's fucking relevant
He has initiated a war on a country that didn’t attack, and wasn’t going to attack, his own one. Already he is responsible for over 1000 civilian deaths-I think some outrage at doing that is warranted.Yes, it is possible to be opposed to both. That is not what you have been doing though.
Your weight of outrage has been specifically at Trump, as it was with your post today.
It’s been written that nobody wanted to know anything about Iran. I speak about it with this guy most weeks.to be fair I remember this being said!
Quoting somebody elses own words is offensive but not the actual person saying it?
This is the issue when people try hard to be offended they don't seem to know what and why they are offended.
Isn't this the point people are making though? Good, bad or horrific neither the US or ourselves should be getting involved. Even more so when the track record of doing so is terrible and it is seemingly done on a whim with no short term plan let alone a long term plan.There is little concern about new leadership coming in to other countries, and there are infinite posts about the orange man every day. It is very transparent.
You are more outraged by Trump than Khamenei. No amount of pretending to not understand is going to change that.
It is funny that once I said I was a Christian, people start to question it and make fun,
but whenever anyone criticises any other religions for there beliefs it's different matter.
Goes to show.
Oh come off it, you know it was meant to be offensive, and if you don't you're even thicker than I thought.
So grow a fucking pair and own it mate - this, "oh it wasn't meant to offend", with a laughing emoji is just a pathetic cop-out. If you say it, mean it, I've got some respect for that.
And you also know you were just being a snarky twat before because you couldn't answer the question without catching yourself out.
So yeah, anyway, you wanted to offend and you managed it. Good for you.
So, for now, please fuck off will you mate, you've got your cheap rise, but it's a bit tedious talking to a snarky prick who's only defence is cheap insults. If you want to actually discuss stuff I'm happy to try to engage, but you're just a waste of time at the moment and I've got better things to do.
"This is how humanity's great disasters start ... You cannot play Russian roulette with the destiny of millions."
"The position of the Spanish government can be summarised in four words: 'No to the war,'" Sanchez continued, adding that the stance was "consistent and coherent" with its approach to the conflicts in Ukraine and in Gaza.
"We're not going to be complicit in something that is bad for the world, nor contrary to our values and interests, simply to avoid reprisals from someone," the prime minister said, in an apparent reference to Trump's trade threats.
He has initiated a war on a country that didn’t attack, and wasn’t going to attack, his own one. Already he is responsible for over 1000 civilian deaths-I think some outrage at doing that is warranted.
The friend I wrote about is a child of refugees who fled the revolution-he badly wants regime change. What he doesn’t want is the US and Israel dictating who the new regime should be, or those countries to be bombing his own. That again seems warranted.
Isn't this the point people are making though? Good, bad or horrific neither the US or ourselves should be getting involved. Even more so when the track record of doing so is terrible and it is seemingly done on a whim with no short term plan let alone a long term plan.
As for Trump he has spent years banging on about how incompetent the Democrats were that they'd lead the US into war in Iran, that US soldiers shouldn't be put at risk in middle eastern conflicts, that the US is not worlds police and that its down to other countries to deal with their own issues. With that in mind surely you can see why he is open to criticism at this point?
Fair play to the Spanish PM:
There is no smokescreen in pointing out that there is no clear successor to the current regime. The leading contenders appear to be Reza Pahlavi, son of the former shah, and the Iranian Mujahadeen, who are both based abroad and both opposed to each other. Both have some support in Iran, but neither has enough to be considered unifying. Domestic political opponents of the regime are all in prison and will either have already been killed by the regime or by air strikes. No Iranian I know wanted this regime to stay in power.It would be a lot more believable if every other post wasn't about Trump. Yes, he is open for some deserved criticism, but the context has been lost. This Iranian regime have killed tens of thousands of their own people, and what has been going on there has really been swept under the carpet. Certainly if you compare it to other comparable shit shows across the world. Unfortunately, it often reads as if it is not a good thing the leadership are no longer in charge by some of you on here. It also reads as if what has gone on there is less important than what Trump has decided to do - which it isn't. It can be a separate thing to be concerned about what a new leadership will look like too, which I agree is a valid position to take. It is pretty obvious however, that this is also being used as a smokescreen.
They aren't Christians then, they just believe in Christian values.
Dunno I'm not MuslimSo I assume people who practice Islam believe it in its purist form?
But doesn't that still make it the word of God? It may have been written down by men, but what they wrote was what God told them wasn't it?Not quite
God breathed written by mostly men
Dunno I'm not Muslim
But doesn't that still make it the word of God? It may have been written down by men, but what they wrote was what God told them wasn't it?
Yes I am a devout Christian I go every Sunday and have various Church leaders in my family.You’ve stated the bible is the word of God. Are you a devout Christian then and believe it in its fundamental form?
Yes I am a devout Christian I go every Sunday and have various Church leaders in my family.
Very probing questions !So you follow every teaching in the bible? You are opposed - for example - to homosexuality and consider it a sin?
Very probing questions !
I never brought up homosexuality! Very probing! And very inappropriate!Not really as you’ve raised the issue? You have to oppose gay marriage as that was the view of the Clergy in the House of Lords?
If you aren’t lying you definitely oppose people of the same sex being married
it’s interesting isn’t it?
I never brought up homosexuality! Very probing! And very inappropriate!
Please stop embarrassing me on this thread G Dawg! Show mercyHow is it inappropriate? You’ve said all Christians believe the bible is the word of God?
You really are looking pretty desperate now
There is no smokescreen in pointing out that there is no clear successor to the current regime. The leading contenders appear to be Reza Pahlavi, son of the former shah, and the Iranian Mujahadeen, who are both based abroad and both opposed to each other. Both have some support in Iran, but neither has enough to be considered unifying. Domestic political opponents of the regime are all in prison and will either have already been killed by the regime or by air strikes. No Iranian I know wanted this regime to stay in power.
You will consider this deflection, but I tried finding your condemnation of Benjamin Netanyahu’s murder of over 60,000 Palestinians as his regime speaks of the desire to ethnically cleanse the region and the UN considers that Israel were attempting a genocide. I have my own opinions on why you haven’t spoken out on that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?