Gulf War No.37: Iranistan

[Rusty Nails]

People won't condemn them though but are quite happy to condemn the USA though
Says a lot about them

And your deliberate misinterpretation of what people say says much about you.

E.g.

So its ok to strike civilian targets like hotels if you are Iran ?

 

[Ian H]

And your deliberate misinterpretation of what people say says much about you.

E.g.

I think it's best to leave him to his pseudo-legalistic nit-picking (which seems to be a weird way of showing off).

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

It occurred to me earlier that this whole 'war' has the air of 'Team America: World Police', only Trump, Hegseth and co. actually mean it.

 

[TailWindHome]

This, from Lewis Goodall is word for word what I think
And is (imho) well worth your time

https://goodallandgoodluck.substack...vereignty?utm_medium=ios&_src_ref=go.bsky.app

However I'd like to know how this..

Squares with the Tim Shipman version of events that it was the cabinet (Miliband & Cooper) who stopped Starmer rowing in behind Trump.

 

[Pinno718]

I think it's best to leave him to his pseudo-legalistic nit-picking (which seems to be a weird way of showing off).

He did this in BR.

 

[Pross]

Some of you have much more tolerance and shorter ignore lists than me.

 

[Pblakeney]

So its ok to strike civilian targets like hotels if you are Iran ?
And the attacks on British sites in Cyprus that have nothing to do with this us/ israel attack


Think your excuses for Iran don't hold up to any scrutiny

No need for me to post a comprehensive reply as others have covered it already. The reason this debate is one sided is the war was started by just two men. It is an unnecessary and possibly illegal war with undefined objectives.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I’m sure someone will be along to say it can’t be illegal because there hasn’t been a trial yet.

 

[icowden]

People won't condemn them though but are quite happy to condemn the USA though
Says a lot about them

Let's give you an example again.

Mr USA walks up to you and punches you in the face for no reason. He keeps punching you. He accidentally punches your wife, you children and two of your friends. Instead of just standing there you decide to try and punch him back, but instead hit some of his friends and some people who had nothing to do with it.

In this analogy, who should we condemn more? The person who started it, or the person who is trying to retaliate?

 

[briantrumpet]

Some of you have much more tolerance and shorter ignore lists than me.

Snap.

 

[C R]

http://youtube.com/post/UgkxEO2fAUB3yF38xhHvjZe85vBcpRyLrcoN?si=Zm_9LNVFzXEUYrgF

 

[TailWindHome]

 

[TailWindHome]

 

[briantrumpet]

View attachment 13691

Also a WaPo 'exclusive' 🤔🤷

 

[C R]

The Iranian ship sunk near Sri Lanka had no armament, and the US knew it. The Iranian ship had taken part in an exercise organised by India. The US also took part on that exercise. One of the conditions of the exercise was that the craft did not carry armamamets. The US knew that.

https://newrepublic.com/post/207429/us-attack-iran-naval-ship