what are you even talking about

its a fact that chomeini received lots of support from the iranian left wing to get rid off the shah at all cost
well, it did turn out to be very costly in the end

so i have no clue what your comment is supposed to mean, let me know if you want to actually discuss something or you just felt the urge to use the word nazi for no reason

This post was edited by ampoo on May 15 2019 01:19pm

Can't only pet the Islam without giving you some attention as well

history lessons sponsored by raytheon...
seriously, your knowledge when it comes to middle eastern history is so flawed and selective, you should seriously consider not posting on topics related to it anymore.

as to 'patting islam', what part of 'shitty theocracy with major human rights issues and an oppressive leadership', which was my characterisation of iran in the very first post i made on this topic, triggered you into brainlessly vomiting that stupid narrative again?




holy shit, you're literally just regurgitating the transparent excuses the warmongers that you allegedly oppose are making for those shitty policy decisions.

am i a fan of iran wanting nuclear weapons? of course not, but the deal DID work, your characterisation of it is utterly ridiculous and exclusively shared by the american and israeli right wing (and their braindead shills) - literally the entire rest of the world acknowledges what a diplomatic accomplishment it was. also, had the withdrawal NOT been simply a provocation and attempt of escalation, genuine attempts to make a realistic better deal would have been the logical step, not abandoning diplomatic channels altogether. how gullible can you be?

do i think the republican guard is a force of good in the world? same answer, of course not. but your apologist approach of claiming 'well technically, there are some substantive reasons to support that move' blatantly and unintelligently ignores some major context to it: there is nothing that considerably changed lately to justify this policy shift, it was only done to antagonise iran - are you really too blind to see that? also, your justification concerning 'war crimes' and the 'spreading of national influence in the region' very much also applies to the american forces - did you seriously overlook that or were you trying to be funny there? should they be labeled a 'terrorist organisation' as well?



and i think it's a pretty obvious historical and military FACT.

Wow! Great pictures. :/

all correlations are "facts". causations are more factual tho.

i'll take you omitting my argument and not bothering to respond to mean you'd rather toss mud with ampoo and black.

the USA has only occasionally wanted to invade a country that had nukes, really only once by my account with Pakistan (and even there we might not have invaded for more reasons than just nukes). we haven't really wanted to invade any other country that has them since they got them, and most got them from the USA directly.

This post was edited by thesnipa on May 15 2019 01:40pm

you know there are whole articles and essays you can find about nuclear deterrence, it's a well known concept that many people have theorised and written about. you might want to look that up before you put all your eggs into the 'pure correlation' basket...

Honestly it gets a bit tiring when you clearly are not actually responding and just trying to "beat" me.

I said that Pakistan IS a case where it's between causation and correlation. I also talked about the role that nukes played in the US not invading the USSR and vice-versa. another case where nukes clearly play a role.

then i went through, one by one, all of the other countries that have nukes.

your response? i'm putting all of my eggs into a "pure correlation basket". ummmm wat?

what stupid narrative? and how is an arms industry corporation connected to historical facts?
for your information, these conspiracy theories you are making up for every argument that debunks your stupidity are not an argument

i described the simple fact that the islamic revolution was also successful due to the support of the political left like the tudeh party and certain liberals
5 minutes of actually informing yourself will make that clear, but you are too lazy

randomly connecting a regular german dude with a random arms corporation from another continent is so much easier

the thing is, you denouncing iran as a "shitty theocracy with major human rights issues and an oppressive leadership" is nice and all, but at the same time you are constantly spreading their propaganda and clearing the path for their islamism by fighting everyone, who is critical of islam
do you not realise how you contradict yourself all the time?

i wont let you get away with it though, you cant bullshit everyone critical of islam but condemn a system that is the ideology of islam implemented in reality

ridiculous double standards, these iranian islamists would literally laugh at your posts as you are foolish enough to serve the purpose of people, who would kill you in a heartbeat

the incredibly unintelligent narrative that people who unequivocally denounced the iranian regime, but also provided historical and political context to call out transparent warmongering, are simply leftists idiots looking to make excuses for islam. your typical anti-islam bigotry makes you completely immune to even the most obvious of truths...



it's funny you'd say that because that's pretty much what i had been thinking: on several occasions you had to admit that nukes at least partly acted as a deterrent and by no means could you prove 'the opposite' of my statement that it's a major reason a country with iran's history would want to have them - yet somehow you insist on disagreeing and arguing with me...

mother of all dodges