None of those numbers are verifiable. The opposition has every incentive to lie. And let's not forget there was a lot of armed agitators amongst those protesters. Mike Huckabee let the cat out of the bag with a tweet boasting of how a mossad agent walks beside every protester.
You're confidently replying to a point that I did not make. Protesters were certainly killed, both peaceful ones and agitators. In addition, government claims hundreds of police officers died and places of worship were attacked and burned.
My point is there is simply no verifiable numbers because both the opposition, particularly diaspora groups backed by the regimes enemies, and the government have incentives to be inaccurate. So trying to use the death toll as a talking point is not a good idea.
It's completely naive to underestimate the role of Mossad and the United States in the unrest. The former through actual Iranian nationals in their employ, and the latter in engineering the dollar shortage that led to the unrest in the first place (Scott Besant bragged about this).
Extensive domestic economic control by security forces is also a feature of Egypt and Pakistan. America does not complain about those examples of course, because those countries bend the knee.
Half the world chants that. Currently, probably more. Americans have managed even to alienate the ass-kissing politicians from europe. Even in US, the people are protesting against the current president, and no wonder... trump wants 200 billion more while people can't afford healthcare and education and some cities look like cities from apocalypse movies, with homeless camps everywhere.
Currently lot if people dislike/distrust america. Which is understandable and rational thing to do. Chanting “deato xyz” is very irrational and unproductive and just bad.
if I was disliked and distrusted by a lot of people I’d think long and hard about why that is vs. complaining about how that dislike/distrust is communicated
"The single greatest threat to free speech at this point in time is Israel and its supporters" - American political scientist Professor John Mearsheimer.
Why should you expect in general that someone who agrees with you on one issue also agrees with you on other issues? The idea that Israel is the greatest threat to free speech at this point in time is as offensive to some people as the idea that Russia is fighting a just war in Ukraine is to some other people.
Their message seems to suggest that the claim is worth more because of who it is attributed to. Without Mearsheimer's name, it's just an utterly generic observation.
The attribution would make sense if Mearsheimer had actually said something novel, or if his association somehow made the statement more credible.
Mearsheimer says many reasonable things, but would you really want to cite him as an authority on any topic given his track record of spouting utter nonsense?
The AI editing of the article makes it a painful read. A shame because the point they were making is a good one, regarding AI coding apps empowering domain experts.
The wording in the posted article, which is elevator-pitch. The audience has money, ambitious, mercenary attitude, and proximity to big problem that must be either solved or resold.
Rather, humans involved have looked at this problem and in a few cases succeeded. And in many cases, shelved it and returned to process cardiology, Ugandan infrastructure, etc.
I thought the proposal for a solar link between Morocco and the UK was a great idea. Unfortunately the UK government has decided not to back it with a contract for different guarantee.
And the US, Israel, and EU member states have been pushing back to prevent that from happening for decades.
Stuxnet, the assassination of nuclear physicists [0], and the expansion of the DGSE's presence in Tehran [1] and various other actions that haven't been publicized or can't be announced have been going on for a reason.
None of the players in the JCPOA negotiated in good faith.
Iran's continued support for Assad, the Houthis, Hezbollah (especially after their massacre of Syrian Sunnis in 2013 which lead to Jabhat Al-Nusra), and their backing of Nouri Al-Maliki's sectarian government leading to Iraq collapsing into civil war again showed Iran was negotiating with the Obama administration in bad faith.
Similarly, Russia and China's continued support for Iran's ballistics missiles program and other dual use technologies showed that Russia+China as guarunteers wouldn't end well.
There's a reason why the French - one of the guarunteers of the JCPOA - expanded their own offensive intelligence capacity in Tehran, unless you think the DGSE are American (ha)
We would have been in the same position today if Harris was president as well.
The lawless bully nation known as the United States is strangling Cuba. They manufactured this crisis by threatening sanctions on anyone who sends oil to the country. An act of outrageous imperial aggression.
Or the Wahabi regime that sponsored the sort of fanaticism that led to the rise of Al Qaeda?
Let's not put a moral spin on America's realpolitik.
reply