1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

AI Overview

Iran and its heavily armed, state-funded network of militant proxies (including Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and various Shiite militias) have been attributed to hundreds of high-profile terrorist attacks globally. Iran provides weapons, funding, training, and strategic direction to these groups.

Israel far worse. Why not run an an analysis on how many people they have killed and displaced, as compared to Iran?

6 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

A military dictatorship has the military as the head of state. A theocracy has a cleric as head of state. Question now is are the clerics running the show or is the IRGC? The latter is more than likely now the case.

The IRGC is and has since forever hence my response.

Just bc a nation has some religious figurehead as it's top leader hardly makes it a theocracy.

2 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Israel far worse. Why not run an an analysis on how many people they have killed and displaced, as compared to Iran?

I guess quite a lot and Gaza is a good example. What triggered the war on Hamas in Gaza?

3 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Israel far worse. Why not run an an analysis on how many people they have killed and displaced, as compared to Iran?

In/directly since 1948 probably 750k deaths could be attributed to Israeli aggression and genocide.

Greater Israel donchaknow

2 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

I guess quite a lot and Gaza is a good example. What triggered the war on Hamas in Gaza?

The latest situation in Gaza is just one of very many to do with Israel. No Israel, no problem.

16 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

Israel far worse. Why not run an an analysis on how many people they have killed and displaced, as compared to Iran?

Determining which is "worse" for terrorism depends on whether one is assessing state-sponsored proxy groups or the broader use of state violence and military force in regional conflicts.

Iran and Terrorism

• State Sponsorship: Iran is widely designated by Western governments as one of the world's leading state sponsors of terrorism. It bankrolls, arms, and trains a network of heavily armed militant groups across the Middle East, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories, and the Houthis in Yemen.

• Tactics: These proxy organizations utilize tactics such as suicide bombings, kidnappings, and targeted rocket and ballistic missile strikes against civilian populations, military targets, and international shipping lanes.

• Foreign Policy: Iran's use of these groups functions as an asymmetric foreign policy tool, expanding Tehran's regional influence while avoiding direct conventional confrontation. [1,

Israel and State Violence

• State Military Action: Israel does not sponsor international terrorist proxy groups; rather, it conducts direct state-level warfare and targeted military operations.

• Civilian Casualties: In its military campaigns, particularly in Gaza and southern Lebanon, Israeli forces have been responsible for a massive number of civilian casualties and widespread infrastructure destruction. International bodies and human rights organizations frequently accuse Israel of using disproportionate force and violating international humanitarian law.

• State Terrorism Accusations: Critics, regional neighbors, and some international observers argue that Israel’s use of targeted assassinations, blockades, and aggressive military engagements serves as a form of state-driven violence that terrorizes and destabilizes the region. [1, 2, 3]

Summary
Ultimately, if the definition of "terrorism" is restricted to state sponsorship of armed non-state actors, Iran is universally considered the worse actor. However, if the definition is broadened to include state violence that causes mass civilian casualties and deep regional instability, Israel's military campaigns are viewed by critics as highly destructive and destabilizing

8 minutes ago, IsmeUno said:

The latest situation in Gaza is just one of very many to do with Israel. No Israel, no problem.

No Israel and no US the Middle East would be controlled by fundamentalist Islam.

2 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

Summary
Ultimately, if the definition of "terrorism" is restricted to state sponsorship of armed non-state actors, Iran is universally considered the worse actor. However, if the definition is broadened to include state violence that causes mass civilian casualties and deep regional instability, Israel's military campaigns are viewed by critics as highly destructive and destabilizing

Interesting summary. The 1st part agrees that Iran is universally considered the worst and the second part is determined by a broader definition.

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

Interesting summary. The 1st part agrees that Iran is universally considered the worst and the second part is determined by a broader definition.

Can you not read

Iran is widely designated by Western governments as one of the world's leading state sponsors of terrorism

It all depends on the Definition of the word Terrorism it is basically saying BOTH Have committed acts of terrorism and BOTH are equal responsible

as i have said in previous posts

Edited May 23May 23 by MikeandDow

24 minutes ago, StarOfLight said:

In/directly since 1948 probably 750k deaths could be attributed to Israeli aggression and genocide.

Greater Israel donchaknow

Genocide? Like the genocide in Gaza I suppose.

https://nolabels.org/the-latest/what-gazas-population-tells-us-about-the-genocide-charge/

19 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No Israel and no US the Middle East would be controlled by fundamentalist Islam.

Wrong !!!

The Middle East would not necessarily be controlled by fundamentalist Islam, as regional geopolitics is primarily driven by state interests and national sovereignty. Without the US and Israel, other powerful states like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and Egypt would compete for hegemony, balancing each other out through traditional political alliances and strategic deterrence.

Geopolitical analysts and historians point to several factors that challenge the assumption that fundamentalists would control the region:

• Strong National Autonomy: Major powers like Saudi Arabia and Turkey possess well-funded, conventional militaries designed to counter regional threats. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states heavily invest in secular, state-led security architectures to check radical elements.

• Ideological Diversity: Fundamentalist groups are not a monolith; militant Shi'ite Islamism, as practiced by Iran, is in direct opposition to various strands of Sunni political Islam. This rivalry between major regional powers limits the capacity for a single fundamentalist ideology to gain universal control.

• Pragmatic Geopolitics: Countries in the region often base their foreign policy on pragmatic economic needs rather than strict religious ideology. For instance, Saudi Arabia and Iran have pursued diplomatic detente and non-aggression pacts to ensure economic stability and protect vital infrastructure

3 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Genocide? Like the genocide in Gaza I suppose.

https://nolabels.org/the-latest/what-gazas-population-tells-us-about-the-genocide-charge/

You don't understand what Genocide is.

It is not simply population numbers. Destruction of habitat, services (electric, water, sewage), destruction of social services (schools hospitals) all qualify as genocide.

Attempting to move the population also counts as genocide.

3 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

You don't understand what Genocide is.

It is not simply population numbers. Destruction of habitat, services (electric, water, sewage), destruction of social services (schools hospitals) all qualify as genocide.

Attempting to move the population also counts as genocide.

Correct on 2 points

1 the poster does not know what Genocide is !!

2 Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group

Any of the following acts committed with the aforementioned intent qualifies as genocide:

• Killing members of the group: Murder or mass extermination.

• Causing serious bodily or mental harm: Inflicting widespread torture, rape, or severe psychological trauma.

• Inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction: Deliberately depriving a group of resources essential for survival, such as clean water, food, shelter, or medical services.

• Imposing measures intended to prevent births: Enforcing policies that restrict reproduction within the targeted population.

• Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group: Taking children away to be raised by outsiders, stripping them of their cultural identity

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

A military dictatorship has the military as the head of state. A theocracy has a cleric as head of state. Question now is are the clerics running the show or is the IRGC? The latter is more than

likely now the case

1 hour ago, StarOfLight said:

It's not. It's the military that controls everything. Military mafia. The streets and public areas far more open and free than Saudi.

Even Hillary Clinton acknowledged this in comments well over a decade ago.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/02/100215_clinton_iran.shtml

Religion is the facade the same way Communism is a facade for China, N Korea, Cuba ... countries in which political system would be labeled fascist, authoritarian, autocratic

Good. In the case of iran it could be called a fascist religious / militarian authoritarian dictatorship- a fascist religion. Any way rather than analyzing until the cows come home... Then these whackos can be discussed in the past tenses.

21 minutes ago, Point Arguello said:

Good. In the case of iran it could be called a fascist religious / militarian authoritarian dictatorship- a fascist religion. Any way rather than analyzing until the cows come home... Then these whackos can be discussed in the past tenses.

How ignorant

Well, seems petty...call them what you wish - they've won the war set upon them by Israel, US Big Oil, MIC

No one arguing is not a difficult government to live under, but the notion of US being a freedom loving nation, open democracy, void of corruption is laughable.

This war is being fought for one reason - Israel. Big Oil and American Hegemony on for the ride.

11 minutes ago, StarOfLight said:

How ignorant

Well, seems petty...call them what you wish - they've won the war set upon them by Israel, US Big Oil, MIC

No one arguing is not a difficult government to live under, but the notion of US being a freedom loving nation, open democracy, void of corruption is laughable.

This war is being fought for one reason - Israel. Big Oil and American Hegemony on for the ride.

39 minutes ago, Point Arguello said:

Good. In the case of iran it could be called a fascist religious / militarian authoritarian dictatorship- a fascist religion. Any way rather than analyzing until the cows come home... Then these whackos can be discussed in the past tenses.

Is this the post you are referring with that diatribe? Since my post is only about classification of Iran. And if you are referring to Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan - your preaching to the choir

3 hours ago, IsmeUno said:

The latest situation in Gaza is just one of very many to do with Israel. No Israel, no problem.

However, "no Israel no problem" would involve the destruction of an entire state, and ultimately the expulsion of millions, which will inevitably lead to huge slaughter. Then you will be left with a (probably irradiated) wasteland, a bodycount of millions over which various factions will bicker, squabble and fight.

The behaviour of the current Israeli government is appalling, what they have done to Gaza, and their failure to control the maniac settlers in the West Bank is terrible. That government can change, and likely will in the next few months. I don't believe that it accurately reflects the actual desires of thr Israeli people.

The Iranian regime similarly almost certainly doesn't reflect the actual desires of the Iranian people.

It is a massive problem, perhaps a clash of two fanatical religious beliefs. But it is not intractable, the fanatical hardliners are not the majority in both countries.

12 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

how did you come to the conclusion that Trump is freeing the Iranian people from the control of the hardliners? Do you have any evidence whatsoever to support that thesis?

Trump has regularly said the Iranian people have a glorious future ahead of them. At the start of bombing in February:

"Finally, to the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand ... America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force. Now is the time to seize control of your destiny, and to unleash the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach."



https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/read-trumps-full-statement-on-iran-attack

On 5/22/2026 at 6:15 AM, JAG said:

old fashioned bombs dropped from lumbering aircraft like B52s.

From Trump's Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino just an hour ago. Not B52s, instead he posted an image of an advanced B-2 Spirit stealth bomber. This is what was used before on Iran, and soon, will be used again.

https://x.com/DanScavino/status/2058030953834971471

Off topic posts trolling about a bachelor party/bridal shower have been removed.

16 hours ago, dinsdale said:

All good non-biased sources I see but yes, when your quoting you need to source. University 101.

Diversion 101. You got owned, now learn to live with it.

6 hours ago, dinsdale said:

A military dictatorship has the military as the head of state. A theocracy has a cleric as head of state. Question now is are the clerics running the show or is the IRGC? The latter is more than likely now the case.

"A military dictatorship has the military as the head of state. A theocracy has a cleric as head of state."

And when electing a clown, he becomes the head of the circus.

"Question now is are the clerics running the show or is the IRGC? The latter is more than likely now the case."

Possibly, and was that one of the goals for the war? Is this a desirable outcome of the bombing campaign?

55 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Possibly, and was that one of the goals for the war? Is this a

There were no stated goals, makes it a lot easier later to claim your goals have been achieved.

On 5/22/2026 at 1:09 AM, davb said:

Trump, a loving father, isn't even leaving the White House this weekend to attend his son's wedding. That is a big deal. It's because Iran, not those other things. Another data point that an attack happens soon.

https://people.com/donald-trump-told-don-jr-his-wedding-is-not-good-timing-for-me-11981491

May actually be because of a need to avoid a diplomatic embarassment for the Bahamas

Of course, why did Don Jr pick the Bahamas to get hitched? He had a choice of at least two terrific and free wedding venues in Florida and DC, taxpayer funded even.

The Bride wanted the Whitehouse. Iran was the cited reason why that didn't happen, but that sounds specious considering that during a war, the President felt safe enough to attend a hotel dinner in the Capital.

So the Iranians have come up with the most precise definition of the term TACO yet. They call it "institutionalized vacillation".

Call the hospital burn unit, orange man with 3rd degree incoming!🤣

On 5/21/2026 at 8:50 PM, candide said:

You're right. Actually the Indian dish is said to originate from Persia.

And here's me thinking it was in Glasgow.........oh no, that was Chicken Tikka Massala, sorry.

Oh, now I see. Trump started this war because he knew the Iranians would start collecting environmental fees, thereby slowing down man-made climate change!

Trump is secretly an environmentalist and is playing 6D chess - genius!

So, what are the chances a deal is reached? Any deal that is even slightly worse than the Obama deal (that Trump tore up due to him being a thin skinned idiot) is gonna be seen as a humiliating defeat.

And it seems the Iranians believe (rightly, IMO) that they're in a much stronger position strategically than before the war, so chances are they won't agree to something resembling the JCPOA deal anyway.

So here we are, right in the middle of the biggest s**t show Trump has ever started, with the entire planet feeling the negative effects of the moronic actions of one single person.

Infuriating.

"Trump’s worried sycophants probably know that the details of an eventual agreement likely do not matter very much at this point. As my colleague David Frum noted earlier today, the war has already ended with America’s strategic defeat by the Islamic Republic of Iran, an outcome for which Trump is directly responsible. How much Iran will get away with, and how much humiliation the United States will endure, has yet to be ironed out by the negotiators, but the war is now almost certain to end with Tehran’s theocrats firmly in power, and with a stronger chokehold both on their own people and on the international economy than they had three months ago."

1 hour ago, BLMFem said:

So, what are the chances a deal is reached? Any deal that is even slightly worse than the Obama deal (that Trump tore up due to him being a thin skinned idiot) is gonna be seen as a humiliating defeat.

And it seems the Iranians believe (rightly, IMO) that they're in a much stronger position strategically than before the war, so chances are they won't agree to something resembling the JCPOA deal anyway.

So here we are, right in the middle of the biggest s**t show Trump has ever started, with the entire planet feeling the negative effects of the moronic actions of one single person.

Infuriating.

"Trump’s worried sycophants probably know that the details of an eventual agreement likely do not matter very much at this point. As my colleague David Frum noted earlier today, the war has already ended with America’s strategic defeat by the Islamic Republic of Iran, an outcome for which Trump is directly responsible. How much Iran will get away with, and how much humiliation the United States will endure, has yet to be ironed out by the negotiators, but the war is now almost certain to end with Tehran’s theocrats firmly in power, and with a stronger chokehold both on their own people and on the international economy than they had three months ago."

The biggest US/Iran diplomatic failure since Carter's hostage rescue fiasco - nay much worse because it has revelaled Iran's hidden hand that is far more powerful than a nuke, it's resilience and it's choke hold on Hormuz. A staggering win and as you say he doesn't know what had hit him. Nor does Israel either they bet bigly and lost bigly and Israel getting whacked in Lebanon by a resurgent Hezbollah who may have been down but they certainly not out.

Oh, and what were the Gulf States actually buying from the US - peace and security ?

Edited May 25May 25 by beautifulthailand99