I don’t get this whole “radical” word being used besides having been propagandised that way. Like, what does it even mean? How does it show up and why do you think it’s part of the calculations when deciding to bomb yet another for purely financial/imperialistic reasons? Is “radical” just the word Western propaganda uses for people who believe in something and act accordingly instead of just being amoral “pragmatists”?
Hope they get them or else the Judeo-Christian American alliance will just do the same in some months/years time. Also, nukes are general deterrents but since the only aggressor is America (plus Israel), ofc it would be “anti West”. 😅
Who’s more “radical” than a society that was created through settler genocide, built by trafficked and enslaved, dominated the world through sheer horror and Khorne-like violence and even have the pleasure of being the only ones to ever use nuclear bombs? This word loses all meaning when it comes out of American imperialistic lips, it’s what I’m saying.
Radical means root (like in radishes). More radical means more focused on roots of the movement/core values. It has nothing to do with extremism per se. It’s trough overuse in propaganda, “radical extremist” started sounding like a tautology.
Are you telling me that if a country bombed and killed your whole family it would t make you hate that country or at the very least it’s leaders for doing so? You wouldn’t have ideation about getting revenge?
How far you would take that depends on a lot of factors including your own personal temperament and personality, your belief system, and your ability and opportunity to get said revenge.
The leader of a country definitely had ability and opportunity, especially when they are the country whose sovereignty has been violated.
Are you telling me that if a country bombed and killed your whole family it would t make you hate that country or at the very least it’s leaders for doing so? You wouldn’t have ideation about getting revenge?
Of course, 100%, but that wouldn’t make me “radical” but just a regular person, a victim seeking justice, lol. Sadly, Iran doesn’t have the capacity to hurt America in earnest, it can only fight American forces and destroy their facilities in the region. Moreover, it just isn’t necessary and it would be a risky waste of Iranian lives. That’s never gonna be the move, they’re just gonna keep on trading amongst themselves (BRICS, Gulf countries) after the region is safer and not as much under American control (one day we’ll get rid of Israel, God willing) and wait America out.
America really does seem to think it’s untouchable but that propaganda is failing more and more each day. I think it’s probably not true that Iran can’t hurt us. I’m pretty sure they could to launch a full scale assault on American soil, but I honestly don’t think that matters in the long run. American needs those bases for Force Projection. It’s part of the strategy that makes America so “untouchable”. Iran has the capacity to do a lot of damage and that’s before taking into account other ways that Iran has traded blows with America in the past through less overt means.
Iranian forces don’t just include their Coast Guard and military forces. Iran has been involved in quite a few state sponsored terrorist groups. Thats part of the reason the region is so volatile even in times of relative peace.
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m also critical of Israel (even before the genocide) and America (I generally don’t approve of the way we destabilize regions, kill leaders in sovereign nations, and set up puppet regimes, nor am I fond of weapons deals orchestrated by us for those purposes).
But as for the redicalization, I suspect that’s your idea of cutting the US and it’s allies out of trade and other economic deals would be the more moderate and less radical move but I don’t know that that’s what will happen now that this dudes whole family got napalmed.
The idea that you can’t be a victim and still be readicalized is interesting. Just because you can empathize/sympathize with a person and the trauma they gave suffered doesn’t mean that they aren’t radicalized.
All this did was replaced khamenei with younger khamenei who is more radical and has nothing to loose (they killed his whole family)
Not to forget innocent civilians which are bombed by them.
On the other hand Israel has killed 800 lebanese people and have displaced 700k of them (10% of their entire population)
Israel learned from the “best”, don’t worry about the Lebanese, it’s just Lebensraum, it’s literally in the name!
I don’t get this whole “radical” word being used besides having been propagandised that way. Like, what does it even mean? How does it show up and why do you think it’s part of the calculations when deciding to bomb yet another for purely financial/imperialistic reasons? Is “radical” just the word Western propaganda uses for people who believe in something and act accordingly instead of just being amoral “pragmatists”?
Reports suggest he is not anti nuclear unlike his predecessor so in that aspect he is more anti west
Hope they get them or else the Judeo-Christian American alliance will just do the same in some months/years time. Also, nukes are general deterrents but since the only aggressor is America (plus Israel), ofc it would be “anti West”. 😅
Who’s more “radical” than a society that was created through settler genocide, built by trafficked and enslaved, dominated the world through sheer horror and Khorne-like violence and even have the pleasure of being the only ones to ever use nuclear bombs? This word loses all meaning when it comes out of American imperialistic lips, it’s what I’m saying.
Radical means root (like in radishes). More radical means more focused on roots of the movement/core values. It has nothing to do with extremism per se. It’s trough overuse in propaganda, “radical extremist” started sounding like a tautology.
Are you telling me that if a country bombed and killed your whole family it would t make you hate that country or at the very least it’s leaders for doing so? You wouldn’t have ideation about getting revenge?
How far you would take that depends on a lot of factors including your own personal temperament and personality, your belief system, and your ability and opportunity to get said revenge.
The leader of a country definitely had ability and opportunity, especially when they are the country whose sovereignty has been violated.
Of course, 100%, but that wouldn’t make me “radical” but just a regular person, a victim seeking justice, lol. Sadly, Iran doesn’t have the capacity to hurt America in earnest, it can only fight American forces and destroy their facilities in the region. Moreover, it just isn’t necessary and it would be a risky waste of Iranian lives. That’s never gonna be the move, they’re just gonna keep on trading amongst themselves (BRICS, Gulf countries) after the region is safer and not as much under American control (one day we’ll get rid of Israel, God willing) and wait America out.
America really does seem to think it’s untouchable but that propaganda is failing more and more each day. I think it’s probably not true that Iran can’t hurt us. I’m pretty sure they could to launch a full scale assault on American soil, but I honestly don’t think that matters in the long run. American needs those bases for Force Projection. It’s part of the strategy that makes America so “untouchable”. Iran has the capacity to do a lot of damage and that’s before taking into account other ways that Iran has traded blows with America in the past through less overt means.
Iranian forces don’t just include their Coast Guard and military forces. Iran has been involved in quite a few state sponsored terrorist groups. Thats part of the reason the region is so volatile even in times of relative peace.
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m also critical of Israel (even before the genocide) and America (I generally don’t approve of the way we destabilize regions, kill leaders in sovereign nations, and set up puppet regimes, nor am I fond of weapons deals orchestrated by us for those purposes).
But as for the redicalization, I suspect that’s your idea of cutting the US and it’s allies out of trade and other economic deals would be the more moderate and less radical move but I don’t know that that’s what will happen now that this dudes whole family got napalmed.
The idea that you can’t be a victim and still be readicalized is interesting. Just because you can empathize/sympathize with a person and the trauma they gave suffered doesn’t mean that they aren’t radicalized.