this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
1546 points (95.3% liked)
Microblog Memes
7272 readers
3344 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Chill. I don't disagree with you that the current tensions are heavily impacted by the conflict with Israel, but I'm just supplying additional context that relations have also been bad for decades, for reasons not directly related to that. There's nothing "disingenuous" to providing historical context, and just because tensions currently are related to something else doesn't mean that history is irrelevant or that supplying context is "disingenuous." You don't get to just declare things to be "independent of history," that's not how anything works. If Iran was neutral on Israel, the bad blood would not just disappear overnight.
I'm on your side here, I'm just trying to be accurate about things.
Iran has offered to end its side of the bad blood with the "official western agreed solution" to Palestine.
Isn't that a point for what I'm saying? I assume that the US did not accept, which doesn't make sense if the US was purely antagonistic because of Israel.
US official position has always been a 2 state solution. It is Israel doing everything it can to avoid it, with US "unofficial" cover, that has Iran resisting. It is Israel not wanting peace, much more than, or central rather than, US devotion to Israel, the root of the problem.