this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
62 points (94.3% liked)

World News

36925 readers
996 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MarcoPOLO@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The US wanted to strike Iranian targets without retaliation in order to not lose face globally. Tehran says no. If I were serving on a US military base in the Middle East, I'd be looking for ways to take leave because things are about to get hot.

[–] ganksy@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Why did the US want to strike Iranian targets?

[–] Montagge@kbin.earth 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Iran is the world’s fifth most resource-rich country, with the second largest natural gas reserves and the fourth largest crude oil reserves, and with a total value of resources amounting to $27.3 trillion.

https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/iran-a-resource-rich-country-reeling-from-rampant-poverty/

[–] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

"In 1951, Mohammad Mosaddegh was elected Prime Minister of Iran, voted in by the legislature and confirmed by the Shah. Mosaddegh became enormously popular after he nationalized the oil industry of Iran, which had been largely controlled by foreign interests. He worked to weaken the monarchy of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi until Mosaddegh was removed in the 1953 Iranian coup d'état—initially an Anglo-American covert operation that marked the first time the United States had participated in an overthrow of a foreign government during the Cold War"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#1951–1978:_Mosaddegh,_Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi

There's a reason Iranians call the US The Great Satan.

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago

To maintain their empire

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Because Iran is resposible for the deaths of three US service members in Jordan and the wounding of dozens more.

Hitting Iran in Iran was never a likely scenario, though. The response will almost certainly be to Iran-aligned terrorist and/or militia groups outside of Iranian borders. There's a small chance that it will be to direct Iranian assets outside Iranian borders, but most people in the FA space don't think that this is going to happen, either.

[–] naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To not lose face, didn't you read?

[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Biden is groveling for israel there is no face to save

[–] PanArab@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

I’m so glad my government was wise enough to make peace with Iran despite the US’s objection.

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I honestly feel like Iran's proxies have more clout than Iran.

Hamas staged a losing war for a long period which is still going. Houthis disrupted world trade by targeting ships off coast.

Meanwhile Iran got harassed by Pakistan for using some light artillery on some probably random Balochis.

It doesn't really matter if they have the weapons when they can't really use them all that effectively themselves.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well maybe they'll attack a us ship on their own next time instead of delegating their dirty work 🤷

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, because what the US needs right now is another hot war, it is wise to encourage escalation into a direct conflict with Iran.

You do understand that will just make the US empire crumble faster, right?

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry for wanting iran to make open moves instead of their usual paying other groups to do their dirty work.

I don't want another war, nobody does. These games that are being played aren't mine, I am just judging the players.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Idealist? Sure.

Accurate to how I feel about the situation? Also yes.

Why are you mad about what I want?

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Because of the bloodthirstiness. You can conceptualize that actual people would die right? At much larger scales?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

On one hand, we shouldn't be going around picking fights.

In the other hand, lol try us.

[–] PanArab@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah. As a citizen of the US I dont use "we" and "us" when referring to the US state.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because it is not necessarily great to subsume your identity to an empire

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And that's what you've decided this is?

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why else would you speak of the US state as if you were a part of it, with "we" and "us"?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because I'm in it. What do you want from me?

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're in the US government?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Lolol. No.

Not referring to when soldiers of our genocidal government is attacked as "an attack on us" is literally just not being a nationalist.

[–] Pili@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 year ago

It usually doesn't end well for you, when then try you.