I'm inclined to think the latter will happen. Trump's main battle plan is to destabilize the Iranian Theocracy so a popular uprising takes them down, but a revolution is never a binary good-guys-vs-bad-guys situation.
I do not see how bombing Teheran will end the conflict between Afghanistan and Pakistan and bring eternal peace to the Middle East, but I choose to trust the experts in this thread.
I'm not happy about defending Trump but this sounds rather hollow when stuff like this is in the TES thread and it's unopposed and updooted:
this thread has consistently made a distinction between the iranian government and the iranian populace
Mother fucker it's been 5 days and we've killed at least 50% of Iran's leadership (if not more), destroyed their navy, have total air supremacy, Iran is barely firing rockets and drones, and now the Kurds have started their rebellion which will cause the IRGC to move to attack them opening themselves up for total mullah death. How dare we haven't achieved every single objective in less than a week though. #Totalforeverwar #thanksjews #epsteinwar. Faggot.
Yeah - the potato-quality image is why I defaulted to profile for ID. There's not enough fidelity to use anything aside from profile.
It's hilarious just how much AI-slop 'footage' is being shared by the usual 'multipolar world' Twitter accounts, because Iran has only hit maybe 2 or 3 things of actual note. So you have shit like this getting 20k likes because Iranian bot accounts are desperately trying to make Iran look competent.
Don't worry, according to Iran, and backed up by their supporters, Iran will introduce their 'new weapons' shortly, because we all know the best military strategy is to only use your advanced stocks after you've been getting your entire military completely shredded for days on end.
I didn't say it would and you seem to just make up interpretations of what people mean on the spot to just keep acting like a retard on purpose.
Ideally there are enough feds within Iran to prevent the latter from happening.
There's a difference between killing civilians protesting against the regime and killing their army. Plus you really want to argue that the world needs another North Korean style threat to pass on to the future hoping it will resolve itself.
I am so glad that the Kurds have started their rebellion. I am certain it will not lead to direct involvement of Turkey or Syria. The only future I see is a stable democracy in Kurdistan and hijab-free Iranian women swimming in the Caspian. Truly, every bomb that Israel drops is bringing us closer to peace.
Oh no. Turkey might end up fighting in Iran and Turks may kill IRGC members and Kurds. Pearls clutched very tightly.
People who opposed theocratic regime, of course. I don't have any problem with the color of their skin, I have undying admiration for people who were born into Islam and left it (and yes, they are usually brown), same way I consider those who convert to Islam to be the lowest form of life on the planet.
This has the same aura of Russia having been bogged down in Ukraine for a year, lost countless men and equipment, then the Ukrainians bomb the Kerch Bridge, the response on social media was “You fools! Russia is only getting started!”
If North Korea somehow got us to bomb Iran, I would propose a formal alliance and letting them have their nukes. Maybe giving them a few.
Yes! Having Turks fighting Kurds in Iran while Israel and the US are bombing the region will certainly achieve peace in the near future. The more countries are directly involved, the better.
There’s already a place in Mass Debates for you to cry about it.
I get it, you want to kill protestors and you’re living through the IRGC.
