1000 Missiles are Locked and Loaded and aimed at the Islamic Republic of Iran, with thousands of more to immediately follow, should the Iranian Government act on its threat, pronounced in many corners of the Globe, to assassinate, or attempt to assassinate, the sitting President of the United States of America, in this case, ME! Orders have already been given, and the U.S. Military is ready, willing, and able, for a one year period of time, subject to extension, to completely decimate and destroy all areas of Iran - PRAISE BE TO ALLAH! President DONALD J. TRUMP
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116899176820572671
https://nitter.net/RapidResponse47/status/2075782782974885899#m
So if Israel takes out Trump and blames it on “Iranian-backed terror groups,” they can get exactly what they want?
In the event of my death, I’ve ordered my minions to fight for me for a year, potentially longer, so that my legacy may be stained with spiteful blood.
The orders have already been given and therefore can’t be taken back - per the No-Takesies-Backsies clause of the constitution, of course.I wish all those Islamic terrorists we were told were coming for us for the past 25 years weren’t just CIA
AP had a headline about how the funeral revealed a “divided Iran” or someone nonsense. Idk bruh they look pretty united to me; that’s like the level of unity you’d see in the us if “alleged” assassins could actually do their one goddamn job
If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regimes atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom.
What’s this quote from?
It’s from Michael Parentis book Blackshirts and Reds. Really good read, if you haven’t already. Here’s the full quote:
spoiler
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”
When I was first exposed to online leftism I thought his full name was Chad Michael Parenti because I kept seeing it written that way
Carpet bombing always unites its victims through a common threat. Whatever divisions and tensions existed in Iranian society before the war got pushed to the sideline when the yanqui devils smothered the nation under black rain. This has been well-studied since the bomb raids of WW2, where it could be observed extensively in both the UK, Germany and Japan. That was the first time mass bombing civilians was a military tactic and it immediately proved a failure. Yet it has been done over and over again in Korea, in Vietnam, several times in Iraq and Afghanistan, now in Iran, and so on and so on, and the result is always the same: Bombing that does not strictly focus on military targets only serves to boost the morale of those that get bombed.
But taking the correct lesson from that would diminish the importance of the Air Force and it would lead to the MIC selling less bombs, so this course of action can’t be taken and millions of innocent people all over the world have paid with their lifes for that.
hegemonic anglos just love killing
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had the largest funeral in documented history.
I was trying to find the AP article, but I think they’ve silently changed it as they often do
The only division I’ve seen was between the comprador Iranian diaspora/Iranian redditors who were cheering for the US to bomb their family members and the actual Iranians who had to take actually take those bombs.
Divided between killing Trump or the liberal negotiators first
Is there an equivalent to the witch is dead parties for trump planned?
Can’t we just see the end soon ? I’m expecting a skirmish with Europe to finally cut ties and then a US empire without backup to call for… I’m sad my main professor in the area was right about Soviet falling but missed the US empire death date already.
Trump is an azhole, but he is not the problem. He is just an actor and democracy is the problem as it is being used for protecting neoliberalism and capitalists.
They want us foccusing on Mango
Democracy is very plainly not the problem, though certainly the pretense of democracy is a problem. Trump is wildly unpopular and so is his and Israel’s war, and getting more unpopular by the day.
Bourgeoisie democracy is absolutely a problem.
Of course it is, but notice you added an adjective and that adjective is kind of the operative factor here.
Trump is a neoliberal and a capitalist. He always has been.
He is definitely part of the problem. Saying “he is not the problem” is delusional. Iran is still pissed about Trump assassinating Qasem Soleimani during his first term, January 2020.
Trump also pulled out the JCPOA Iran denuclearization agreement in his first term. Iran continued to follow the agreement, even after he pulled out of it.
Trump had many, many pro-Israel policies during his first term. Trump signed a bill declaring that Golan Heights was Israeli land, which Israel had seized from Syria in the 1980s. Trump moved the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to occupied Jerusalem in 2018, which Israel annexed in 1967. Trump created the Abraham Accords deal, which increased Israel’s power in the region.
Trump started the war with Iran this year. Trump started the war with Iran last year. Trump signed the MoU to end the war that he started and then used that MoU as a way to restock ammunition so that he could start the war again. That’s a war crime called Perfidy. It’s a war crime under the Geneva Convention to use false pretense of truce or surrender, to kill, injure, or capture an adversary.
Israel has wanted to do a war with Iran for the past 40 years, but Trump was foolish enough to give them the green light. Trump is definitely a problem.
Iranians recognize that Trump is a problem. Iranians have been waving flags for the past week which say “#
Trump”. Tell someone living in Iran that Trump isn’t a problem after he assassinated Qasem Soleimani and Ayatollah Khamenei and killed 160 school girls and many other Iranians and continues to kill Iranians.I agree Iran has right to do whatever they want to Trump and US - even if i could, i would not say a word against it or stop them
In fact it is desirable big american actors falling as it would make neoliberal narrative more difficult to be sustained
