Are people still rejoicing about Iran?

Everyone is well informed.

I still hope Labour get a move on with proscription.

Reported by the media here in the UK. As I said, there are different numbers in circulation right now, yet you called the 30,000 claim propaganda and lies in your pp. Why?

My consumption is perfect, as am I.

I'm extremely well informed. It's why I don't need to ask the same questions over and over again.......

I will stick to my Ivy league, Westpoint, International scholars, Published authors, Ex and current intelligence agents, actuql informed journalists and most importantly civilians in the region.

Eastern let's not engage anymore.

I don’t think what you’re consuming online is helping. And I notice you’ve skipped over the question on the nurses gang rape.

The best bet would be to join the EU, Sweden, Canada, Saudi Arabia and others and proscribe the IRGC so their propaganda can’t be amplified on SM.

Officially reported by who?

The 30'000 figure is the current (last month they attempted to say 80'000 but quickly revised it) number being promoted by the Iranian opposition.

They have a vested interest in increasing the figure to justify ongoing intervention.

The claims are unverified and largely circulated via Iran International allegedly a Saudi funded London based outfit:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/31/concern-over-uk-based-iranian-tv-channels-links-to-saudi-arabia

It not necessary that I believe the "regime" figure of 3000 killed (including 300 security personnel). However Iranians in Iran covered these protests showing video of the protestors were doing, such as killing 3 year old Melina and attacking Iranians that were simply walking down the street.

Even HRANA a US based Iranian outfit cite a much lower number.

Where would I have proof from, apart from what’s been officially reported?
There are different numbers circulating at the moment, it’s difficult to get accurate data during an internet blackout.
How do you know 30,000 is propaganda though? Which numbers do you believe, the ones provided by the Iranian regime? Why do you choose to believe them?

Why were the 3000 killed and why would anyone support it?

Have you got any proof that the 30'000 number is true? Who are they? Which cities.

The Iranian government published a list of the 3000 names of the people who were killed (including security personnel).

In the nearly 3 weeks since this latest aggression approximately 1500 Iranians have been killed and that's with daily bombing. It the 2+ years of Gaza 70'000 have been killed and that with bombing and starvation.

That it's been promoted by many of the same voices that repeated the "40 beheaded babies" lie, also calls into question it's credibility.

So you believe his lines?

What do you think of the raping of nurses who provided cared for protestors?, for example.

It’s really not that surprising sadly that there are more people like him out there who will be supporting him. There were plenty of people who supported the likes of Hitler and Stalin, so that’s nothing new.
Have you got any credible sources for your claim that the 30,000 killed protesters are just a lie/propaganda?

Iran really doesn't export weapons to either much anymore.

Both are self sufficient and can build their own weapons "in-house".

It's why the IDF is currently suffering casualties inflicted by Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The intelligence "said" that with Jolani controlling Syria, Hezbollah no longer had a land bridge to receive weapons from Iran and were weak. It was wrong.

Yup, she is most probably used to guests who agree with her uncritically. She did manage to read all her propaganda cards out though.

The problem is that as the Professor said the propaganda no longer works.

The world has seen MSM journalists act like stenographers and uncritically repeat easily debunked lies and increasingly no longer believe them.

The contempt he displayed towards her was likely meant for the audience to let them know that they're being lied to.

According to Trump, all those targets have been met, apart from Hezbollah and the Houthi.

With the Houthi, when was the last time they attacked a ship ? Was their capability not destroyed ?

Hezbollah. How on earth does Iran manage to export arms to them ? A thousand miles, via the Suez canal ? Or do they go the long way round ?

She was likely surprised by his fire and death to you all rhetoric.

She should have followed up with a question on what happens to people who oppose the IRGC?

Plus hearing him I can understand why what happened to the nurses did. It’s relentless.

Knowing Trump, he would have wanted to take the credit for regime change if the war helps to bring it about. However both Trump and Netanyahu have stressed many times that regime change can only come from within.

The aims of the war have been suggested repeatedly by several different sources. They all boil down to the same 4 listed by the Washington Institute:

One week into the war with Iran, the United States seems to have settled on four primary objectives: (1) destroying Iran’s navy; (2) destroying Iran’s missile capabilities; (3) preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons; and (4) preventing Iran from supporting proxy groups, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon or the Houthis in Yemen

www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/assessing-us-progress-iran-war

So if regime change is only a hope, why was Trump going on about it right at the start ?

I mean... what to you see as the aim of this war ? What one of the many different and changing reasons do you have faith in ?

I listened to the Times Radio interview, it's on their YouTube. Surprisingly the comments on the video largely support the Professor.

The Times Interviewer was clearly unprepared and uncritically repeated her propaganda/lies about the 30'000 deaths, trying to blame these deaths on Ali Larajani.

The Professor rightly stated that the rest of the world saw what was happening live during the protests and saw Pompeo, Mossad talking about being on the ground.

Regime change is a hope rather than a goal, because the US/Israel do not have the ability to impose regime change. All they can do is weaken the existing regime in the hope that they are overthrown from within Iran.

Even if that doesn't happen on this occasion, even a different administration with a similar outlook will have less power than the original regime. The country will have less money and less ability to threaten other countries. Also, they will be decades away from developing nuclear capability.

So trying to look at something objectively is extreme bias ?

And yes. Iran hates the state of Isreal and wants to see it wiped out.

Can you think of any other nations that used to take that position but now don't ? Was there any other nations who had wars with Isreal in the last 70 years, and who now don't because they were "rewarded" with normalised relations and were removed from the US naughty list and were put on their pals list ?

It is a feature of war isn't it that they are usually ended with dialogue. Has that happened with Iran ? Nope. The US have never even had a sit down chat with them about the revolution. They are on the eternal naughty list, as I have mentioned before.

Hell, Trump even had his meetings his pal from the DPRK.

Oh, and never Cuba too as I keep saying. Iran and Cuba. Only total defeat of them is allowed in any conversations of certain factions in the US. Total defeat. And I think they are the only two.

They probably have a weariness of being killed if they protest or gang raped if they provide healthcare to those protestors.

On the not ordinary people I recommend listening to an interview on Times radio from a spokesperson yesterday who pretty much reigned hostility to all, including the interviewer and us. Intense rhetoric.

The objective isn’t regime change though.
So the US and Israel may decimate military capabilities but leave an administration with a similar outlook.

Aw how sweet of them ...

Many countries in the Middle East are sick of their bullshit too.

Joint statement issued today by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Qatar, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Türkiye and the United Arab Emirates:

The Ministers discussed the Iranian attacks ... and they affirmed their condemnation and denunciation of these Iranian deliberate attacks with ballistic missiles and drones which targeted residential areas, civilian infrastructure, including oil facilities, desalination plants, airports, residential buildings, and diplomatic premises. The Ministers further affirmed that such attacks could not be justified under any pretext or in any manner whatsoever.

The Ministers also stressed the right of states to defend themselves in accordance with Article (51) of the United Nations Charter. The Ministers called on Iran to immediately halt its attacks and affirmed the necessity of respecting international law, international humanitarian law, and the principles of good neighborliness, as a first toward ending the escalation, and achieving security and stability in the region, and promoting diplomacy as a means to resolve crisis.

The Ministers further emphasized that the future of relations with Iran depends on respecting the sovereignty of states and non-inference in their internal affairs, as well as refraining from violating their sovereignty or their territories in any manner whatsoever, and to not use or develop its military capabilities to threaten countries of the region.

The Ministers stressed the need for Iran to abide by implementing the Security Council Resolution 2817 (2026), which called for an immediate halt to all attacks, and unconditional cessation of any provocative acts or threats against neighboring states, and the cessation of support, financing and arming its affiliated militias in Arab countries, which Iran is doing to serve its goals and against the interests of these countries.

Furthermore, to refrain from any measures or threats aimed at closing or obstructing international navigation in the Strait of Hormuz or threatening maritime security in Bab al-Mandab.

The Ministers reaffirmed support for the security, stability and territorial integrity of Lebanon, activating the sovereignty of the Lebanese state over all its territories, and supporting the Lebanese government's decision to limit weapons to the state. They also condemned Israel's aggression against Lebanon and its expansionist policy in the region.
The Ministers reaffirm their commitment to continuing intensive consultation and coordination in this regard, to monitor developments and assess emerging issues in a way that ensure the formulation of common positions and the adoption of necessary legitimate measures and procedures to protect their security, stability, and sovereignty, and to halt the Iranian heinous attacks on their territories.

https://mofa.gov.qa/en/latest-articles/statements/joint-statement-issued-by-the-consultative-ministerial-meeting-of-the-foreign-ministers-of-a-group-of-arab-and-islamic-countries-regarding-the-iranian-attacks

I think you are showing extreme bias here

Death to the US/Death to Israel. Yeah. From the revolution.

It's not from the revolution is it? The Iranian regime is continually trying to bring death to Israeli civilians through it's proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

Iran is anti US government, not the ordinary Americans. As are several other countries around the world.

Most people do not know that Iran was invaded and occupied during both WW1 and WW2 despite declaring neutrality.

So Iranians do have weariness of foreign intervention and occupation.

Remember during the hostage crisis, Iran released all the Female and Black (except for Carl*) hostages "as they suffer too".

s

Quote :

"I don’t see it as punishing for decades old decisions, focusing on Iran what seems to be missing is the relationship between the people and the IRGC."

So why are the US so against any discussion on anything with the Iranian Government ?

Remember this :

Obama Didn't Give Iran '150 Billion in Cash' - FactCheck.org

Apart from Obama, I don't recall any US politician trying to repair relations with them. None. And Cuba too by the way. Apart from Obama.

And yes, they shot protestors. And the way to deal with that should be sanctions/ arrest warrants etc. But sanctions can't be imposed when there are no sanctions left to impose. Reference my goose for gander line. Imagine an Iranian guv meeting on the protests. Hardliners demanding they be shot. Moderates saying " no, don't shoot because we will be sanctioned". Who would win that argument ?