The West’s war on Iran

174 comments on “The West’s war on Iran ”

• Comments are now closed

1. weka 1

   14 June 2025 at 11:02 pm

   If the threat of nuclear advancement isn't the reason, why now?
   • Psycho Milt 1.1

     15 June 2025 at 7:24 am

     His claim that the nuclear programme ended in 2003 is false. However, even if it were true, Iran's been attacking Israel via proxies – Hamas, Hizballah, the Houthis, possibly others – for a long time, and Al Aqsa Flood was the last straw for the Israeli government. It's not just a matter of the murdered civilians, it's the shame and humiliation of having failed to foresee the attack, recognise what was happening quickly or respond to it quickly. Having crippled Hamas and Hizballah, and having taken out most of Iran's anti-aircraft capability last October, I'm not surprised they're now punishing the source of those proxies.
   • Francesca 1.2

     15 June 2025 at 7:50 am

     Israel is on a roll.They've committed war crimes with impunity, with even the support of our leaders in the west.They've taken over parts of Syria.They've conducted assassinations with no consequences .Tyey've bombed anywhere they like …crickets, not a murmur…Guess this must be our common values in play .Democracy, human rights and all that.

     Iran has been on the hit list for ever.Regime change( the easy way of colonising)has been a goal for ever…at least since the last regime change was overturned and the Shah ousted

     https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2003/9/22/us-plans-to-attack-seven-muslim-states

     It's in the US interests , and never has there been a more ardent and ghoulish embrace between the US and Israel , with a ruthless, stupid manipulable buffoon in the White House
   • KJT 1.3

     15 June 2025 at 9:31 am

     Right wing despots like to have a war/external enemy. It takes attention away from their inevitable failures.

     Both the Isreali Government and Trump’S GOP, need it.
     • weka 1.3.1

       15 June 2025 at 11:59 am

       This seems one of them more likely explanations. It still doesn’t quite explain why right now though.
       • weka 1.3.1.1

         15 June 2025 at 12:00 pm

         Taking the heat off themselves over Gaza is plausible, there is internal politics within the Israeli government,
       • Chris 1.3.1.2

         16 June 2025 at 11:36 am

         Maybe they see the current US regime as providing the necessary window?
     • Psycho Milt 1.3.2

       15 June 2025 at 1:12 pm

       You're so close. Think about your post in the context of the right-wing despots running Iran having spent 46 years railing against and attacking a small country that's nowhere near Iran and wants nothing to with Iran.
       • KJT 1.3.2.1

         15 June 2025 at 5:09 pm

         No time for the Iranian despots, or any others. Nor did any of many Iranians I knew.

         However. Israel attacked Iran.
         • Psycho Milt 1.3.2.1.1

           15 June 2025 at 5:45 pm

           Again, you might believe that Iran attacking Israel via proxies gives it plausible deniability, but neither the Israelis nor anyone who's paying attention finds that deniability genuinely plausible.
           • Res Publica 1.3.2.1.1.1

             15 June 2025 at 6:30 pm

             It's not like they're particularly subtle about it, either.
             • Francesca …

               16 June 2025 at 9:14 am

               Have you noted Israel's top generals, scientists, political figures being systematically murdered by Iranians or their proxies?
               • Res Publica …

                 16 June 2025 at 9:35 am

                 Have you also noted the thousands of attacks carried out against Israel by Iranian-backed proxy groups using weapons, intelligence, and training provided by the IRGC’s Quds Force?

                 And yes, Israel was subjected to a horrific terrorist attack. They've responded with overwhelming (and arguably disproportionate) force, much like the U.S. did after 9/11. But that doesn’t change the fact that the initial attack was an act of terror.

                 It’s also worth noting that the IRGC has been designated as a terrorist organization by multiple governments, including the U.S. and Canada. Under those legal frameworks, targeting the IRGC’s military infrastructure and leadership is considered lawful.

                 While international law draws more complicated lines, states that classify the IRGC as a terrorist group can generally treat them as legitimate military targets.

                 Since many of the 'political figures' and scientists you're referring to also hold positions within the IRGC or are directly affiliated with its military programs, it's reasonable to argue that they blur the line between civilian and combatant.
               • Psycho Milt …

                 16 June 2025 at 9:51 am

                 I've noted that Iranians and their proxies lack the competence to systematically murder Israel's top generals etc. Instead, they settle for systematically murdering anyone in Israel they can get their hands on, which unfortunately they were able to do recently and it's now coming back to bite them.
   • Res Publica 1.4

     15 June 2025 at 3:15 pm

     My own view is this:

     Given the Iranian regime’s long history of opportunism that would make even Mussolini blush, it’s hard to imagine they wouldn’t have been tempted to escalate if they believed Israel was diplomatically isolated and militarily overcommitted in Gaza.

     Their foreign policy has always been a calculated blend of ideological rhetoric and ruthless pragmatism. If they saw a moment to knock a rival down a peg or two, they’d take it.

     This strike, then, is best read as Israel’s way of reminding the region (Tehran especially) that it remains a serious military actor. That even under intense global scrutiny, it still possesses both the will and capacity to respond forcefully.

     It may not be justified, but it is understandable, if we’re speaking in the cold grammar of deterrence and power projection.
     • Muttonbird 1.4.1

       15 June 2025 at 3:40 pm

       Iran's use of hypersonic missiles also reminds Israel how close they are to oblivion. Not that Iran would do that but deterrence is a powerful incentive to curb expansionist ambitions.
       • Res Publica 1.4.1.1

         15 June 2025 at 6:26 pm

         I'd be extremely suprised to find Iran in posession of hypersonic missiles, let alone enough to do serious damage to Israel.

         The Iranians aren't showing any restraint out of the goodness of their hearts. They well know in an all out shooting war they'd be demolished.

         Which would leave them vulnerable to their main rival: the Saudis.
         • Muttonbird 1.4.1.1.1

           15 June 2025 at 6:43 pm

           Admittedly it's hard to know what imagery from Tel Aviv and Haifa is real, and even harder to know what denials from Tel Aviv and Haifa are real, but certainly some high ordinance has made its way through the vaunted iron dome.
           • Res Publica 1.4.1.1.1.1

             15 June 2025 at 9:58 pm

             No anti-missile defense system is perfect. Some leakage is inevitable—it’s the nature of saturation attacks, especially when decoys and drones are mixed in. The Israelis know that it's never about achieving 100% interception.

             It's about absorbing the blow, demonstrating resilience, and retaining escalation dominance.

             If anything, the fact that the response was limited, with relatively little damage compared to the scale of the barrage, plays in Israel’s favor. It lets them say: “You threw everything you had, and we’re still standing.” That’s a deterrence message in itself.
     • weka 1.4.2

       15 June 2025 at 5:34 pm

       this also makes sense. Do you think this was just in the planning rather than there being a particular impetus for the timing? Or more likely that they knew the Iranians were about to do something?
       • Res Publica 1.4.2.1

         15 June 2025 at 6:04 pm

         If they were response to a particular threat, the strikes would have been much more targeted.

         We'd also see different language from the Israeli government, and a more calibrated response from Iran.

         So I suspect the timing is more driven by political calculations and the availabilty of resources.
         • weka 1.4.2.1.1

           15 June 2025 at 6:35 pm

           👍
         • Nic the NZer 1.4.2.1.2

           16 June 2025 at 11:35 am

           Netanyahu has been saying Iran is between two weeks to two months from having a nuclear weapon for at least the last 10 years. This is purely a rhetorical device to convince the western public that Israeli threats to Iran are justified.

           Something which has not been highlighted enough is how critical the IAEA has been of attacks on nuclear sites in Iran. The IAEA does not condone the Israeli response to its own report should give pause for thought at least to what the report is saying. This is certainly no way to avoid a nuclear armed Iran, probably the opposite.

           What appears to have happened here is Israel has instrumentalized the US and its negotiations with Iran to start a regime change conflict which it now intends to coopt the US into. I don't see direct evidence the US was aware of this as it was happening (though that the US was in on this plan is strongly suggested by Israeli press and statements). This would of course by fully consistent with long standing Israeli regime change ambitions known at least since we became aware of Netanyahu lobbying the US to attack Iraq (and then a list of 7 countries ending with Iran). Netanyahu was also involved in lobbying the US (under Trump) to leave its nuclear agreement with Iran (the agreement Iran was complying with according to US and IAEA sources).

           This makes a lot more sense when we understand a US isolated and sanctioned Iran, even nuclear armed, is preferable to a US partner, to Israel. On the other hand if Israel is really concerned about Iran becoming nuclear armed a military attack is a sure fire way to encourage that goal to be pursued, and since Israel understands this (and the significant domestic consequences of Iranian retaliation) we can no longer make sense of what they are doing.
           • Res Publica 1.4.2.1.2.1

             16 June 2025 at 12:36 pm

             Or, hear me out, the Israelis have made the perfectly reasonable assumption that Iran is going to pursue nuclear weapons regardless, if only to counterbalance Israel’s own deterrent.

             It's certainly what I'd be whispering into the Supreme Leader's ear if I was a senior Iranian strategist.

             And honestly, the Israelis probably would do the same thing too, if the boot were on the other foot.

             In that light, launching strikes now; when Iran might assume Israel is too bogged down in the Gaza quagmire to respond decisively, could actually look like a strategic move to maintain regional military superiority.

             Not everything in international relations has to be evidence of some nefarious cabal or grand political calculation. Sometimes things happen for overlapping, complex reasons. Realpolitik exists. And in any case, deterrence, escalation and punitive action are languages both Tehran and Tel Aviv speak fluently.

             This is simply the latest round in an ongoing exchange that has only occasionally been punctuated by missiles and bombing attacks on both sides. And, by some miracle, has avoided escalating into a full-scale war so far.

             The Iranians have likely held back because they understand being bombed into oblivion by Israel (and potentially the U.S.) wouldn’t serve their national interests. And the Israelis, for all their gung-ho posturing, probably realise that being embroiled in a war of annihilation against their neighbours and regional rivals is a remarkably effective way to become an international pariah.
             • Nic the NZer …

               16 June 2025 at 1:29 pm

               Again, this is quite inconsistent with multiple things we know. First off (and I don't actually care if you refer to this as a shadowy conspiracy narrative), It is however actually quite well established that Netanyahu was lobbying the US to change the regime in Iraq before 2002 and has also been lobbying the US to attack Iran. The 7 countries in 5 years memo is pretty well established by now, with the only missing bit being how directly that may have been an instruction from Israel. On the other hand, Netanyahu has again been clearly publicly lobbying the US on this in agreement with all aspects of that plan.

               The other thing to understand is the nature of the IAEA report. This only repeated claims of breaches which were first brought to light in 2007 and 2018, so nothing new. This doesn't suggest any reason for the long standing tradition of Netanyahu blustering Iran is weeks away from a nuclear weapon is any different.

               There are also actually civilian uses for more than 60% enriched uranium including nuclear powered submarines. Iran is probably following the letter of the agreement even if it is enriching higher than usual reactor capacity. Yes, this might be to be within short range of weapons production but giving ample justification for reaching nuclear armed status is not going to counter that.

               Even if it is presently an opportune time to attack Iran, Israel still needs a (should really be an extremely) good justification to do so. The timing being an unexpected surprise to Iran is highly consistent with how I narrated it, including occurring before any kind of new agreement is reached.

               Things make a lot more sense once we understand regime change in Iran is a top priority of Israel, well above non-proliferation.

               On the other hand, Netanyahu lobbying the US to leave its existing agreement with Iran (which everybody reporting said was working, Iran was compliant), makes no sense if non-proliferation is an objective. Neither does attacking Iran and making total sense of the arguments for Iran to become nuclear armed. Israel could not possibly think its surface level attacks on underground infrastructure are going to stop two weeks of work being carried out.
               • Res Publica …

                 16 June 2025 at 3:26 pm

                 Things make a lot more sense once we understand regime change in Iran is a top priority of Israel, well above non-proliferation.

                 You say that like it’s shocking or new.

                 Any halfway rational Israeli policymaker would be deeply interested in regime change in a country whose leadership openly calls for their destruction and funds proxies to help make it happen. That’s not mysterious—it’s strategic self-preservation.

                 What’s actually surprising is your inability to grasp that, and your willingness to do some fairly serious mental gymnastics to justify Iran’s objectives (nuclearization and dismantling the state of Israel) while casting Israel’s objectives (survival and maintaining regional deterrence) as uniquely immoral.

                 You don’t have to like Israel to apply the same standard to both sides.

                 And just to keep things in perspective: yes, Israel is bombing Iran and committing war crimes in Gaza. But at the same time, Iran is disappearing and murdering its own citizens for checks notes wearing the wrong clothes.

                 Your boos mean nothing, I’ve seen what makes you cheer.
                 • Nic the NZer …

                   16 June 2025 at 4:25 pm

                   Unfortunately, your comment demonstrates your whole argument is incoherent. I didn't in any way discuss the morality of Iran having or not having nuclear weapons, I would actually strongly prefer the US negotiations to succeed and Iran to return to a monitored purely civilian program.

                   What I did point out is the track record of Netanyahu lying about Iran's nuclear abilities (for a very long time) in order to try to get the US involved in military attacks on Iran, and trying to get the US out of nuclear agreements with Iran.

                   Since you didn't raise any additional points I don't think this requires further comment, but your contention that (Israel) feeling threatened justifies them starting a war, simply justifies every attack started ever (please try to substitute the attacker into the bracket). If there is such a just war, then both the actual threat the level of that threat and how the attack counters that threat does matter. The fact that (as you said) this action strongly encourages Iran into advancing a nuclear weapons program clearly undermines this being the justification for the attack.

                   The other thing to highlight is living under bombardment (with 400 odd civilians killed already) is obviously far worse than the state prosecuting women for how they dress. You have entirely imagined I support the Iranian theocratic regime in any way, but the Israeli attack has already observably increased its support in Iran.
                   • Psycho Milt …

                     17 June 2025 at 1:16 pm

                     "The other thing to highlight is living under bombardment (with 400 odd civilians killed already) is obviously far worse than the state prosecuting women for how they dress."

                     Impressive trivialising of one of the most repressive regimes on the planet, there. But yes, even worse than all the things that will get you beaten, tortured, raped, imprisoned or murdered by that regime is that it's spent decades quite deliberately getting itself into a war against a country that doesn't suffer the Iranian regime's utter incompetence so is correspondingly superior militarily, and Iranians will now suffer for that.

                     But even that isn't really as bad as that the Ayatollahs have spent 46 years turning what should be a lively, prosperous and well-educated country into a repressive, impoverished failure. Israel doesn't have the ability to impose regime change on Iran, so your comments are superfluous, but yes it would be an unalloyed good if that regime were to collapse.
                   • Francesca []

                     17 June 2025 at 5:34 pm

                     Oh so heavy duty economic sanctions have nothing to do with the impoverishment
                   • Psycho Milt …

                     17 June 2025 at 6:59 pm

                     Well, it's one factor, but the sanctions are themselves a consequence of running a murderously repressive regime that's a threat to other countries as well as its own citizens. In any case, even if there were no sanctions, if you spend the state's money on a huge internal security apparatus to ensure a lack dissenting opinions, a separate special military to protect you from the regular military, and foreign proxy groups to provide plausible deniability when attacking other countries, your economy does not thrive.
               • Tom Hunter …

                 17 June 2025 at 12:37 pm

                 There are also actually civilian uses for more than 60% enriched uranium including nuclear powered submarines.

                 What? In decades of reading about nuclear tech, including submarines, I've never heard such a thing so a citation would be good.

                 The reactors on nuclear subs operate much the same as nuclear reactors everywhere, the uranium enriched to 3-5% U-235. The only uranium at 60%+ U-225 on board would be in SSN ballistic missile subs – in their nuclear warheads.
                 • Nic the NZer …

                   17 June 2025 at 1:09 pm

                   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_marine_propulsion#:~:text=Some%20marine%20reactors%20run%20on,big%20advantage%20to%20a%20submarine).

                   "Some marine reactors run on relatively low-enriched uranium, which requires more frequent refueling. Others run on highly enriched uranium, varying from 20% 235U, to the over 96% 235U found in U.S. submarines,[4] in which the resulting smaller core is quieter in operation (a big advantage to a submarine)."

                   That is sourced elsewhere again. Yes, nuclear submarine reactor characteristics are highly classified.

                   Though I think the most reasonable understanding of what Iran is doing with this is that it wants the US to return to the nuclear treaty position and exchange sanctions relief. High enrichment is a provocation to the US, but within civilian use.
                   • SPC …

                     17 June 2025 at 1:18 pm

                     Nuclear power subs with quiet capacity?
                   • Nic the NZer …

                     17 June 2025 at 1:32 pm

                     @SPC. No, I still think its a provocation to try to get back into a treaty and get sanctions relief from the US. That's just to point out the IAEA doesn't get a hard and fast rules because it gets very complicated. If your picture is 20% or more must be going into weapons that's simplistic, and almost certainly being used to generate a WMD narrative by the aggressor.
                   • SPC …

                     17 June 2025 at 1:38 pm

                     Above 60% enrichment is seen as moving towards weapons grade

                     Uranium has been enriched to 83.7% at Fordow, which is comparable to the 80% enriched uranium contained in the Hiroshima atomic bomb.

                     https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360723648/im-nuclear-scientist-significance-israels-airstrikeshttps://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360723648/im-nuclear-scientist-significance-israels-airstrikes
                   • Tom Hunter …

                     17 June 2025 at 7:16 pm

                     Others run on highly enriched uranium, varying from 20% 235U, to the over 96% 235U found in U.S. submarines,[4]

                     Interesting but extraordinarily thin given that the Iranians don't have much of a navy, let along nuclear subs. You're being very generous to them in your interpretation.

                     I'll stick with William of Ockham in thinking that the reason they've produced so much uranium metal at U-235 enrichment levels of 60% is that it enables a fast move to the 90%+ required for an atomic bomb.
                   • Nic the NZer …

                     18 June 2025 at 12:25 pm

                     You are the one being very generous, to accept Netanyahu has evidence this time for the exact same allegation he has recycled since 2012.

                     What I was describing was how even this claim needs multiple levels of further being jacked up, even if it's true. There are some uses of HEF, including research (and yes Iran has been investing heavily in training nuclear scientists, as Israel kills its nuclear scientists regularly).

                     As I said most plausibly, they have been trying to provoke Trump into returning to its nuclear treaty as they want sanctions relief. The key point here is Israel is known to want Iran out of this treaty and that treaty was demonstrably keeping Iran's nuclear program civilian. So, you have to be pretty credulous to think this time Israel's attack is actually about Iran's nuclear program.
                 • Psycho Milt …

                   17 June 2025 at 1:18 pm

                   Not to mention, in what sense is a nuclear-powered submarine a "civilian use?" I haven't noticed Maersk or Hamburg-Sud equipping themselves with nuclear subs.
                   • Muttonbird …

                     17 June 2025 at 7:41 pm

                     There's inherent racism in every statement. No question is asked of western nations why they might need a nuclear submarine fleet. Only islamic nations.
                   • Psycho Milt …

                     17 June 2025 at 8:14 pm

                     Islam isn't a race. And yes I do ask the question of what use a regime with a hard-on for destroying Israel might have for nuclear submarines when it can't even consistently supply its own population with electricity. We in NZ may not be very flash at electricity production ourselves, but we don't have daily blackouts and at least we're not busy flushing billions down the toilet of uranium enrichment.
       • Psycho Milt 1.4.2.2

         15 June 2025 at 6:52 pm

         I watched a military YouTuber (so feel free to take with a grain of salt) yesterday who pointed out that it was almost a full moon at the time of this attack, which is the worst possible timing for a night attack because you're lit up like a Christmas tree, so you have to assume there was some reason why they didn't hold off a couple of weeks until new moon when it'll be nice and dark. What that reason might be would be anyone's guess, though.

         I suspect it's just a matter of Hizballah and Assad having been taken out and it taking this long to plan how to extend the attack to their bosses.
         • Res Publica 1.4.2.2.1

           16 June 2025 at 10:40 am

           shrug or that an F-15 can only be in one place at a time.
2. Psycho Milt 2

   15 June 2025 at 7:09 am

   "…found ordinary Iranians to be such wonderful, cultured and kind people."

   Ordinary everybody are wonderful, cultured and kind people. If we were able to visit late-1930s Germany, we'd find it full of wonderful, cultured and kind people. Likewise if we could visit Italy or the USSR of the late 1930s. The fact that people everywhere are mostly very nice is irrelevant – they may be very nice and ruled by a despotic, totalitarian government with genocidal aims, and in that case they suffer a lot of unpleasantness. Israel killing a few of the despots and wrecking the odd nuclear facility is among the more trivial of the unpleasantness ordinary Iranians suffer due to their government.
3. Francesca 3

   15 June 2025 at 7:59 am

   Except the consequences of the killing of civilians mean that the Iranians back their government more than ever

   The world we now live in thinks its "trivial" when one country , not facing any kind of imminent threat from country 2, goes all out and attacks it .This is ok apparently

   Diplomacy is no longer valued in our brave new world

   Well It's not the kind of world I welcome for my children and grandchildren
   • Psycho Milt 3.1

     15 June 2025 at 1:00 pm

     Neither of us has in-depth knowledge of Iranian citizens' attitude to their government, so neither of us should make assertions about it.

     You may believe that Iran's use of proxies to wage war on Israel gives it plausible deniability, but neither the Israelis nor anyone who's paying much attention find the deniability plausible.
4. Muttonbird 4

   15 June 2025 at 8:46 am

   International relations expert Professor Robert Patman says the Israeli strikes may backfire catastrophically, by encouraging Iran to finally pursue nuclear weapons.

   “They’re not going to eliminate Iran's capability to become a nuclear power,” the University of Otago professor said. “If anything, this may hasten their decision.”

   He argued Iran’s lesson from this strike will be simple: “Because they didn't have nuclear weapons, they were subjected to a preemptive strike.”

   Patman said Israel's long-standing opposition to Iran's nuclear energy programme appears increasingly aimed at regional dominance, not non-proliferation.

   “Israel already has 200 nuclear weapons,” he noted. “Iran has signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel has not.”

   Nuclear deterrence works. A nuclear capable Iran will help quell Israel’s expansionist ambitions and bring lasting peace to the region.

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360722787/israel-launches-attack-iran
   • Francesca 4.1

     15 June 2025 at 9:09 am

     And what's more, Iran is a founding member of the nuclear free zone of the middle east.

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_nuclear_weapon_free_zone

     Of course, if Israel really wanted to feel more secure they would have wholeheartedly embraced this idea .The fact is , they're more interested in domination, and so prefer to be the only state with nukes in the ME
     • aj 4.1.1

       15 June 2025 at 5:16 pm

       Domination, and by whatever means necessary. Vijay Prashad covers the background here very well.

       https://www.counterpunch.org/2025/06/13/the-illegal-attack-on-iran/
   • Res Publica 4.2

     16 June 2025 at 9:15 am

     A nuclear capable Iran will help quell Israel’s expansionist ambitions and bring lasting peace to the region.

     Or further destabilize the region and lead to Iran's proxies having access to nuclear capabilities. Or potentially an all-out war if the Iranians feel they have sufficient first strike capability and strategic depth to nuke Israel back into the sea.

     If you're searching for a "good" guy in the Middle East, the Iranians are not the people you want to be looking at.
     • Stephen D 4.2.1

       16 June 2025 at 10:18 am

       There are no good guys in the Middle East.

       Everyone has an agenda. Israel V Palestine, Iran V Israel, Sunni V Shiite, USA V Russia, The Military Industrial complexes of nations V each other, God V God and so it goes on.
5. bwaghorn 5

   15 June 2025 at 9:51 am

   My thoughts where hamas possible took a big step towards winning yesterday, Isreal can't survive for ever if their naighbours hate them,
   • Res Publica 5.1

     15 June 2025 at 3:07 pm

     Its neighbours have hated it since 1948. I can't see it going anywhere anytime soon.
     • Muttonbird 5.1.1

       15 June 2025 at 3:43 pm

       Israel needs to ask itself why it is not a good neighbour and member of the region.

       I can see a successful two-state solution resolving the situation. But that would require Israel to get back in its box. That I can't see.
   • SPC 5.2

     15 June 2025 at 4:10 pm

     Hamas did nothing.

     They put their own cause before Palestine – Likud has used them to justify their de facto annexation policy in the WB since 2010.

     They will contend with those call them on it though.

     https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/24/hamas-condemns-abbass-remarks-over-gaza-hostages
     • Muttonbird 5.2.1

       15 June 2025 at 4:56 pm

       “We condemn the PA leadership’s continued pursuit of this discourse, which criminalizes the resistance and absolves the occupation of its ongoing crimes against our people for decades, especially the genocidal war against Gaza, the annexation and Judaization of the West Bank and Jerusalem, and the severe suffering endured by our valiant prisoners.”

       Important point. Abbas invites Israel to fully annex Gaza and the West Bank.
       • SPC 5.2.1.1

         15 June 2025 at 5:04 pm

         From 2010-2018 Hamas fought without any recognition of an Israeli state.

         That undermined the PA seeking international support – and that is how they win.

         They only changed their charter in 2018. Maybe because they realised the error?

         Abbas invites Israel to fully annex Gaza and the West Bank.

         An outrageous lie. The inability of Hamas to work with others is why they remain outside the PLO.
     • bwaghorn 5.2.2

       15 June 2025 at 7:09 pm

       Hamas did nothing

       Yeah they did they poked the bear with their attacks, they must have known that Isreal would respond massively, so now Isreal is attacking naighbours escalating the war the chances of Isreal being destroyed in the end has increased
       • SPC 5.2.2.1

         15 June 2025 at 7:23 pm

         The Israeli attack on Iran is unrelated to Hamas, it is related to Iran's nuclear developments and that is related to the diminishment of Hezbollah (no longer firing missiles at Israel) – thus a fear that Iran will use its its enriched uranium to build weapons to pose itself as retaining a revolutionary war against Israel capacity (how it legitimises its regime).

         You do realise that with

         Israel being destroyed

         you sort of pose others as seeking to not just win a war but end it as a nation state.
         • bwaghorn 5.2.2.1.1

           15 June 2025 at 10:08 pm

           Just an observation, the outcome doesn't really make much difference to me , they've been killing each other for thousands of years over there, just happens to be Isreal that's on top at the moment

           That’s not yo say that it’s not horrific what’s happening btw
         • Stephen D 5.2.2.1.2

           16 June 2025 at 12:57 pm

           "The Israeli attack on Iran is unrelated to Hamas"

           Hamas being Iran's proxy in the region, Israel would certainly have factored that in their calculations. Who else is going to provide Hamas wirh weapons and succor?
           • SPC 5.2.2.1.2.1

             16 June 2025 at 3:28 pm

             It is now generally accepted that Iran had no knowledge of the Hamas attack (one reason there was no Hezbollah action when the IDF first responded).

             Hamas is an offshoot of the (Sunni) Moslem Brotherhood of Egypt (Morsi) unrelated to Iran's Shia Moslem network (militias in Iraq, the Alawite led regime in Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis of Yemen).

             Most of the economic aid comes from Qatar, though Hamas applied tariffs on imports for extra revenue.

             The latter part of this covers Hamas arms supply.

             https://theconversation.com/where-do-israel-and-hamas-get-their-weapons-220762
6. Ad 6

   15 June 2025 at 10:39 am

   Interviewing expats about Iran's virtues will get you an identical response to interviewing expat Israelis about Israel. They share intensive political education.

   Be honest and interrogate the Iranian state policy and posture framework towards Israel since 1979.
7. Bearded Git 7

   15 June 2025 at 10:52 am

   Israel's nuclear hypocrisy.A must watch.

   https://www.facebook.com/reel/4027592617556095/?s=single_unit&__cft__%5B0%5D=AZUA7eIPgvkX3jZKKZkosWf8mmCtbx-MdmcnA-CAO0kMv61LHphis6ZGO-ZJHhU1qbNYR-i2wiMNc3DbXiI-5Ep7x7qP3ZpVkCtXJ7t-GToWYqS3lRNqTa8faDIk6dTFMq2mc5asYHd-aEwTGWRLZHfa0jfoOUzXQdAPRx9ROhYuuy44GnqgA27pzhDypr6CgKE&__tn__=H-R
   • ianmac 7.1

     15 June 2025 at 12:36 pm

     Too right BG. A must watch. Hypocrisy writ big.
   • SPC 7.2

     15 June 2025 at 2:07 pm

     The work to realise the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty was between 1965-1968.

     Following the ratification of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in 1968, all non-nuclear powers are required to negotiate a safeguards agreement with the IAEA, which is given the authority to monitor nuclear programs and to inspect nuclear facilities.

     Israel had a nuclear power plant (1962-1964) and nuclear weapons (by 1967) before 1968.

     Thus the terms did not apply to it. It is not known to helped any nation to breach the agreement either.
8. ianmac 8

   15 June 2025 at 12:30 pm

   I believe that Iran has never invaded another country. Even in the Iraq Iran War, Iran stayed within its borders with one exception. Near the war end they moved troops into the wetlands across the border then withdrew a few days later.

   How many countries has Israel attacked?
   • Psycho Milt 8.1

     15 June 2025 at 1:06 pm

     The ayatollahs prefer to attack other countries using proxies rather than Iranian troops, sure. But the countries being attacked via the proxies can't afford to take that as unseriously as people safe in NZ commenting on social media can.

     Re Israel, a more relevant question is "How many countries has Israel been attacked by?" The number includes Iran.
   • SPC 8.2

     15 June 2025 at 2:02 pm

     Do you know how many missiles Iran supplied to Hezbollah to fire at Israel?

     Do you know how many drones Iran sent to Russia after it went to war on Ukraine?

     Do you know that at the Natanz nuclear facility the centrifuges that enrich uranium for power plant use are at ground level (and that in an underground protected shelter there are centrifuges that develop weapons grade uranium).

     If Russia helps Iran to have nuclear weapons it is in breach of the non proliferation treaty.

     The UNSC should declare that Iran would be subject to sanctions if it is ever known to have nuclear weapons (permanent while they have them).

     And temporary sanctions until it ends enrichment beyond nuclear power plant level.

     And in return call on Israel to end its attacks and allow food, fuel and medical aid into Gaza.
     • Francesca 8.2.1

       15 June 2025 at 3:06 pm

       When he pulled the US out of the JCPOA Trump imposed more sanctions under USs maximum pressure canpaign

       What kind of incentive does Iran have to engage in yet another agreement when the commitment is so fickle.

       It was the most sanctioned country in the world before Russia took that place and you're suggesting more?

       Sanctions are a poor substitute for dialogue and diplomacy
       • SPC 8.2.1.1

         15 June 2025 at 3:36 pm

         It is only more if they

         1.seek to have (sustain) nuclear weapons capacity

         2.acquire nuclear weapons

         Otherwise it is the pathway to the end of them and allow nuclear power – their stated goal.
       • SPC 8.2.1.2

         15 June 2025 at 3:39 pm

         And if this is the prime security goal of Israel then

         in return call on Israel to end its attacks and allow food, fuel and medical aid into Gaza.

         it ends the Israeli action in Gaza.

         That surely means

         1.Hamas exit the area and hostages released (those of Hamas into exile)

         2.An Arab League force supports a UN administration – for the purpose of re-building in partnership with a civil administration (first appointed, then elected)

         3.A civil administration elected in the WB, including a directly PM as a temporary head of the PA.

         4.the head of the PLO represents the Palestinian state cause (this needs to be separated from PA cronyism).
       • Cricklewood 8.2.1.3

         15 June 2025 at 3:47 pm

         Very little chance of meaningful diplomacy and dialougue with religious extremists who completely oppose western values or basic human rights especially when it comes to woman or lgbt communties.
         • Muttonbird 8.2.1.3.1

           15 June 2025 at 3:58 pm

           Pardon me if I am sceptical about your commitment to women and LGBT communities in distant lands. Even western countries have been very slow to acknowledge LGBT and other minority communities.

           What does stand out however is the (primary) admission this is about forcing western values on every corner of the globe which hasn't already had them shoved down their throats.
           • SPC 8.2.1.3.1.1

             15 June 2025 at 4:03 pm

             You obviously approve of the US departure from Afghanistan so the men with guns there can impose their regime of household arrest on women.

             No forever war to defend human rights, or democracy, from those who rule via force.

             No values abroad, none at home – tyranny rampant.
             • Muttonbird …

               15 June 2025 at 4:38 pm

               US involvement there was the same as US involvement anywhere. Disastrous.

               You can't fix countries by attempting to enforce depraved, licentious western values on them and then bailing.

               Is this the sort of liberation you are so convinced by and wish upon other islamic nations?

               March 19 marks 15 years since the U.S.-U.K invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the American people have no idea of the enormity of the calamity the invasion unleashed. The US military has refused to keep a tally of Iraqi deaths. General Tommy Franks, the man in charge of the initial invasion, bluntly told reporters, “We don’t do body counts.” One survey found that most Americans thought Iraqi deaths were in the tens of thousands. But our calculations, using the best information available, show a catastrophic estimate of 2.4 million Iraqi deaths since the 2003 invasion.

               https://www.codepink.org/the_iraq_death_toll_15_years_after_the_us_invasion

               More than 40,000 civilians were killed in the devastating battle to retake Mosul from Isis, according to intelligence reports revealed exclusively to The Independent – a death toll far higher than previous estimates.

               Residents of the besieged city were killed by Iraqi ground forces attempting to force out militants, as well as by air strikes and Isis fighters, according to Kurdish intelligence services.

               Hoshyar Zebari, until recently a senior minister in Baghdad, told The Independent that many bodies “are still buried under the rubble”. “The level of human suffering is immense,” he said.

               https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/mosul-massacre-battle-isis-iraq-city-civilian-casualties-killed-deaths-fighting-forces-islamic-state-a7848781.html
               • SPC …

                 15 June 2025 at 4:52 pm

                 You can't fix countries by attempting to enforce depraved, licentious western values on them and then bailing.

                 True. The US bailed and betrayed the women of Afghanistan again. Last time in using the mujahadeen to take out a secular regime in Kabul (because it was backed by Moscow).

                 Is this the sort of liberation you are so convinced by and wish upon other islamic nations?

                 Na. Because of my communications to the US embassy saying an Iraq regime change was inconsistent with their war against terrorism, I was visited by NZ Police (they asked a local post shop to ban sending my faxes).

                 They “took my pre APEC 1999 advice on East Timor” though … .
                 • Muttonbird …

                   15 June 2025 at 4:58 pm

                   Oh, well. You have certainly changed since those days.
                   • SPC …

                     15 June 2025 at 5:08 pm

                     No, but getting portrayed this way and that is something one gets used to.

                     Back in the day, there was SIME and SOME. MSN message boards early 2000's.

                     Expressing the same opinion on both sites meant being called either an Arab rag head squatting on the WB or some sort of expletive Zionist.

                     An Introduction to ME tribalism 101.
             • aj …

               15 June 2025 at 5:21 pm

               …when it comes to woman or lgbt communties.

               Until I reached those words I was certain you were talking about Israel. Religious fanatics, and all.
               • Psycho Milt …

                 15 June 2025 at 6:55 pm

                 Israel is the most secular society in the Middle East, you clown. It's as secular as we are.
                 • Muttonbird …

                   15 June 2025 at 7:08 pm

                   Yawn.

                   https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2018/7/22/israel-has-finally-come-out-as-an-ethno-religious-state
                 • SPC …

                   18 June 2025 at 2:47 pm

                   More like Iran since 1979 or the USA under Project 2025.
     • Muttonbird 8.2.2

       15 June 2025 at 3:33 pm

       1) Is it more, less or about the same number of munitions as the US has supplied to Israel in order to slaughter 28,000 women and girls?

       2) 200-400 as of mid 2023.

       3) Speculation.

       4) If pigs had wings…

       5) Iran is already the second most sanctioned country in the world, but more should make them see sense.

       6) Speculation.

       7) Interesting that for Zionist sympathisers the UN's role should be to pressure and order all countries which are critical of Israel to give up their defence strategies while Israel, an illegal occupying force, is to give up nothing and continue its expansion into territory set aside for the Palestinian state.

       Why shouldn't Iran be able to defend itself with a nuclear deterrent? Is it because they are muslim and muslims can't be trusted?
       • SPC 8.2.2.1

         15 June 2025 at 3:43 pm

         Thanks for admitting you support Iran getting nuclear weapons and thus you oppose the non proliferation treaty.

         It puts your 3) into perspective.
         • Muttonbird 8.2.2.1.1

           15 June 2025 at 3:44 pm

           Merely asking the question no-one has the balls to answer.

           Non-proliferation is a way for nuclear capable states to freely bully, to hegemonise other states.

           A powerful incentive.
           • SPC 8.2.2.1.1.1

             15 June 2025 at 3:59 pm

             Any state with nuclear weapons and/or UNSC veto that does not recognise another member state of the UN (and their borders) is a problem.

             Peter Fraser recognised the problem of the latter back in 1945.

             Iran does not recognise the state of Israel.

             Russia does not recognise the borders of Ukraine (or the free will of other nations to determine their collective security).

             The USA has problems with the Golan Heights being in Syria, possibly Taiwan being part of China and now apparently Greenland remaining part of Denmark.

             Nuclear disarmament by those who such weaponry has been a thing by the way.
             • Drowsy M. Kram …

               17 June 2025 at 9:25 pm

               Iran does not recognise the state of Israel.

               Israel does not recognise the State of Palestine, which is convenient for Israelis – Palestinians not do much.

               What's a Palestinian to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Israel?

               At least 51 Palestinians killed in Gaza waiting for food trucks, says health ministry [17 June 2025]
               More than 200 also wounded on Tuesday morning as they waited for UN and commercial trucks to enter territory with aid supplies

               Samaher Meqdad was at the hospital looking for her two brothers and a nephew who had been in the crowd. “We don’t want flour. We don’t want food. We don’t want anything,” she said. “Why did they fire at the young people? Why? Aren’t we human beings?”
               
               • SPC …

                 17 June 2025 at 9:31 pm

                 Israel does not recognise the State of Palestine, which is convenient for Israelis – Palestinians not do much.

                 What's a Palestinian to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Israel?

                 Iran does not recognise the state of Israel.

                 What are the Israelis to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Iran, if they get nuclear weapons?
                 • Muttonbird …

                   17 June 2025 at 9:41 pm

                   Ifs and buts don't stack up against the heres and nows.
                   • SPC …

                     17 June 2025 at 9:45 pm

                     It does to those in involved.
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   17 June 2025 at 9:47 pm

                   I'm looking at recent events in the Occupied Territories from (my limited grasp of) a Palestinian perspective, hence my question:

                   What's a Palestinian to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Israel?

                   What are the Israelis to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Iran, if they get nuclear weapons?

                   Why would Israelis need to "throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Iran, if they get nuclear weapons"? "Israel is estimated to possess somewhere between 90 and 300 nuclear warheads."

                   For your question to make sense (to me), you would have to believe that a hypothetical nuclear weapon-armed Iran would use those notional weapons against Israel.

                   It is fair to say that notional weapons of mass destruction have played a role in the region.

                   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
                   • SPC …

                     17 June 2025 at 10:02 pm

                     In the case of Palestinians all they needed was leaders to accept two state peace offers (as per 2000 or 2009).

                     Lacking a government in Israel willing to make an offer, they can try to get recognised statehood (but would face a US veto in the UNSC sans a peace deal with Israel).

                     One pathway towards some justice is outlined above 8.2.1.2.

                     https://thestandard.org.nz/the-wests-war-on-iran/#comment-2036360

                     Why would Israelis need to "throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Iran, if they get nuclear weapons"?

                     Which nation is at risk, if they both have nuclear weapons and one does not think the other state should exist? And its revolutionary regimes existence is based on the concept of end time war to remove the infidel from the ME (as per Israel and its backer USA)?

                     PS is your use of the term mercy deliberate, as in inferring Moslems and Christians are merciful, or have a merciful God and others not so much? You do realise both believe in hell for the unbeliever?
                   • Muttonbird …

                     17 June 2025 at 10:13 pm

                     Why is it always by the book on actual actions and diplomacy (nothing else matters) but all hell breaks loose about retoric.

                     You'd have to believe that one regime was inherently more dishonest about intention than the other.

                     We know for a fact by many statements and actions that Israel does not want Palestine to exist.

                     Iran as a people and western leftie activists are the only ones seriously asking questions about that because we are still free to. Iran not for much longer I expect…we lefties not long after that.
                   • SPC …

                     17 June 2025 at 10:21 pm

                     It is fair to say that notional weapons of mass destruction have played a role in the region.

                     That was a great charade.

                     The Iraqi leader blocked arms inspections to infer he had something to hide (to keep the Shia and Kurds cowered, despite the UN no fly zone over their areas).

                     The West used that to cite a security threat so they could seek to obtain UN authorisation or act without it (because they wanted to end sanctions by regime change).
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   17 June 2025 at 10:21 pm

                   In the case of Palestinians all they needed was leaders to accept two state peace offers (as per 2000 or 2009).

                   Obviously – benefit of hindsight etc. But since the Israeli govt now doesn’t want the State of Israel to exist, Palestinians will just have to wait, and wait. If only the IDF would leave them alone in the meantime.

                   https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east/israel-and-the-occupied-palestinian-territory/report-israel-and-the-occupied-palestinian-territory/

                   Which nation is at risk, if they both have nuclear weapons and one does not think the other state should exist?

                   In that circumstance, both nations are at risk.

                   PS is your use of the term mercy deliberate…

                   It's deliberate in the sense of being part of the commonly used phrase "throw yourself on someone's mercy".
                   • SPC …

                     17 June 2025 at 10:46 pm

                     I'm asking what is a Palestinian to do now – are those "two state peace offers" still on the table?

                     Lacking a government in Israel willing to make an offer (the current one is in power till the end of its term), they can try to get recognised statehood from more and more of the nation states of the UN (would face a US veto in the UNSC sans a peace deal with Israel).

                     One pathway towards some justice is outlined above 8.2.1.2.

                     Which nation is at risk, if they both have nuclear weapons and one does not think the other state should exist?

                     In that circumstance, both nations are at risk.

                     Which would explain why one would want the status quo and see any change as a security risk.

                     The world’s problem is its lack of unity over a diplomatic and security approach.

                     Iran seems to have lost its Hezbollah proxy and is moving to a missile build up from 2-3,000 to 8000 missiles to provide its own more direct (and risky) existential threat to Israel (thus to be seen as capable of backing up its revolutionary regime sop).

                     In a sense there are two war hawk regimes (as per the Cold War) in a co-dependent relationship (to justify each staying in power to their own people).
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   17 June 2025 at 10:35 pm

                   Oops, that should have been "But since the Israeli govt now doesn’t want the State of Israel Palestine to exist…".
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   17 June 2025 at 10:59 pm

                   Which nation is at risk, if they both have nuclear weapons and one does not think the other state should exist?

                   In that circumstance, both nations are at risk.

                   Which would explain why one would want the status quo and see any change as a security risk.

                   Quite, but perhaps reflect on why you started your question with "Which nation is at risk…" – could it be that you believe Israelis would never use their nuclear arsenal?

                   Commentary: Nuclear weapons, Israel and Gaza
                   [4 Nov 2024]
                   There has been extensive attention paid (in the English-language press) to Russian nuclear threats since its invasion of Ukraine, but there has been less focus on the implications of increased Israeli references to nuclear weapons. Despite Israel’s official stance of nuclear ambiguity, there has been a significant increase in references to Israel’s nuclear arsenal since 7 October 2023. Both Israeli and US officials have alluded to, or explicitly called for, the use of nuclear weapons against Palestinians in Gaza, and in some cases, even against Iran. This includes MP Tally Gotliv’s posts calling for the use of doomsday weapons to “restore the country’s dignity, strength, and security.”

                   Just as well Israel does carefully calibrated proportional responses.

                   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

                   2015 – “Israel has 200, all targeted on Tehran.”

                   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel
                   • SPC …

                     17 June 2025 at 11:39 pm

                     Quite, but perhaps reflect on why you started your question with "Which nation would be at risk…" – could it be that you believe Israelis would never use their nuclear arsenal?

                     It was only said to hold up a mirror to your own question.

                     What's a Palestinian to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Israel?

                     The PLO/PA and Israel have appeal to other nations.

                     In one instance the 2015 USA/EU/Iran deal Trump withdrew from in 2018. The recent talks that did not reach any success (related to the IAEA declaring Iran in breach of NPT expectations).

                     The threat of use of nukes by Russia is well known to be a bluff. It is a pretence because it is under no real existential threat.

                     It is a huge leap from use of force to realise ambition and threat of using nukes as a last resort security deterrent (Iran not being a front-line state is in no position to invade Israel).
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   18 June 2025 at 10:40 am

                   Quite, but perhaps reflect on why you started your question with "Which nation would be at risk…" – could it be that you believe Israelis would never use their nuclear arsenal?

                   It was only said to hold up a mirror to your own question.

                   My "own question" was:

                   Why would Israelis need to "throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Iran, if they get nuclear weapons"?

                   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

                   2015 – “Israel has 200, all targeted on Tehran.”

                   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel

                   'Might makes right', from Ukraine to Tehran by way of Palestine.

                   Israel-Iran conflict at critical juncture as Trump demands Tehran’s ‘unconditional surrender’ [17 June 2025]

                   Putin To Netanyahu, A New Babylonian Age Of Pure Power [17 June 2025]
                   As Netanyahu’s war recalibrates alliances and redraws red lines, international law fades into irrelevance, Gaza becomes background noise, and the West’s moral compass spins off course.
                   …
                   These days, might makes right. It is a doctrine cemented by the rise of a volatile American president who no longer even tries to cloak his arbitrary decisions in legal justifications.
                   …
                   “I am no longer king, I am God.” That kind of leap flattens every trace of humanity and reduces the world to a brutal state of self interest, whatever the price and whatever the means. Here we are again. Mercy becomes a crime.
                   …
                   We pull back, shut ourselves in, suffocate slowly. Hoping the iron fist of the strong doesn’t come down on our heads this time.

                   As I write these lines, an international news agency reports the latest headline: “Sixty dead, including twenty children, as building hit by Israel.” And so, in this daily disaster, we can turn to Austrian poet Rainer Maria Rilke’s words: Perhaps we cling to our demons because we are afraid of losing our angels. Even if, today, we’ve begun to wonder where those angels might be hiding.
                   • SPC …

                     18 June 2025 at 12:44 pm

                     There is a hole in the bucket.

                     It really did begin with this question

                     What's a Palestinian to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Israel?

                     I held that up to a mirror.

                     Then you responded.

                     I did the same again.

                     Once again, Palestinians chose war after 3 chances of a state.

                     1947, 2000 and 2009.

                     This was underlined in October 2023.

                     Their main backer of recent years has a regime predicated on a militant revolutionary purpose – removal of non Moslem governance from the ME (and western backed regimes in the Gulf).

                     It had as proxy a heavily armed Hezbollah to fire rockets off at Israel (its back up to that has been its own use of missiles). Now that it has lost that, it would have to fire off its own missiles (and have nuclear weapons capability as back up).

                     We have at the moment 3 nations with a strategy based on use of force. Israel de facto annexation of the WB (Gaza is its diversion) under the protection of the US UNSC veto, Russia in Ukraine (supported by Iran with missiles and drones) and Iran (receiving help from Russia to get nuclear power), removal of the Israeli regime to pose as some sort of regional hegemon.

                     In a UN Charter based world this would not be the case.
                   • Francesca []

                     18 June 2025 at 2:14 pm

                     Don't understand what you mean by Russia helping Iran to get nuclear power

                     It was the US who assisted and encouraged Iran's nuclear power program under the atoms for peace initiative

                     Russia was certainly an integral part of the JCPOA taking Iran's spent uranium. under that deal

                     And they did supply Iran with nuclear fuel but so what?

                     In 2023 Russia supplied 38% of the EUs enriched uranium

                     Even now Russias helping to build 20 reactors outside of Russia
                   • Muttonbird …

                     18 June 2025 at 1:00 pm

                     Once again, Palestinians chose war after 3 chances of a state.

                     1947, 2000 and 2009.

                     Analysis and citation please, particularly 2000 and 2009. What were these offers?
                   • SPC …

                     18 June 2025 at 1:10 pm

                     Apparently a mystery to some.
                   • SPC …

                     18 June 2025 at 2:39 pm

                     The "Atoms for Peace" initiative was a proposal by U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1953 to promote the peaceful applications of nuclear technology worldwide, shifting the focus from nuclear weapons to uses in agriculture, medicine, and energy production.

                     This initiative led to the creation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 1957, tasked with promoting the safe, secure, and peaceful use of nuclear technologies.

                     Not specifically for Iran.

                     And not for nuclear weapons proliferation.

                     The IAEA says Iran is in breach.

                     Russia says it's ready to remove highly enriched uranium from Iran

                     https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-it-is-ready-remove-excess-nuclear-materials-iran-2025-06-11/

                     Maybe the Putin-Trump phone calls are not that informative?
             • Drowsy M. Kram …

               18 June 2025 at 2:30 pm

               What's a Palestinian to do – throw themselves on the 'mercy' of Israel?

               I held that up to a mirror.

               Your mirror held no answer. Mirror, mirror, on the wall…
               • SPC …

                 18 June 2025 at 2:34 pm

                 You have provided no answers at all.
                 • Drowsy M. Kram …

                   18 June 2025 at 3:58 pm

                   You have provided no answers at all.

                   True, but is there a good and/or realistic answer to the question I posed? If I was a Palestinian in Gaza, then I might try to get enough food and water to survive, without getting shot (mercy mercy), and find somewhere (anywhere) less likely to be bombed to hunker down.

                   Israeli forces kill 51 Palestinians waiting for flour at Gaza aid site, witnesses and rescuers say
                   "This is again the result of another food distribution initiative," said Thanos Gargavanis, WHO trauma surgeon and emergency officer.

                   "There's a constant correlation with the positions of the four announced food distribution sites and the mass casualty incidents," he added, saying the trauma injuries in recent days were mostly from gunshot wounds.

                   That report may be (mostly) Hamas propaganda, but what would you do, if you were a Palestinian 'living' in Gaza, or ('lucky') the West Bank?

                   You're on the money with Gaza being Israel's "diversion", although it seems a callous descriptor given the death toll. And I’d add Israel’s strategy of using force to draw the US into the Israel-Iran war.

                   The Annexation of the West Bank Is Complete
                   [17 June 2025]
                   With eyes on Gaza, Israel has quietly annexed the West Bank
                 • Francesca …

                   18 June 2025 at 4:19 pm

                   No reply button available to me under your reply to me

                   The Atoms for Peace program provided the foundations for Irans nuclear program by providing key nuclear technology and education. Iran&s nuclear program began under Mohamed Reza Shahs rule in 1957, after the United States and Iran agreed to a civilian nuclear cooperation arrangement, known as the Cooperation Concerning Civil Uses of Atoms, through the Atoms for Peace program. Two years later, the Shah established the Tehran Nuclear Research Center (TNRC), located at the University of Tehran, and began to negotiate with the United States to provide Iran with nuclear technology and materials.

                   So the IAEA say Iran is in breach .Thats then permissible to launch a lethal attack ,bomb their capital, kill their scientists and citizens living in the same building?

                   What a world we live in .Surely then in this age of permissiveness where slack is cut for Israel, who is allowed to gun down starving people lining up for food some further dialogue might be appropriate .No?Only Israel is allowed to defend itself?

                   And of course would Iran still be in breach if the JCPOA was still intact?That agreement seemed to be working.

                   And talking about providing no answers, you still haven’t clued me in on the seemingly meaningful comment that Russia is helping Iran get nuclear power.
                 • SPC …

                   18 June 2025 at 4:37 pm

                   This is assistance, is it not.

                   https://www.powermag.com/russia-has-deal-to-build-eight-nuclear-power-plants-in-iran/

                   This is getting tiresome.

                   It’s not a debate, it is a projection and transference of some sort of accountability for whatever Israel is doing onto those who challenge questionable claims/accusations/arguments.
                   • Francesca …

                     18 June 2025 at 6:19 pm

                     I'm asking why you think that's significant

                     Iran shouldn't have nuclear power?
                   • SPC …

                     18 June 2025 at 6:32 pm

                     Who says it is about them having nuclear power?

                     Even Russia acknowledges it is not a good look to be supplying reactors after the recent IAEA report – thus it offers to take in all the uranium enriched to weapons grade.

                     The thing is Iran did it to see if they could do so with their Natanz underground centrifuges. And built Fordow to be able to do so within an even more secure facility.

                     The purpose is to be seen as the cusp of being nuclear weapons capable (first weapons grade standard uranium) as a security deterrent. Why?
                   • Muttonbird …

                     18 June 2025 at 8:47 pm

                     I asked you this out of genuine interest because I wanted to know what these rejected offers of statehood in 2000 and 2009 looked like:

                     https://thestandard.org.nz/the-wests-war-on-iran/#comment-2036638

                     I had a quick read of a couple of Wikipedia sources but could not find any offer of contiguous border Palestinian statehood in the West Bank.

                     Obviously statehood is not worth shit if you have racist Israeli settlers and IDF in your midst.
                   • SPC …

                     18 June 2025 at 10:06 pm

                     One 2000 issue was on a transportation (road and rail) between Gaza and the West Bank.

                     No immediate contiguity.

                     Based on the Israeli definition of the West Bank, Barak offered to form a Palestinian state initially on 73% of the West Bank (that is, 27% less than the Green Line borders) and 100% of the Gaza Strip.

                     https://israelpolicyforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/camp-david-2000-1-scaled.jpg

                     In 10–25 years, the Palestinian state would expand to a maximum of 92% of the West Bank (91 percent of the West Bank and 1 percent from a land swap).

                     No map for this.

                     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit
                   • SPC …

                     18 June 2025 at 10:11 pm

                     The Annapolis talks in 2008

                     Both sides seemed to accept on principle the division of Jerusalem and a symbolic number of Palestinians refugees to be repatriated into Israel. In one of the meetings, moreover, Olmert offered the Palestinian negotiators more than 93 percent of the territory they claimed in the West Bank.

                     https://www.britannica.com/topic/two-state-solution

                     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annapolis_Conference

                     https://ecf.org.il/issues/issue/927

                     https://www.chathamhouse.org/2018/07/israeli-palestinian-peacemaking/abbas-and-olmert-annapolis-and-after
       • weka 8.2.2.2

         16 June 2025 at 3:36 pm

         1) Is it more, less or about the same number of munitions as the US has supplied to Israel in order to slaughter 28,000 women and girls?

         Always interesting to see when women are useful to western leftie arguments.

         Women in Gaza are not being targeted because they are women. In Iran, they are. You made a gross body count argument with zero regard for the women in Iran who've been hanged, or the girls who've been child brides.

         They're all barbarians, Israeli government, Iranian government and Hamas. US government too.
         • Muttonbird 8.2.2.2.1

           16 June 2025 at 3:49 pm

           In response to SPC’s question about Hezbollah rockets I was direct referencing the UN Women article linked to. Perhaps that organisation are 'western lefties' using women for convenience too?

           As for liberating the women of Iran from oppression, do you think the people of Iran should do that, or better that Israel rain down bombs on them all?
           • weka 8.2.2.2.1.1

             16 June 2025 at 8:15 pm

             Like most women, I don't live in that binary world. As such I don't find it that hard to speak up for women outside of the patriarchal hegemony (which is a big part of this conversation, arguing about which bombs are better).
9. Francesca 9

   15 June 2025 at 1:10 pm

   Vijay Prashad has an interesting and credible take on why Israel has chosen to attack Iran at this moment

   https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/06/13/the-illegal-attack-on-iran/
   • aj 9.1

     15 June 2025 at 5:23 pm

     Snip. Posted that link before scrolling further down sorry.
     • Francesca 9.1.1

       16 June 2025 at 9:20 am

       
10. Dennis Frank 10

    15 June 2025 at 2:12 pm

    So sad to see political assassination re-emerging in the USA: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/14/us/melissa-hortman-minnesota-assassination

    A dedicated volunteer who taught Sunday school and loved dogs. A lawyer who served as a Girl Scout leader and worked at her dad’s auto parts store. A mother and wife whose husband was killed alongside her. Minnesota State Rep. Melissa Hortman was more than just the state House’s top Democrat, according to those who knew her… Hortman and her husband Mark were shot and killed Saturday morning at their Brooklyn Park home in “a politically motivated assassination,” Gov. Tim Walz said. The suspect, Vance Boelter, is on the run, officials said… On Saturday, investigators found a hit list in Boelter’s car with nearly 70 names, including abortion providers, pro-abortion rights advocates and lawmakers in Minnesota and other states, a law enforcement official briefed on the matter told CNN.

    So the killer appears to be a terrorist, but the media may not identify him as such unless affiliation to an organisation emerges. Perhaps restraint is valid if you see elimination of political opponents as a random consequence of democracy, but many of us are averse to the establishment always dodging the truth.
11. Res Publica 11

    15 June 2025 at 3:05 pm

    This kind of binary thinking; where Iran is cast as a principled victim and Israel and “the West” as cartoon villains; isn’t just naïve. It’s an act of moral cowardice and intellectual bankruptcy.

    Reducing a region this complex to heroes and villains doesn’t clarify—it obscures. And it empowers authoritarian regimes by laundering their brutality through the language of resistance.

    Yes, Israel’s actions in Gaza are indefensible. But let’s be clear: the Iranian regime is no noble resistance movement. It’s an authoritarian theocracy, with enormous power concentrated in the IRGC: a militarized elite with a vast regional reach. Through the Quds Force, Iran has funded, armed, and directed proxies responsible for conflict and terrorism from Lebanon to Yemen.

    That’s not “restraint.” That’s a deliberate strategy of asymmetric warfare and power projection.

    And despite its protestations, Iran almost certainly seeks nuclear weapons. Not out of ideology, but for deterrence. A nuclear capability offers protection against regime change, limits Israeli operational freedom, and balances U.S. and Saudi influence. That’s not Western propaganda: it’s basic strategic calculus.

    The Iranian regime, for all their corruption and short-sightedness, are far from stupid.

    In our understandable desire to hold Israel accountable for its actions (and we must) it’s critical we don’t lapse into the lazy, conspiratorial framing of a Zionist or Jewish global project. Criticising the Israeli state is legitimate. But projecting a singular, malevolent Western agenda rooted in “Zionism” echoes antisemitic tropes that have done immense harm throughout history. Opposition to militarism should never require us to abandon clarity, or to indulge bigotry in progressive packaging.

    The idea that a state which represses dissent, executes protesters, and enforces theocratic rule is now enjoying a legitimate groundswell of national unity is absurd. Nationalism often spikes under fire, but that doesn’t make the regime more just, nor more representative of its people.

    What’s most infuriating is the tankie fantasy this narrative creates; where regimes are romanticized simply because they oppose the U.S. or Israel. This doesn’t help oppressed people. It erases the voices of feminists, dissidents, and reformers: the very people the left should stand with.

    Real-world geopolitics is murky. States act in their interests. Civilians pay the price. Pretending Iran is a bastion of anti-imperialist virtue isn’t just misguided—it’s a betrayal of the very values you claim to defend.

    And if we’re being honest about modern Iran’s strategic posture, we should say it plainly: it’s a former imperial power mourning its lost grandeur, clinging to regional influence and a persecution complex as compensation for its diminished global status.

    But Darius the Great died 2400 years ago and the Sassanid Empire fell in the 7th century. Let it go.
    • Stephen D 11.1

      15 June 2025 at 3:35 pm

      In addition, Iran has called for Israel’s destruction, and doesn’t recognise Israel’s right to exist. More grist to Netanyahu’s mill.
      • Muttonbird 11.1.1

        15 June 2025 at 4:11 pm

        Link, please.
        • Psycho Milt 11.1.1.1

          15 June 2025 at 6:59 pm

          You could of course take some time to educate yourself about Shia Islam, belief in the 12th Imam, the Mahdi, and the mullahs' 46-year history of setting up proxies to fight Israel, but why do that when you can just demand a link and pretend you've made some kind of point?
          • Muttonbird 11.1.1.1.1

            15 June 2025 at 7:18 pm

            Still just a lot of unsubstantiated nonsense which you demand other people spend time researching.

            Put up a link to your repeated claims that Iran wants to wipe Israelis from the face of the earth.
            • Psycho Milt 11.1.1.1.1.1

              15 June 2025 at 9:20 pm

              Here's one: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran. However, there's 46 fucking years of them, so feel free to start doing your own research instead of just dishing up arguments from ignorance-based personal incredulity.
              • Muttonbird …

                16 June 2025 at 11:52 am

                20 years ago, eh. Got anything relevant?

                Also, the quote was disputed, and retracted by that publication:

                Giving background to this week's controversy over remarks by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, a story mentioned his previous call for Israel to be "wiped off the pages of history". The translation of the statement he made in 2005, at The World without Zionism conference in Tehran, has been the subject of dispute. A more literal translation is: "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time", and this is the translation we should have used (as noted in Corrections and clarifications, 28 July 2007).

                https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2009/apr/23/corrections-clarifications

                It's simply islamophobic Israeli and US propaganda used to build a case for the destruction of Iran. That propaganda is spread around the world by useful idiots. It’s that sort of propaganda which led to the Christchurch mass murders.

                If we are so concerned about security in the region the two biggest risks are Israel and the US. The last few days should have made that very clear, even to the most blind.
                • Res Publica …

                  16 June 2025 at 12:44 pm

                  If we are so concerned about security in the region the two biggest risks are Israel and the US. The last few days should have made that very clear, even to the most blind.

                  Sure. Israel and the US have done plenty to undermine regional stability, and the last few days absolutely reinforce that.

                  But I’d argue the long-standing rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia, two competing theocracies with regional ambitions, has been just as destabilising, if not more so. With the extra added spice of an increasingly assertive Turkey willing to ignore both Iraq and Syria's borders when it feels it can get away with it.

                  Their proxy wars have torn through Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, fuelling decades of instability.

                  Ironically, Israel’s presence, for all its hideous consequences, may be one of the only things holding that fragile regional balance together. It gives Tehran and Riyadh a shared enemy they hate just slightly more than each other.

                  That dynamic, toxic as it is, also helps keep the Saudis and the UAE at least loosely in the Western orbit. Without it, they might be far more inclined to take a direct shot at Tehran.

                  And the consequences of that would make today’s instability look restrained.
                • Psycho Milt …

                  16 June 2025 at 1:17 pm

                  Well, here's one from two days ago if it's currency you're after. And here's a pro-Iranian one from the 2010s, which includes the following truly impressive weasel-words:

                  Since being elected Supreme Leader in 1989, Khamenei has made it clear he wants Israel, as a country, to disappear. But he has never spoken about the destruction of Israel’s government by Iran…

                  Still, you probably find that weaselry pretty persuasive, if you think Ahmadinejad saying "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" doesn't mean the Iranian regime wants Israel destroyed.

                  "That propaganda is spread around the world by useful idiots. It’s that sort of propaganda which led to the Christchurch mass murders."

                  It's grotesque but also unsurprising that you'd post this only a short time after the kind of "anti-Zionist" rhetoric you peddle led to Jews getting murdered in the US.
                  • Muttonbird …

                    16 June 2025 at 3:06 pm

                    Israel just attacked Iran unprovoked. Of course its leader is going to vow to, "destroy the despicable Zionist regime".

                    I assume you're talking about the two Israeli embassy staff killed last month? Murder is wrong but it appears to have been attack specifically targeted at Israelis in response to that country's genocidal campaign in Gaza.

                    What did global Islam do to have 51 members of its community in Christchurch gunned down live on Facebook, apart from exist?

                    It's the normalisation and encouragement of islamophobia so rampant among the Christian and political right in the western world which allowed the Christchurch terrorist to do what he did. You expect it on places like Kiwiblog but not here, so that's a real worry.
                    • Psycho Milt …

                      16 June 2025 at 6:30 pm

                      "You expect it on places like Kiwiblog but not here, so that's a real worry."

                      Oh, the irony!
                    • Res Publica …

                      17 June 2025 at 3:40 pm

                      If you can oppose Israel without being antisemitic, you can oppose the Iranian regime without being Islamophobic.

                      At the very least, have the intellectual honesty to apply the same rules to both sides.
                    • Muttonbird …

                      17 June 2025 at 7:16 pm

                      A very easily digestible, Seymour-like comment. You're on the wrong blog!

                      Let's remind ourselves of the psycho's very first comment on this thread, which was to liken Iranian people to Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and Stalin's Soviet Union:

                      Ordinary everybody are wonderful, cultured and kind people. If we were able to visit late-1930s Germany, we'd find it full of wonderful, cultured and kind people. Likewise if we could visit Italy or the USSR of the late 1930s.

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/the-wests-war-on-iran/#comment-2036318

                      Actions in front of us do count when measuring prejudices, and the only regime with brutal, racist, expansionist intent in this equation is Israel.
    • mikesh 11.2

      15 June 2025 at 3:58 pm

      I doubt whether pining for the glory days of Cyrus and Darius have anything to do with current attitudes in Iran: a more likely influence would be more recent events like the ousting of Mossadegh and the (temporary) installation of the Shah.
    • Muttonbird 11.3

      15 June 2025 at 4:21 pm

      Again with this false solidarity with the so called oppressed in authoritarian regimes, and the itself autocratic desire to stamp ill-defined but weirdly celebrated western values on every corner of the map.

      China happily represses dissent, executes protestors, enforces theocratic rule, erases voices of dissidents and reformers and yet they are our largest trading partner, and Luxton is going there this week to grovel some more.

      Fake champions of the oppressed always with their diatribes on computers made in autocratic and murderous China.

      No, concern for the oppressed is wafer thin and entirely dependant on what that country has to offer you. As it always was.
      • Res Publica 11.3.1

        15 June 2025 at 6:14 pm

        Or we can simply accept that the real world is at best a morally ambiguous place, and that neither side in this conflict is morally perfect.

        If you look back through my past comments, I think you'll find i've been plenty willing to call out the CCP as a brutal police state that poses a huge, long-term geostrategic risk to New Zealand's interests.
    • Francesca 11.4

      15 June 2025 at 4:40 pm

      Astonishing! I didn't detect any romanticism , and most countries who oppose Israel or the US have pretty good reason to do so.Nothing to do with harking back to glory days, the historical record is there for all to see. .You seem to have taken an extreme stance on Prasad's criticism …."moral cowardice, intellectual bankruptcy, bigotry, tankies" I think you've filled your bingo card

      I'm wondering if you're prone to the black and white thinking you impute to others.

      In that western values are the only values, ….they should all be like us?
      • Res Publica 11.4.1

        15 June 2025 at 6:21 pm

        What is with tankies and their weird fetish about "western values?"

        This is realpolitik at its simplest and most obvious.

        Israel wants to continue to exist. Iran would prefer it didn't. At the moment Israel has the military strength to strike Iran. The Iraniana will respond.

        You can try overlay whatever childish, simplistic arc of history bullshit that you want.

        But while you are doing that, the adults are going to talk about actual diplomacy and actual strategy.
        • Psycho Milt 11.4.1.1

          15 June 2025 at 7:05 pm

          What is with tankies and their weird fetish about "western values?"

          Apparently, despotic totalitarian dictatorships killing hundreds of their own citizens every year for minor infractions against religious doctrine is a trivial matter because we shouldn't expect everyone to be like us.
        • Drowsy M. Kram 11.4.1.2

          16 June 2025 at 4:31 pm

          Israel wants to continue to exist. Iran would prefer it didn't.

          Iran (and Palestine) wants to continue to exist. Israel would (now) prefer it didn't, at least in its present form.

          There are people on all sides – not my people, but people nonetheless.
          Is anyone getting anywhere?

          It’s a time for choosing [23 Oct 2023]
          The humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Gaza requires each of us to make a choice.

          Which leads me, finally, to the choice the mostly unrepentant keyboard cavalry who are happily saddling up once more – in derivative columns and hyperbolic appearances on TV – made to side with their home team’s, by now, familiar mantra: Kill first, think later.

          A year of war accelerates ‘silent departure’ of Israel’s elite
          [6 Oct 2024]
          Most of her friends would like to leave as well. “Everyone is talking about it, a few have done it, but it takes time, and not everyone has the privilege to leave. Especially if we talk about Palestinians, but also not all Israelis have a second passport, or they have family [responsibilities],” she [Dror Sadot] said.

          "The privilege to leave."

          https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/israel-iran-strikes-news-06-15-25
          • SPC 11.4.1.2.1

            16 June 2025 at 4:47 pm

            Israel has no problem with Iran continuing to exist as a nation state, only its regime because of its revolutionary war polity.

            Iran seems to want a Palestinian state from river to sea.

            Whereas Israel's current government is not inclined to work to establish a Palestinian state, thus a de facto occupation/settlement/annexation of the West Bank and breaking Gaza Palestinian resistance to this.
            • Drowsy M. Kram 11.4.1.2.1.1

              16 June 2025 at 8:40 pm

              Israel has no problem with Iran continuing to exist as a nation state…

              Less sure than you about "no problem", but fair enough.

              Whereas Israel's current government is not inclined to work to establish a Palestinian state…

              Yep, the State of Palestine isn't recognised by Israel, which would seem to dovetail nicely with plans for new Israeli settlements / colonies.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement

              Israel confirms plans to create 22 new settlements in occupied West Bank [29 May 2025]
              Defence minister says move ‘prevents establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger Israel’

              Imho, settlement is not just about military security – Israel is in even greater biocapacity overshoot than NZ.

              With regard to these settlements, Israeli law and the IDF trump international law and Palestinian 'rights' – seeing human rights stripped away en masse, just for belonging to the wrong ethnic and cultural group in the wrong place at the wrong time, should never be an easy watch. Some South Africans of a certain age and ethnicity will empathize.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa%27s_genocide_case_against_Israel

              I've made an amateurish effort to understand recent events in the Occupied or Disputed Territories from a Palestinian (underdog) cf. Israeli perspective.

              Oscar-winning Palestinian director speaks at UN on Israeli settlements [4 April 2025]
              Occupied by Israel since 1967, the West Bank is home to around three million Palestinians, as well as nearly half a million Israelis who live in settlements that are illegal under international law.

              I wonder what more the Israeli government has in store for Palestinians. Surely they can't be thinking Palestinians will simply melt away in a timely fashion. After all, Palestinians feel at least as great an affinity to 'their' land as Israelis. But Bibi is in no mood to share, so Palestinians will have to give and give, and give some more, with Israel dictating the course of 'giving'.

              Israel’s destructive West Bank military operation fuels mass forced displacement of Palestinians [5 June 2025]
              The Israeli military has displaced tens of thousands of Palestinians by destroying homes and essential civilian infrastructure in Jenin and Tulkarem refugee camps rendering them uninhabitable, as part of its ongoing brutal military operation in the occupied West Bank, said Amnesty International.
              • Muttonbird …

                16 June 2025 at 8:53 pm

                Indeed the louder the calls for a two state solution (still fairly muted), the more violent Israel becomes.
      • weka 11.4.2

        16 June 2025 at 3:29 pm

        In that western values are the only values, ….they should all be like us?

        would you be ok living in Iran rather than the west? Which bits of Iranian culture today are Iranian values? All of them?

        We should have the western values debate on TS sometime.
        • Francesca 11.4.2.1

          16 June 2025 at 4:42 pm

          It's gor the Iranian people to sort…and bombing won't do it

          If that's the kind of world you want to live in , fair enough…count me out

          When Libya was bombed to smithereens what became of the women?

          You think war is good for women and children?You think it's the means to bring about a free and open society….only fans and all the rest

          And as to the nuclear question

          The JCPOA was a perfectly good working mechanism…and who destroyed it ?

          Not Iran
          • weka 11.4.2.1.1

            16 June 2025 at 8:12 pm

            nah, I think war is men's business and it's time women took their toys away.

            But you sidestepped my point I think. I don't know anyone here that says western values are the only values and that everyone should be like us (whatever that means). But I've heard the 'leave it to them to sort out' argument my whole life, early on it was around female genital mutilation. More recently we literally abandoned women in Afghanistan, what chance is there of Afghan people sorting it out? Please don't take that as me saying war is good, because that just misses the point.
            • Muttonbird 11.4.2.1.1.1

              16 June 2025 at 8:35 pm

              I don't know if you read the OP but he says this:

              Iranians are the most politically astute people in the region. Many I spoke to were quite open about their disdain for the regime but none of them sought a counter-revolution. They knew what that would bring: the wolves (the Americans, the Israelis, the Saudis, and other bad actors) would slip in and tear the country apart. Slow change is the smarter option when you live in this neighbourhood. Iranians are overwhelmingly well-educated, profoundly courteous and kind, and have a deep sense of history. They know more than enough about what happened to them and to so many other countries once a great power sees an opening.

              It's not about 'leaving them to it' and 'abandoning women in Afghanistan', it's about responsible global diplomacy, engagement, and the removal of isolating and damaging sanctions and illegal occupations. Then societies are able trade and associate with their neighbours and adjust and develop over time.

              If the US and Israel decapitate the Islamic Republic infrastructure overnight what to you think is going to happen to the women of Iran? They'll be at the mercy of the morality police, but in this version unrestrained.
              • weka …

                16 June 2025 at 8:49 pm

                You think Afghanistan will allow emancipation for women because of influence from its neighbours over time? What are you basing that on?

                If the US and Israel decapitate the Islamic Republic infrastructure overnight what to you think is going to happen to the women of Iran? They'll be at the mercy of the morality police, but in this version unrestrained.

                I'm not making an argument for US/Israel to do anything. I told you, I don't live in that binary world.
            • Francesca 11.4.2.1.1.2

              16 June 2025 at 9:47 pm

              Afghanistan has a long history of emancipation for women .There's quite a tradition of it , strongly opposed by rural conservative elements, but in the cities applauded and encouraged.During the communist period, as part of the ideology and backed by the soviets, all women, of all classes, rural as well , were expected to take part in literacy courses and schooling for girls was compulsory.They voted, they weren't expected to get married as children, they took part in public life.How totalitarian! Tribal leaders didn't like it .And as we all now know, the Mujahideen , reactionary zealots from the tribal areas were armed and organised (by our heroes of the free world) to defeat the communist Afghan govt and the Soviets who rallied to protect that govt.

              The rest is history .Afghanistan under US puppet govts did not improve womens positions, particularly in the rural areas in any significant way

              I have no doubt, that Afghan women will rise again.But sanctions and war won't do it.It'll have to be a painful struggle from within .But perhaps you feel this is "leave them to it " which you're up to here with

              Whats your solution?
              • Francesca …

                16 June 2025 at 9:50 pm

                Because as far as I can see humanitarian interventions rarely lead to lasting stability
              • weka …

                17 June 2025 at 9:16 am

                The longer the situation in Afghanistan goes on for women the further away women and girls get from that lived experience in memory of women’s rights. I agree that Afghan women will always resist in whatever ways they can. But it’s interesting to me that the arguments in the west aren’t around supporting Afghan feminists for instance. I almost never see those women mentioned in discussions like the one happening here on TS. Which makes me think that they are largely disregarded.

                Beyond that, I think the arguments over supporting this bunch of sociopaths with bombs over that bunch of sociopaths with bombs, pick your preferred bombing sociopaths, as a massive fail for the western left. those arguments are happening within a patriarchal frame, or a domination frame, and that’s why so many people can’t see a way out. Because domination can’t solve domination. Again it’s interesting that we don’t have the conceptual language to talk about it outside of that frame. it’s not that this discussion isn’t useful, I think there’s a lot of really interesting ideas being put out, in fact being brought to the table, but it’s insufficient. Unless we look at our own patterns of domination and willingness to work within a frame of domination, I don’t think there will be any kind of resolution for not just this particular set of gnarly problems but all the ones that we face.

                The inclination to say we are the goodies, you’re the baddies, well understandable just keeps us in the same frame as Israel and Hamas, or Israel and Iran. In New Zealand we just have the privilege of being able to argue on social media rather than having to fight in real terms out there in the world. One of the conversations that would probably be useful would be to imagine ourselves in that situation here in the Pacific.
                • Francesca …

                  17 June 2025 at 11:35 am

                  Well once potable water becomes a resource issue we probably will be in that situation .

                  And heaven help us and any NZ govt determined to retain our independence and control over our own resources

                  Regime change is so much more effective than occupation

                  It's the new colonization , in fact I sometimes wonder if we've already been regime changed …with the help of the likes of the Atlas foundation
        • Res Publica 11.4.2.2

          16 June 2025 at 5:01 pm

          I actually have a draft series of posts on that exact topic. Just never got around to trying to login to put them up
          • weka 11.4.2.2.1

            16 June 2025 at 8:09 pm

            I emailed you 👍
    • Macro 11.5

      16 June 2025 at 4:00 pm

      On the other hand. It takes two to tango.

      One of the factors which is not being highlighted in the discussion on media is the fact that Israel has about 90 nuclear warheads and has enough plutonium for many more. Furthermore Israel refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the only country in the region to do so. That makes any agreement on a nuclear free Middle East impossible.

      https://armscontrolcenter.org/countries/israel/
      • SPC 11.5.1

        16 June 2025 at 4:22 pm

        India, Pakistan and North Korea developed nuclear weapons after 1970 – the date the 1968 NPT became effective.

        https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2025/05/07/how-did-india-pakistan-get-nuclear-weapons/83494547007/

        Israel had a nuclear power plant 1962-64 and nuclear weapons by 1967. It is not known to have assisted others with their nuclear development.

        While Iran has signed the NPT agreement, the IAEA has twice found them in breach once 20 years and again this year (apparently a decision they made last year). Such as enriching uranium beyond that for nuclear power purposes.

        What makes a NPT zone effective is a peace framework.
12. SPC 12

    16 June 2025 at 4:52 pm

    The U.S. of A. pulled out of the 2014 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement in 2018.

    But Iran is still bound by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Safeguards Agreement it signed decades ago and which the IAEA determined it violated.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3v6w2qr12o

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn840275p5yo
13. Francesca 13

    16 June 2025 at 5:11 pm

    Good old Gordon Campbell, a breath of fresh air

    https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2506/S00028/on-the-wests-war-against-iran.htm
    • Muttonbird 13.1

      16 June 2025 at 8:01 pm

      Yes, great to read an actual leftie's thoughts on this situation rather than the thoughts of wannabe Blairites and worse.

      It's important to note those who claim to protect Israel's right to defend itself are in fact masking Israel's supremacist intent to expand and displace.
      • Tom Hunter 13.1.1

        17 June 2025 at 12:50 pm

        …. an actual leftie's thoughts…

        I doubt I'll ever see Psycho Milt and Res Publica voting for National, ACT, NZ First or any right-wing political party, but people like you on The Pure Left certainly do your damndest to make that happen.
        • Psycho Milt 13.1.1.1

          17 June 2025 at 1:20 pm

          "No true leftist…"

          Don't tell him Israel is significantly smaller than it was 50 years ago, his head will explode.
          • SPC 13.1.1.1.1

            17 June 2025 at 3:37 pm

            Not really.

            Israel did not annex the Sinai in 1967.

            In 1979, Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty in which Israel agreed to withdraw from the entirety of the Sinai Peninsula. Israel subsequently withdrew in several stages, ending on 26 April 1982.
        • Res Publica 13.1.1.2

          17 June 2025 at 3:30 pm

          Ironically, a much younger and stupider version of me did vote for National in 2008 out of a sad teenaged attempt to be edgy and rebellious.

          I still cringe just thinking about it.

          The boos and brickbats of the purist left means nothing. I've seen what makes them cheer.
          • Tom Hunter 13.1.1.2.1

            17 June 2025 at 6:52 pm

            Don't feel too bad Res. I voted for Helen Clark and Labour in 1999. 🙂 TBF to me I'd been in the US for a decade, voted for Chris Laidlaw in '93 and '96 by mail and knew no better – and Shipley's outfit was a shrieking clown show.
            • Psycho Milt 13.1.1.2.1.1

              17 June 2025 at 7:01 pm

              We all have the odd skeleton in the closet when it comes to voting. Mine will get no deathbed confession.
              • Visubversa …

                18 June 2025 at 8:37 am

                I lived in the Tamaki Electorate for a while in the late 1970's. Bill Andersen used to stand there (in Muldoon's electorate) and I was one of the slightly under 200 people who voted for Bill and the SUP.
                • Psycho Milt …

                  18 June 2025 at 1:12 pm

                  I probably would have too! I didn't get to vote until 1981 though. I was in a run-down flat in central Chch so in the Chch Central electorate, but by 1984 had moved to a run-down flat in Riccarton to be closer to the University and was horrified to discover I was now a Fendalton voter. Philip Burdon didn't get my vote, but that was hardly a problem for him.
          • Tom Hunter 13.1.1.2.2

            17 June 2025 at 7:33 pm

            My voting history since 1981, in all its glory, as I addressed criticisms that I was an extremist. 🙂
            • SPC 13.1.1.2.2.1

              18 June 2025 at 12:25 pm

              Mine, 1978 Social Credit – reason, first vote (a form of protest against the silliness of the Muldoon government applying sinking lid to university budgets – retrenchment that does not of a design to afford a path ahead is folly, budget accountancy not economics).

              I only resumed voting from 1996 – electorate voting in FPP was only relevant in marginal electorates. (But I did not vote in 1996 though, to protest NZF campaigning as an opposition party when they were clearly going to form a coalition with National).

              Since 1999 against parties without a CGT/estate tax-wealth tax. I will not vote for a "gated community class order" society. No other first world nation does it and nor should we.
        • Muttonbird 13.1.1.3

          17 June 2025 at 6:33 pm

          Right-wing political parties are welcome to them.
14. Tony Veitch 14

    17 June 2025 at 6:07 pm

    Trump: If I was president, this war would never have happened!

    Oh, wait, I am president!
15. Scud 15

    21 June 2025 at 9:12 pm

    As of 2-3hrs ago there are about 8 Air to Air Tankers Airborne with 8-9 B2's out of Whiteman AFB Airborne.

    The 1st set of Tankers refuelled the B2's just after Takeoff! The B2 roll out after Take Off suggests they are close to their All Up Max Take Off weight, leading to speculation that B2's are loaded with 2 GBU-57's (Bunker Busting Bombs) as each GUB-57 weighs 30,000lbs each.

    There is also a NOTAM issued just North West/ West North West of Hawaii and the Size of the NOTAM suggests a possible Air to Air Tanker Refuelling Bracket.

    I haven't heard of any USAF Tankers station in Oz atm, but in saying that, the preparations for Ex TS 25 are currently under way which starts mid July.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS