this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2025
513 points (97.4% liked)
Technology
71799 readers
4131 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's also something that allows people to organize to overthrow an oppressive authoritarian regime.
But this particular authoritarian regime is apparently good because they want to wipe Israel off the map, so I guess we need to pretend everything they do is for the best.
Well according to the Democrats, I should always support the lesser of two evils, so now Iran is good. /s
For real though, it’s called critical support. You can support Iran’s right to defend against genocide while simultaneously criticizing their human rights abuses.
So it's ok for you to give "critical support" to an authoritarian regime, but super bad for someone to give "critical support" to Israel for fighting against an authoritarian whose proxies massacred villages? Why isn't Iranian proxies massacring villages, Iran itself firing missiles at civilian populations (including a hosptial) something you don't consider to be genocide?
How do you determine which genocide you support and which genocide you're against?
Attacking civilians doesn't automatically make it a genocide. If that were true, then pretty much every war ever was a genocide.
So why is the Israel-Hamas war considered a genocide? Is it a numbers thing? Most other wars throughout history had many more civilian casualties than there's been in the Israel-Hamas war.
What makes the Israel-Hamas war a genocide and for example, the Vietnam war not be considered a genocide?
Because of the genocidal rhetoric war aims behavior and aesthetics. So just vibes I guess.
Because Vietnam was a war of ideologies, not a land grab intended to wipe out the current occupants so they could be entirely replaced by a "superior, chosen" people not of the ethnicity of the current residents.
This is such a mindblowingly stupid attempt at a gotcha question. Ffs, you literally had over a million Vietnamese fighting on the same side as the US in the ARVN during the course of the war. The belligerent parties in a conflict both being composed of largely the same peoples fighting each other tends to preclude it being described as a genocide.
Not menitioning the events of October 7 and the fact that Hamas is still holding Israelis hostage is a rather glaring omission there.
Iran has stated many times their goal to wipe Israel off the map. Is that not them saying they only want their "chosen people" living in the area? So under your definition of genocide, Iran is committing a genocide. If the fact that Israel was attacked on October 7 is irrelevant, then the fact that Israel attacked Iran in this iteration of hostilities between them is also irrelevant. Iran has the officially stated goal of wiping Israel off the map, Iran has killed Israeli civilians, therefore Iran has committed genocide (according your definition of it).
Kindly refrain from putting such stupid words in my mouth, and keep them in your own, where it seems they rightly belong, thank you.
You asked about Israel and Hamas, then instantly conflated this particular conflict with a broader conflict to come between Israel and Iran, which are not the same thing. That's beyond moving the goal posts, we're no longer even discussing the same events. You're also conflating Israel with Jews as a whole here. Calling for the state of Israel to no longer exist and calling for all Jewish residents within its borders to be either killed or displaced are two rather distinct things.
I know of no definition in which a single attack in isolation, or merely killing civilians during a war, is considered to constitute genocide. Even if this were the case, the civilian casualties in the many conflicts between Israel, Hamas, and more or less all of Israel's neighbors in the region have been decidedly lopsided. Israel suffers far fewer civilian deaths than those they inflict on others, so even if we were to entertain the notion that Hamas' resistance to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories constitutes a genocide and we accept that the Iranian regime is in some major capacity responsible for such actions because they provide funding and support to Hamas (which, lol, even Israeli media admits Israel did, too), just going by the casualties, we'd have to conclude that Israel is either a decidedly more genocidal regime, better at genocide, or both.
Israel continues to interfere in the affairs of other sovereign nations, support settlers stealing other peoples' land and is actively engaging in a brutal genocide. If the Israeli state were to be dismantled and Israel ceased to exist as a nation, I could only say that it's past time for it to happen. And before you put more hysterical words in my mouth, note well: Israel no longer existing as a sovereign theocratic ethnostate and the Jews who currently live in the region being in any way harmed are two entirely separate things. Calling for a particular state to no longer exist is not a call for genocide, in and of itself.
Tl;dr: Get lost with your hasbara attempts, they're woefully transparent.
Indeed it is. From the IRGC: "Either you must choose 'gradual death' in hellish life in shelters or save your lives from the 24-hour missile rain and flee as soon as possible from the lands usurped by your ancestors, so that you may survive." https://iranwire.com/en/news/142321-irgc-says-it-fired-2000-kilometer-range-missiles-at-israel/
So they literally are "calling for all Jewish residents within its borders to be either killed or displaced" which is distinct from calling for "the state of Israel to no longer exist". So we're clear about Iran's intent now, this isn't putting words into your or the IRGC's mouths. This is coming directly from the mouths of the IRGC.
Does this mean the IRGC is committing genocide?
I think both Iran and Israel are guilty of atrocities, and Israel has been worse recently in their treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. I don't think either amounts to genocide, since genocide has the intent of eliminating a race from existence (e.g. Jews in the Holocaust). I don't think Israel wants to eliminate Palestinians (the people), they just want to eliminate Palestine (the country). I don't think Iran wants to eliminate Jews or Israelis, they want to eliminate Israel (the country).
Be careful, even suggesting that Israel isn't committing genocide might get you banned from communities on lemmy.
To give a better idea of how Iran wants to eliminate Israel (the country):
"Either you must choose 'gradual death' in hellish life in shelters or save your lives from the 24-hour missile rain and flee as soon as possible from the lands usurped by your ancestors, so that you may survive." - IRGC Statement https://iranwire.com/en/news/142321-irgc-says-it-fired-2000-kilometer-range-missiles-at-israel/
Iran's goal is to make Israelis flee from the lands "usurped by your ancestors". So they recognize that Jewish people in Israel were born there, and they want to force them to leave their lands. So... ethnic cleansing.
There have been attempts by Israel in the past to have a peace plan with Palestine. Land for Peace. And remember Israel unilaterally withdrew both the military and their settlements from Gaza. There was a brief time when we were all hopeful as Gaza was free from Israeli occupation. They could trade with Europe easily and become a place of peace and prosperity. Once that happened we could pressure Israel to withdraw from the West Bank as there's no way they could claim that occupying it was for security anymore. There was a clear path opened towards a free Palestinian state.
Then Hamas took power with a plurality of the vote and it all went to shit. It's going to very difficult to convince Israel that ending the occupation will improve security for their people after what happened on October 7. But who knows, maybe a group of Palestinians that are tired of constant war might be able to get power and change things.
I feel like most Israelis want peace, just they also don't want to be murdered in their sleep by a Hamas terrorist. I don't think it's a land thing, though obviously in a democracy different politcal parties will have different agendas. Israel has shown a willingness in the past to trade land for peace. It's more of a problem of Israelis not trusting Palestinians. And October 7 means that it will probably be at least a generation and a change in Palestinian leadership before Israelis can trust Palestinians on a land for peace kind of deal. But that change in leadership has to come from within. There also needs to be a change in leadership in Israel, but that's kind of automatic since Israel is a democracy.
The last time Israel gave up ground, Palestinians voted for Hamas. It seems Israel conceding territory is seen as a sign of weakness by too many Palestinians. Maybe the next generation will think differently. At least I hope.
I'd be better off for it then. If a power hungry mod cares more about their feels than the truth, then that's a community I don't want to be a part of.
And yeah, Iran, like most majority Muslim countries, wants Israel out of the Holy Land for religious reasons, and politically, they don't want strong western influence in the region. Israel likewise wants to retain control of the Holy Land and maintain western allies to help keep them secure. Both sides have legitimate reasons to hate the other, and, neither side seems interested in murdering everyone on the other side, they just want their religious and political objectives met, which consists solely of control over the Holy Land.
And yeah, of course Israel wants peace, their objectives are met by holding that territory. The problem is that most Muslim-majority countries don't see Israel as legitimate, because it was created arbitrarily by western powers by taking land away from Muslims.
I hope so too, on both sides. Israel needs to accept that Palestinians deserve self-rule, and Palestinians need to accept that Israel has that same right. The boundaries will need some changes, but hopefully there's a resolution that's acceptable to most people on both sides.
I mostly agree with you. Sorry if it seems like I'm nitpicking, but you said a lot there (and that's not a bad thing) so I'm just breaking it down a little.
I don't think hate is ever legitimate.
Iranians are encourages to regularly chant "death to Israel" regularly. I don't feel comfortable trusting that it's just propaganda and there's no intent there. We've been burned a lot lately with because people voted for Trump thinking "he's just saying he wants to deport millions of people, he won't really do that". Sometimes the crazy things people say is just propaganda, sometimes it's what they really mean. Having trust that an authoritarian is lying seems unwise.
And if I think long term, some young person in Iran chanting "death to Israel" today may someday in a position of power in the future. Bad things could happen someday if a true believer gets into power. Especially if Iran has a nuclear weapon on that day. So I understand why Israel is doing everything they can to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons. It's life or death for them.
I also understand why they want a regime change in Iran. Even if their nuclear weapons program is gone today, they could rebuild it and in a decade or so we're doing this all over again. But a regime change is something Iranians will have to fight for, we all know regime changes imposed by foreign countries don't work out well. No way to know if that will happen, that's beyond anyone's control outside of Iran.
And that's the problem. That's irrelevant now because most of the population of Israel was born there. I've met Israelis and they weren't particularly religious. Israel isn't some "Holy Land" to them it's the place where they were born. People have a right to live where they were born. Wanting to restore the ethnic makeup of a region to conform to how it was in a history book is fascistic thinking. Now the Israelis I've met were just the ones that travel so obviously there are different kinds people in Israel that do think it's a holy mission to makes settlements and all of the bullshit. But the wrongs that have been done with the settlements doesn't justify massacring villages or anything else Iran's terrorist proxies are doing.
This hatred of Israel isn't good for other countries in the middle east. Hate is the easiest emotion for authoritarians to manipulate. This results in people being more acting of authoritarian regimes so long as the do some display of attacking "the evil enemy".
I hope people can get put aside their hatred long enough to see the destruction it's caused. Hating Israel isn't improving anything for people in Gaza or anywhere else in the Middle East.
Eh, I think it's reasonable to hate someone who is actively trying to kill you, your loved ones, or trying to ruin your life. That doesn't justify murder or anything, but I certainly wouldn't fault someone in that situation.
There is intent behind the propaganda, but it's not to genocide Israelis or Jews, it's to destroy the Israeli state.
Agreed, and I think the same is true for Iran as well. They're a regional and global pariah, and a nuclear weapon would do a lot to protect the regime. I don't think Iran should ever have a nuclear weapon, but I also don't think Israel should be allowed to just destroy their infrastructure.
I had an Iranian coworker, and they said Iran just needs a strong push and it'll splinter, since there are many powerful groups that dislike the current regime. I hope that's what happens with this offensive by Israel, but that doesn't mean I support Israel's attack here. I think there are other ways to weaken Iran, and I'd prefer to go that route instead of killing innocents.
Agreed. But it will absolutely continue while Israel controls Jerusalem and Palestinians don't have a country. And Israel currently isn't willing to budge on either.
Hatred is a failing, not something that should empathized with or rationalized. We know there's situations that will make people hate, but it's like someone abused as a child becoming an abuser as a parent. We know it happens but it's not a thing where we should empathize with the abuser and rationalize their actions so it seems reasonable or legitimate. Sure I try to understand hatred, but in a similar way as I try to understand mental illness. Something that needs treatment, not something that should be spread out of a weird sense of empathy.
"Either you must choose 'gradual death' in hellish life in shelters or save your lives from the 24-hour missile rain and flee as soon as possible from the lands usurped by your ancestors, so that you may survive." https://iranwire.com/en/news/142321-irgc-says-it-fired-2000-kilometer-range-missiles-at-israel/
I guess more propaganda and not intent? This is part of Operation "True Promise" They've been promising to wipe Israel off the map... so more propaganda.
Iran keeps promising to ethnic cleansing of Jews, and every thing they say seems to be "seriously, me mean it, it's we're making are promises come true now."
And even if you're sure that you trust them to be lying, what about the potential for someone that grew up with this propaganda and is a true believer to someday take power?
Hamas was in power in Gaza for a much shorter period of time and the indoctrinated young men to be capable of doing some extremely horrific things in that time. I'm sorry but the propaganda isn't a nothing burger whether you believe it or not. Some people will believe it and may do horrible things in the future.
The regime will immediately start rebuilding their nuclear program if they remain in power. The infrastructure helps keep the regime in power.
Well prepare yourself, the Ayatollah will use violence to try to remain in power, and that could be a really violent conflict. The Syrian civil war was horrific, over half a million people killed, torture dungeons, mass killings, really terrible things. Hopefully a potential Iranian civil war wouldn't be so bloody, and maybe with air support for a rebel group it'll be more like the Libyan civil war. But that's still tens of thousands dead and Libya is still in a mess today.
I think all of the other ways have been tried, it's not just Israel that would welcome a regime change in Iran. I don't think military action should be a thing anyone should be supporting (it's not a sports team) but sometimes military action is necessary. It would've been better if the JCPOA not been cancelled by Trump and the Ayatollah just decided to quit being supreme leader and let Iran decide things democratically. But that's not the world we live in.
The intent seems pretty clear to me: leave Israel so Israel ceases to exist. They're not saying, "we'll kill you wherever you flee," that would be genocide, they're saying, "as long as the Israeli state exists, we will attack it and make life suck for everyone who chooses to stay."
I think if they had the chance, they'd make good on that threat.
I never claimed the propaganda was a nothing burger, I claimed it's directed at the Israeli state, not Israelis or Jews themselves. Even if Israel were completely secular, there would still be opposition, because Muslim extremists don't care what religion occupies the Holy Land, as long as it's not Muslim, it is the same.
Agreed 100%, which is why Israel's strike is dumb. The power proper solution is regime change, and giving the people there a reason to support their government isn't the way to achieve that.
Unfortunately, I think that's the best possible outcome in Iran. Iran used to be prosperous when they were friendly with the west, and I'd love for them to do so again. But that can only happen with a regime change.
The JCPOA was a step in the right direction, a D we should've followed it up with trade deals. IMO, the best way to fight against extremism is through prosperity and trade, so we should be making very attractive deals with countries in exchange for not having or eliminating nuclear weapons (prosperity in exchange for peace). Unfortunately, that's impossible with Trump in power, and I doubt Iran's leadership is interested after the US broke the trade deal.
“Either you must choose ‘gradual death’ in hellish life in shelters or save your lives from the 24-hour missile rain and flee as soon as possible from the lands usurped by your ancestors, so that you may survive.”
I think the use of the word "ancestors" makes it clear they're talking to a people of a specific ancestry ie. an ethnicity. They are telling Jews to leave or they will be killed. This is ethnic cleansing. And lets not be so naive that Iran wants Arab-Israelis to leave. They stated that they want ethnic cleansing.
So the original plan 1948 plan of Jerusalem being internationally controlled and open to all religions isn't acceptable? Well they are extremists, but they extremists like this can't have any military power because they're just going to do endless war since they'll never get what they want.
If the infrastructure helps keep the regime in power (like systems to monitor people's activities) then why would want it to remain in place? If Iran can't see a gathering of people on security cameras, that helps a resistance movement, doesn't it?
It was never going to be a fast thing. This regime took diplomats hostage which is the biggest no-no in all of diplomatic relations. It's hard to improve things through diplomacy when you can't trust a nation enough to have diplomats set foot in their country. Also they'd need to stop their "death to Israel, death to America" stuff. Kinda hard to trust a country that does that. Sure trade increases prosperity, but it also increases access to technology which helps their military. You'd look pretty stupid if you started trade with a country calling for your death, then they used that to improve their military to attack you. Also they're an oppressive so there's ethical issue with enriching an oppressive regime. Yeah we enrich the Saudis who are oppressive, but only because we're stupidly dependent on their oil and don't have any choice. When we have a choice should we enrich an oppressive regime hoping trade will make it less oppressive? Doesn't seem like trade with China made their regime less oppressive.
It's not a given that trade and diplomacy could be improved with this regime, a lot of that was up to them.
Anyway that's all moot now.
Iran's intention is to eradicate a Jewish state in the Levant. Hamas have stated that they would repeat Oct 7 over and over (seems a stupid thing to say out loud even if one is on their side) and in fact their insane leadership called for world Islamist domination.
"We Will Repeat The October 7 Attack, Time And Again, Until Israel Is Annihilated; We Are Victims – Everything We Do Is Justified"
Whether we agree with the establishment of Israel in the first place or not, it aint going anywhere so to continue trying to eradicate it 77 years later exacerbates suffering.
Aboriginal Australians got a raw deal but are still doing better than Gazans because they didn't continue warring. They are still fighting politically and rightly so.
I agree with everything you said, my point is merely that Iran and Israel aren't interested in genocide, though what Israel is doing in Gaza certainly comes close.
I agree with everything you said, my point is merely that Iran and Israel aren't interested in genocide, though what Israel is doing in Gaza certainly comes close.
Not so sure about Iran. I have looked for unambiguous quotes from them but can only find kooky religious stuff about Mahdism which is kind of like extremist Christians with their second coming madness.
Well educated Iranians seem to be Atheist whereas even intellectuals in Israel can be right wing religious nuts.
Certainly Iranian proxy groups like Hamas have unambiguously calked for a global caliphate
“Hamas, which is widely recognized as an Iranian proxy, has leaders and official rhetoric that go beyond the goal of liberating Palestine and at times explicitly reference the ambition of establishing a global Islamic caliphate.“
“On December 1, 2023, senior Hamas official Fathi Hammad declared on Al-Aqsa TV that the Palestinians are preparing to establish an Islamic caliphate with Jerusalem as its capital. He and other Hamas leaders have repeatedly stated that the liberation of Palestine is just a prelude to bringing all Islamic countries—and eventually the entire world—under Islamic rule, referencing the conquest of Rome and America as future goals”
https://www.memri.org/reports/hamas-leaders-our-goal-establishment-global-islamic-caliphate-not-just-liberation-palestine
For the record, my housemate of two years in Australia is Iranian. I also make music with an Iranian in Mashhad via the Internet (we jam electronic music). He is an extreme loner but tells me what society is like there.