royce

oh https://x.com/N12News/status/1842631718932767173

@Nivsch you posting nonsense . you're ruining the topic with your shitty low quality translated tweets

Regarding the political assassinations carried out by Israel, which it has placed at the top of its priorities, I’d like to remind everyone of a few points: - Sameh Asker Firstly, World War I was sparked by a political assassination—the assassination of the Archduke of Austria. This destructive war claimed the lives of tens of millions and didn’t lead to a decisive and clear victory for any party. It weakened all sides involved—Russia among the Allies, and Turkey and Austria from the Central Powers. It also weakened Britain and France, leading to successive declarations of independence from their colonies, including Egypt, which witnessed the revolution of 1919 and achieved independence in 1922. Secondly, U.S. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963 during the peak of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. This did not harm the U.S. in any significant way, as he was promptly replaced by another president. Thirdly, history has witnessed the emergence of religious extremist groups specializing in political assassinations, such as the Kharijites and Assassins (Hashashin) in Islam, and the Zealots and Sicarii in Judaism. However, these groups failed to establish a powerful state or to create any intellectual movement or renaissance of any kind. Fourthly, numerous political assassinations did not drive countries or groups to change their policies or weaken them. The assassination of Gandhi did not put an end to the Indian-Pakistani peace project, the assassination of Sadat did not halt the Egyptian-Israeli peace process, and the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. did not end the struggle against white racism. In most cases, such political assassinations lead to a firmer adherence to the principles of the victim and a moral challenge to ensure their mission succeeds. Fifthly, in recent history in the Middle East, dozens of leaders of the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance movements have been assassinated. However, these movements remain strong and well-rooted, connected on the ground, and continue to fight against the Zionist enemy in various ways, receiving support through different channels. Sixthly, in Egypt, thousands of leaders and soldiers from the Egyptian police and military have been assassinated in a series of terrorist acts that have spanned from the 1970s to the present day. Despite this, these acts did not weaken the strength, unity, or support of the security forces. Instead, they gained deep expertise in dealing with such incidents and developed an understanding of the psychology of terrorism, enabling them to respond to it appropriately. Philosophically, political assassination raises questions about the morals and values that drive perpetrators to commit such acts. Despite the brutality of war, there remains a glimmer of light or a window for political dialogue and peace. Political assassination breeds inherited hatred across generations, making peace elusive, and raises generations in a spirit of revolutionary revenge. This reality is evident in Palestine, where one of the reasons for the continued violence and war is the ongoing political assassinations that have occurred since the establishment of the State of Israel up to today. Political assassination neither creates victory nor peace; it spreads fear and distrust, serving as a prelude to revolutionary acts of revenge. Fear is not exclusive to the weak but also to the strong, as a driving force behind their oppression is often a deep sense of fear. Moreover, the strength of a resistance movement is not built by a single individual but is rather the product of a complex and diverse network of emotions, beliefs, ideologies, and convictions that generate military, human, and material power. The assassination of a single individual—whether a member or a leader—does not alter the core functioning of this network, which requires intellectual responses, moral projects, and peace and tolerance to properly absorb. Israel’s overarching policy of political assassinations since its establishment has not brought it power. Rather, its strength is derived from just two factors: (1) American and Western support and (2) the internal religious and national conflicts among Arabs and Muslims. Beyond these, Israel is quite a fragile state with significant social weaknesses, especially due to its colonial nature. A detailed discussion on this would be extensive. In general, wars are not won without good planning, military capability, adaptability, intelligent strategies that avoid creating excessive enemies or underestimating opponents, as well as social cohesion and a moral and ethical project to sustain oneself. Israel lacks most of these conditions. It consistently creates new enemies out of thin air, underestimates its opponents, and lacks a moral project that could prevent it from transgressing basic human norms and laws—such as killing children and women or committing acts of genocide. In short: The Zionist policy of political assassination is not only morally and humanly flawed but also politically and militarily flawed. It represents one of the significant weaknesses of this entity and will eventually lead to its demise—whether by ending the occupation and achieving Palestinian independence, or by resulting in the destruction of the Israeli state itself through horrific massacres. Personally, I do not support the latter model, as I do not advocate massacres against civilians. The end of the occupation would suffice as a result of this Zionist recklessness, allowing for peace that we have been denied for the 76 years of Israel's existence. ----- There's an additional model I'd like to bring to your attention: the case of Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force in Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, who was assassinated in 2020. Practically speaking, the Revolutionary Guard struck Israel twice after the man's assassination, and the transfer of lethal missiles to Yemen and Iraq also occurred after his death, not during his lifetime. In essence, Soleimani's assassination did not weaken the Revolutionary Guard.

https://x.com/khamenei_ir

uff

The world should engage with Iran and work towards releasing their frozen assets, as this move could lead to significant progress and development. By doing so, society in Iran would naturally advance. At present, anyone who criticizes outdated internal policies is quickly labeled an American agent (which, in some cases, may even be true), fostering a toxic environment. Making a deal with the Americans would open the door to more constructive criticism and dialogue, gradually making it more acceptable to challenge outdated policies. And the last election results make it clear where the people stand—they want a deal. Pezeshkian, the elected official, has made friendly statements towards the Americans, indicating that Iran is open to entering a new phase. However, Pezeshkian has currently handed over the steering wheel to the Revolutionary Guards, who know how to handle gangsters.

The primary goal of sanctions on the Iranian people is to make life so difficult that they lose sight of their real enemy. The idea is simple: make life hard and conditions miserable so that the people revolt, and repression increases. Despite this, the Iranian people have endured these sanctions from 1979 to 2016, when Obama reached an agreement with the Iranians regarding the nuclear program and decided to release some of their frozen assets in banks. Iran accepted many American conditions, but in 2018, Trump canceled the agreement. Any Iranian – whether atheist, leftist, nationalist, or Islamist – who thinks strategically understands that Iran's strategy toward the world has been correct and successful, as a reaction to the injustice faced by the Iranian people. Fifty years of sanctions is evidence that the U.S. punishes the Iranian population in healthcare, food, technology, and social sectors. These sanctions target the people, not the leadership. Does anyone think that if the current regime were to fall, Iran would turn into a country like the Netherlands? Of course not; the world would seek to tear Iran apart, and it could potentially split into several countries, especially considering that its borders are already tense and volatile.

What really happened on October 1st? https://x.com/s_yas_1/status/1841597649113514474

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2024/10/03/geert-wilders-for-breitbart-why-european-patriots-should-support-israel/

No, you're too simplistic to respond.

If Israel attacks Iran once again, the Iranian response will be swift and devastating, unlike before, where there were delays of a month or two. The reason for this is that before carrying out the strike yesterday, Iran had prepared a "response to the response" plan, and satellite images revealed that the Revolutionary Guards had already set up their missiles. This led some to mistakenly believe that a second wave of strikes was imminent. Israel was significantly damaged by yesterday’s strikes, and the evidence for this includes the following: 1. **Noticeable Reduction in Air Strikes and Flights**: There has been a clear reduction in Israeli air force operations. Before the Iranian military strike, Israeli air forces were highly active around the clock. However, this activity has now partially decreased, indicating potential damage to Israel's air force capabilities. 2. **Satellite Imagery of Targeted Airbases is Blurred**: Since this morning, satellite images of the targeted airbases have been unclear. Experts believe this is due to an artificial electronic cloud placed by certain companies over these bases to prevent the extent of the damage from being revealed. Notably, this cloud did not exist a few days ago. 3. **Lowered Morale Among Israeli Soldiers**: The morale of Israeli soldiers has declined, following the drop in morale among their leaders and the Israeli public. The direct result of this has been Israeli soldiers falling into easy ambushes in southern Lebanon—four large ambushes so far. Before the Iranian military strike, the morale of the Israeli army was high, and they had a significant amount of confidence and arrogance, positioning themselves as the strong and assured attacker carefully choosing their targets. Yesterday and today, Israel lost what it gained last week. This is the nature of battles, meaning that it is possible for the Israelis to regain their strength, but they will not be able to achieve this while facing the readiness and vigilance of the opposing axis. Iran is ready to respond quickly if Netanyahu decides to take a risk. As mentioned yesterday, the Israeli file is now in the hands of the Revolutionary Guards, not President Bazashkian, who prefers diplomatic solutions. The commanders of the Revolutionary Guards are angry over the killing of their colleagues and now have an opportunity for retaliation, especially with Israel embroiled in a ground war with Lebanon and Palestine, scattering its forces and exposing them to attacks, as demonstrated by the recent strike on a tank gathering near the Gaza border. It is not far-fetched for Israel to resort to the Samson Option or act recklessly, whether by assassinating a prominent Iranian commander or bombing nuclear sites. We are facing perhaps the most reckless and arrogant Israeli leadership in its history, and the coming days will reveal more about the nature of this conflict, of which we are living through one of its most significant chapters. - Sameh Asker 2/10/2024

Your neighbor or Netanyahu?

@Inliytened1 It's not about the numbers; your neighbor might be worse than both of them. Can i compare Netanyahu to Stalin or this is insensitive too ?

why insensitive ?

@Inliytened1 After that reply, I couldn’t take you seriously anymore.

yes you angry

don't be so sure bro

haha calma calma , what made you so angry ?

The people are exhausted due to the U.S. imposing sanctions for 50 years to fuel internal tensions.