It’s not either/or, it’s a self-reinforcing cycle, though it isn’t usually the drugs themselves that start it.

This chart is useless to roughly 5% of the population. Is there a version that doesn’t use red and green?

We gave the Iranian regime extremely powerful leverage on the global stage and galvanized support for the regime domestically, so not great. If there was a possibility of a popular revolt happening in Iran the war definitely killed it. The introduction of a common enemy made a lot of the domestic opposition fall in line to defend their sovereignty, and the ones who didn’t were successfully suppressed by the regime with fewer people willing to stand in solidarity with them.

Supporting Israel is supporting terrorism.

They usually start as foot soldiers in a formal state military before moving on to mercenary work.

This is reminding me a lot of the Prairieland case in the US, and that really doesn’t bode well for the defense.

Iran is right not to recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli state, because it was recently created via a violent settler-colonial occupation culminating in a genocide. It’s not black and white, but it isn’t completely fucking gray either, and there are some parts of this that are black and white.

From the American Declaration of Independence:

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—-That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Israel de facto governs the Palestinian people without their consent, depriving them of all rights and treating them as disposable. In this case where Israel has refused all attempts of the Palestinians to alter this arrangement the only path that remains to them is to abolish the Israeli state, as is their right. Israel does not have a right to exist and no other state does either. The existence of any state is a privilege derived from the consent of the governed.

Responding to mentions of atrocities being committed with angry declarations that the victim(s) were/are not perfectly moral - beyond just being in poor taste - can be reasonably interpreted as offering justification or excuse for said atrocities. What you’re doing is no different from chuds saying “he was no saint!” about someone who was killed by a cop, except in scale.

It’s fine to talk about things Native Americans had historically done to one another, but not as a knee-jerk reaction to mentions of the genocide done to them by European settlers.

Sanctions have never worked that way. They often end up doing the opposite and bolstering nationalism.

The actions of former governments in Spain are not the actions of the current government of Spain.

TBH I wouldn’t put it past a bunch of right-wingers from Florida to think storming Cuba with half a dozen people in a speedboat is a good idea.

Obviously you’re part of the target audience - the entire western world is - but the primary target demographic is US Americans. There has been an increase in selective reporting on the political situation in Iran in order to manufacture consent for military intervention and ultimately regime change by the US. Western media has been known to do this in the past such as during the leadup to the Iraq war, and they’re doing the same thing now with Iran. They make certain editorial choices to play up the emotional impact and imply that US intervention is justified or even invited by Iranians, and because they don’t (usually) outright lie about what’s happening they have plausible deniability about their intent, which is why it can’t be proven.

430k Guardian subscribers are American, compared to 529k from the UK. A significant number of their articles are produced specifically for a US audience.

Having some basic media literacy and asking why a story is being told and who it’s for doesn’t make me a tankie or whatever box you’ve likely already put me in. I’m not even disputing the facts in the article. Propaganda can be truthful and still be propaganda. Atrocity propaganda often is, and even when it is exaggerated tends to be based on a kernel of truth.

It should be obvious that the target demographic for atrocity propaganda about an enemy of the US is US Americans.

And then you’d need to show how the article tries to convince me that a US military intervention would be something I as a european should support.

You, as a european, are not the target demographic.

Also burgoo and hot brown, not only uniquely American but uniquely Kentuckian. Each state and territory has their own signature dishes like any other country.

If one of those colors is red 40 then you have been drugged.

AI is new, the military industrial complex is not.

The places in the US that are safer for minorities are also the first places that will be targeted for Trump’s domestic military occupation. If you’re trans and paying attention to how things are playing out, those are the places you go to seek solidarity and fight, not to flee and seek asylum.

Colloquial use of the word Nazi is pretty much synonymous with fascist, and I don’t really have a problem with that outside of - like - academic discourse and such.