Iran War

[crazy canuck]

It's foolish to pretend that anything coming from the Russians should be taken at face value by third parties or anyone else.  This is not the first time Sheilbh has taken misinformation and treated analyzed it as if it were more valid than it is.  It is foolish not to call these things out when them happen.

It is foolish to refuse to look at information because you don't like what it says. No one is taking it at face value, but that doesn't mean that it has zero value. Virtue signalling is always a bad look.

You're right.  Baron please open the gates to all the Russian troll bots some can become more enlightened

Sure.  Because that's the only alternative to self-censorship. 

No, but it is the absurd result of your position

[crazy canuck]

The US Secretary of war threatens to commit war crimes - again.

"Our forces are maximally postured to restart combat operations should this new Iranian regime choose poorly and not agree to a deal," Mr. Hegseth said during a briefing to reporters at the Pentagon. "We are locked and loaded on your critical dual-use infrastructure, on your remaining power generation and on your energy industry."

Even if one accepts the his reference to dual use targets is legitimate, he has also clearly specified non dual use infrastructure as being targets.

[The Brain]

Forget it CC, it's the US.

[Valmy]

The US Secretary of war threatens to commit war crimes - again.

"Our forces are maximally postured to restart combat operations should this new Iranian regime choose poorly and not agree to a deal," Mr. Hegseth said during a briefing to reporters at the Pentagon. "We are locked and loaded on your critical dual-use infrastructure, on your remaining power generation and on your energy industry."

Even if one accepts the his reference to dual use targets is legitimate, he has also clearly specified non dual use infrastructure as being targets.

This regime considers bloodthirsty criminal activity to be manly and strong. You are supposed to be in awe of their alpha manly manness right now and feel ashamed at being a beta girlie at your lack of guts to murder millions.

[Oexmelin]

Can we use « fascist » now?

[Jacob]

Can we use « fascist » now?

Depends on context and objective, I think. Because while we probably could, I'm uncertain whether it will be clarion call to action or just result in strengthening the "well I guess fascism unfairly got a bad rep, then" position.

Future scholars, sufficiently removed, will have a good time comparing what the US is going through now with the earlier historical fascism movements - how is it similar and what exceptional to the American case.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah I agree with all of that. Also I'm not sure the fascism debate - but on the other hand I'm also not really sure the distraction of some of our pointiest heads onto a historical question is massively hurting the cause.

[Jacob]

According to CNN a peace deal is "in the home stretch":

The Trump administration is considering unfreezing $20 billion in Iranian assets as part of ongoing negotiations with Tehran, according to two sources familiar with the discussions.

Officials are hoping that a broader deal to end the war could be finalized as early as this weekend, though some areas of disagreement remain, sources familiar with the discussions told CNN.

Full article here: https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/17/politics/iran-trump-money-uranium-deal

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

After all this misery and bullshit I think we're just going to end up with a slightly worse version of the JCPOA he tore up eight years ago.

[HVC]

This truly glorious American victory shall be engraved on the Trump Arch. Even Titus and Domitian would feel bigly envious of such a victory.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

It will be covered in all the awesome "deals" Our Benevolent Father of Business has negotiated on worse terms than we had before them!

[crazy canuck]

After all this misery and bullshit I think we're just going to end up with a slightly worse version of the JCPOA he tore up eight years ago.

Yep

edit: but the important thing is it will be his deal, and not Obama's deal.  So all the death and misery will be worth it for his greater glory.

[Norgy]

I will state what I have said earlier, as it is a subject have I studied quite intensively.

Fascism is what Mussolini wanted it to be. Its traits are recognisable by uniforms, calls to patriotism, the "othering" of opponents, a theatre of the people where the supreme leader speaks and inspires. And violence. At first, before grabbing power, it is beating up opponents, shivving them and sometimes killing them. Fascism didn't really have the anti-semitic part. It is anti-parliamentary and anti-democratic. In its Italian, Spanish and to some degree Portuguese form, it called for "national rejuvenation". Which meant sacrifice and brotherhood, like the arditi at the front in the Great War.

The worship of the leader is of course important. And the country. Its people. Those who are not communists or socialists.

Mussolini could easily work with some of the rump parliament from democratic parties, except the socialists. Franco shot all the socialists he could find. Around 150.000.

Fascism is about big words, promises and a spectacle. And two enemies. One within. And all those from without. War is part of the make-up of sacrifice. "Don't you feel shame not putting your life on the line like so many did in the Great War?".

I can off the top of my head only think of one fascist who was reasonably successful. That was Getulio Vargas in Brazil. Granted, he was ousted.

If the Versailles treaty had just let Orlando keep some gains on the coast of Croatia and Dalmatia, it might have been a different history. But no, it had to be Fiume.

Franco's Spain was mostly clerical authoritarianism. He took a bloody revenge after the civil war. Some historians say he was a clever diplomat to keep Spain out of World War II, but his demands for food and equipment made the Germans think it was a bad idea to have this guy on our side when people are almost starving at home. He did send his Moroccan troops and some volunteers in Division Azul, though. Franco, unlike Mussolini was a devoted to the idea of a holy country, and that made him more a tool for the church, which had been losing some traction everywhere with social upheavals.

Mussolini monuments still scatter Rome here and there. Franco's Valley of the dead is still there.

I would say fascism is a catch-all term these days for authoritarians. And they do go by the same playbook. However, Trump's ideas of beautifying Washington, his cronies' constant rebuttals to a free press, and him caring so much about how he is treated reminds me more of a certain Austrian who became chancellor of Germany. He also has his stormtroopers.

[Sheilbh]

After all this misery and bullshit I think we're just going to end up with a slightly worse version of the JCPOA he tore up eight years ago.

From what I've read on enrichment what was being discussed was a pause on enrichment. The US pushed for 20 years, Iran wanted 5 - I suspect we'll end up with 10, say.

Again I think Netanyahu's role is striking. 14 years after this and his huge meddling in American politics, actively taking sides (from what I understand one of his big selling points as a leader is the perception that he "gets" American politics and is able to play it):


Then from a very strong position with a friendly president striking nuclear facilities and IRGC leaders, to Israel's own destruction of much of the axis of resistance. To the same deal but worse than he was campaigning against then and in Congress, billion of dollars returned to Iran, a younger, more resilient and (reportedly) more risk-tolerant regime than before and the President tweeting that he "PROHIBITS" attacks on Lebanon (though it's totally not because of talks with Iran which are separate).

Plus politically as I say I think this could be very bad for Israel. I can fully see Trump scapegoating Netanyahu and there's danerous anti-semitic trends on the MAGA right which I think will be strengthened if this is perceived as a or "the" failure of their project.

Obviously it's Britain looking at a moment of imperial over-extension and power-checking over straits in the Middle East so we've had a lot of Suez comparisons. And there are some overlaps for the US. But I can't help but feel it might, more accurately, be Israel's and require a re-calibration of what's attainable, the relationship with the US (which I think is damaged with Democrats already - see Bibi's politicking) and how it can handle threats. Obviously still big differences too.

[Norgy]

I have noticed Tucker Carlson going more and more "anti-zionist". I think certain elements of MAGA now see Israel as more of a liability in their America First worldview.

While I do not know the United States well, I would think it is a dangerous path to thread, not primarily for electoral purposes, but for the Jewish minority that are Americans.

I thought, as a pre-teen, the 1980s were scary. The threat of nuclear war seemed so imminent. When the wall fell in Berlin, it was just days after my 16th birthday, and it felt that we were on a good path, all of us. I am still, to some extent, that youth with hope in his heart. But it is getting rather hard to find much hope these days.