Iran War

[Sheilbh]

Then I think you're monitoring a fringe to be honest.

But again I don't think I really buy right side of history framing - I don't think there's a telos to it. But to the extent there is that sort of goes to my question, right? Or at least of the challenge in the question? From my point of view the regime is vastly stronger as a consequence of this war than it was before it, having killed tens of thousands of people.

It seems to me that objectively Trump and Netanyahu's war has probably given a new lease of life to the regime in a way that their own internal violence didn't (and, perhaps, couldn't). So the regime's violence reflected its nature as bloody, bedraggled and relatively isolated (economically, regionally etc) - and then removed from its isolation, strengthened, re-legitimised by a war that was a mistake (although I note France has said they'll veto any US proposal to lift UN sanctions until Iran agrees a more comprehensive nuclear agreement). So what's "the right side of history" there?

[Razgovory]

It is a fringe that seems to have a lot of influence, if the recent elections in New York mean anything.  And this is sort of the kind thing that Sophie was talking about with apartheid.  She is asking if we would be on the right side of history here.  Who is morally correct, who will be remember as right.  I think I'm just bitter.  This is not a world I want to live in.

And I agree, the Iranians hands down won the war.  They are coming out much stronger diplomatically and politically.

[The Brain]

History will likely be written by Grok, so it really shouldn't be the measuring yard of anything.

[The Minsky Moment]

I think I'm just bitter.  This is not a world I want to live in.

As the clever hopes expire
Of a low dishonest decade:
Waves of anger and fear
Circulate over the bright
And darkened lands of the earth

[Valmy]

I think I'm just bitter.  This is not a world I want to live in.

Oh man. I feel this.