NWS Nieuws & Achtergronden
Discussieer hier diepgaander over de actualiteiten.
Waar zit die Kamer-ei eigenlijk. Heb altijd het idee dat ie lekker in een of ander torentje zit met allemaal hoertjes om hem heen terwijl ie het volk allemaal strenge islamtische regels oplegt.
Opgeblazen gevoel of winderigheid? Zo opgelost met Rennie!
https://irannewswire.org/(...)rth-200-billion/?ampquote:Op zondag 25 september 2022 14:00 schreef Eyjafjallajoekull het volgende:
Waar zit die Kamer-ei eigenlijk. Heb altijd het idee dat ie lekker in een of ander torentje zit met allemaal hoertjes om hem heen terwijl ie het volk allemaal strenge islamtische regels oplegt.
Je zult er niet ver vandaan zitten.
Perhaps you've seen it, maybe in a dream.
A murky, forgotten land.
A murky, forgotten land.
When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.
When the student is truly ready, the teacher will disappear.
When the student is truly ready, the teacher will disappear.
When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.
When the student is truly ready, the teacher will disappear.
When the student is truly ready, the teacher will disappear.
quote:Op zondag 25 september 2022 14:05 schreef StateOfMind het volgende:
[..]
https://irannewswire.org/(...)rth-200-billion/?amp
Je zult er niet ver vandaan zitten.
Ik neem wat de VS over aartsvijand Iran zegt met een berg zout. En dat ze ook nog durven te zeggen dat Iraniërs enorm lijden onder armoede en extreme economische omstandigheden, terwijl de oorzaak daarvan toch wel de VS is die Iran decennialang zware sancties heeft opgelegd (en daarbij ook andere soevereine landen dwingt mee te doen).quote:The US Embassy also said that forty years into the clerical regime, while many Iranians suffer from poverty and extreme economic conditions, Khamenei owns assets worth an estimated $200 billion.
Als ik $200 miljard zou bezitten zou ik niet zo leven: https://www.quora.com/Whe(...)esident-of-Iran-live
Bijna alle Iraniërs zijn sjiieten. Die zijn juist altijd slachtoffer van ISIS. ( denk aan autobommen in Bagdad die altijd ontploffen op Sjiitische markten)quote:Op zaterdag 24 september 2022 14:28 schreef Enchanter het volgende:
[..]
Probleem is met Syrië en Iran , dat het islamitische landen zijn en dat het natuurlijk één grote teringzooi gaat worden , met allerlei groeperingen die de macht willen grijpen en dat ISIS zich ook in Iran gaat roeren.
Wat weer vluchtelingenstroom van hier tot weet ik veel op gaat leveren.
ISIS zijn altijd soennieten, beetje de Saudi Arabië variant maar dan nog heftiger.
Dat weet ik dat Iran overwegend Sjiieten zijn , maar Irak is merendeel ook Sjiitisch en en Syrie heeft een grote sjiitische minderheid. Om nou te zeggen dat het zo gezellig is/was in die landen.quote:
[..]
Bijna alle Iraniërs zijn sjiieten. Die zijn juist altijd slachtoffer van ISIS. ( denk aan autobommen in Bagdad die altijd ontploffen op Sjiitische markten)
ISIS is een soenitische stroming.
Misschien dat het in Iran anders gaat lopen , maar ik heb wel m'n twijfels.
ISIS ruikt z'n kans waar er chaos heerst
Ik ben inmiddels overleden
Ik hoop het ook.quote:
Ik hoop echt zo dat het dit keer gaat lukken, optyfen met dat regime daar. Dat land heeft echt zo veel potentie
Maar het regime van Iran heeft ook Assad gesteund. De man die medeverantwoordelijk is voor 200.000 doden in Syrië..
Dat Iraanse regime krijg je helaas niet meer weg vrees ik..
When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.
When the student is truly ready, the teacher will disappear.
When the student is truly ready, the teacher will disappear.
Op 
Beter Assad dan Isis...quote:
[..]
Ik hoop het ook.
Maar het regime van Iran heeft ook Assad gesteund. De man die medeverantwoordelijk is voor 200.000 doden in Syrië..
Dat Iraanse regime krijg je helaas niet meer weg vrees ik..
"He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
Wat heeft dat met dit topic te maken? Dat is Dagestan/Rusland wat met de oorlog in Oekraïne te maken heeft.quote:
Chaos kan. ISIS heeft echter niet laten zien een grote voedingsbodem te hebben in Iran. Oppositie en terroristen genoeg maar Daesh krijgt weinig voet aan te grond. Irak heeft ook veel meer soennieten die tot voor kort veel politieke macht hadden, dat is ook wel een groot verschil.quote:
[..]
Dat weet ik dat Iran overwegend Sjiieten zijn , maar Irak is merendeel ook Sjiitisch en en Syrie heeft een grote sjiitische minderheid. Om nou te zeggen dat het zo gezellig is/was in die landen.
Misschien dat het in Iran anders gaat lopen , maar ik heb wel m'n twijfels.
ISIS ruikt z'n kans waar er chaos heerst
Incelfrikandel
Beetje offtopic maar interessant achtergrondverhaal over waarom Iran nukes wilt.
https://www.reddit.com/r/(...)_a_better_deal_with/
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door slashdotter3 op 25-09-2022 20:23:54 ]
https://www.reddit.com/r/(...)_a_better_deal_with/
Bijbehorende memequote:Part of the reason they're so dead-set on nuclear weapons is they're surrounded on all sides by countries who hate them.
The Israelis should understand what that feels like.
I'm not defending the Ayatollah or the human rights abuses or the threats against neighbors. I'm saying that Iran has been under threat of being dog-piled in a region-wide war for decades.
Of course they want nukes. They'd be overrun by the Arab League and Israel if they fought conventionally.
The problem with this whole situation is it has been a clusterfuck of both religious conflicts, political conflicts, back and forths through history and an inability for anybody to stop compounding the problems further.
Religiously, there's the Sunni-Shia divide.
Iran is a Shia nation. They're basically the Shia Islam capital of the M.E. The majority of other nations are Sunni. While both sects of Islam are nearly identical, the issue with that divide had more to do with politics rather than religion. If you diverge, you end up with separate power structures and less uniformity on political decisions/goals. Not just religious decisions/goals.
Iran has been fucked over historically and the world kind of ignores that.
Iran has a reason to be pissed about history. Iran (like most M.E. countries) had been used for their oil. The British controlled Iran's oil industry and the relationship wasn't favorable to the Iranian government or its people. Iran's previous government decided they were going to take back ownership of their oil industry and nationalize everything. The British protested and claimed "you can't do that, we own it." but the fact of the matter is it was Iranian oil and they could have changed that relationship whenever they wanted to. The British (like most of the west) set up shop in other people's countries and pretended that gave them ownership over natural resource.
The British were pushed out and as a result they lost a major source of fuel which isn't something they took lightly.
So they let it go and everyone lived happily ever after...sike.
The British couldn't let that go so they went to the United States and tried to convince them that Iran was being taken over by Communists (citing the nationalization of oil) and that something needed to be done so the British could get their oil back.
This resulted in the CIA helping to stage a coup against the Iranian government. They then put the Shah (Iran's former monarchy ruler) back in place (he had been removed from power previously by Iran) and this guy basically cow towed to the west because the west preserved his power within the state. He gave them back their oil relationships which existed beforehand.
The Ayatollah came to power two decades later. That had to do with the oil crisis caused by the embargo against the west. OPEC cut off oil from countries who supported Israel during the Yom Kippur war. The Iranians suffered severely from lack of oil sales and the economic stress resulted in the Iranian revolution and the Ayatollah taking power. (Extremely Short Version)
The power structure of the region isn't extremely solidified and Iran stands in contrast to that established order.
There has been a long history of instability throughout the Middle East. Both because of foreign influence and because of local terrorist groups attempting to destabilize and over throw governments.
The Saudis are one of the foundational "rocks" of the region. They are part of that established order and they have worked for years to make sure they are preserved and that there is regional stability so they can continue to grow money and influence.
Iran fucks that up by funding and supporting terrorist groups and opposition groups throughout the entire region.
They backed the Shia opposition in Iraq which caused a political crisis.
They backed the Houthi Rebels in Yemen which split up Yemen and directly attacked Saudi Arabia.
They backed Hezbollah which is arguably the most destabilizing force in Lebanon.
They backed Hamas which is arguably the most destabilizing force in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
They backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt after the Arab Spring resulted in the ousting of Mubarak.
etc.
Iran attempts to destabilize countries who treat them unfavorably in hopes the resetting of the regional order could work out in their favor.
That resulted in a lot of animosity and it can be argued that the entire region has been in its own "Cold War" for decades now. The Saudi bloc, aligned with Israel, openly discusses a military response to Iranian actions in the region.
With all of that in mind, Iran uses this history to do some fucked up things without any real accountability.
Iran tends to repeat that their actions are a response to imperialism. They do what they do because they are isolated and because they've been fucked with historically and they have no other real options.
While there's truth to some of that, their isolation is also a side-effect of the way they've gone about dealing with their neighbors.
Even the nuclear deal which they were originally in was arguably a bullshit deal. It had very little oversight and there was evidence that the Iranians had been building and operating hidden facilities outside of the UN's view.
The regions argument is Iran has a history of being a threat and meddling in regional affairs and causing regional instability. They have a right to look at Iran unfavorably.
Iran (while not openly admitting they want a nuke) would argue that they need to build up militarily because they're surrounded by countries who hate them and they are constantly under threat of war.
I can see both sides. That being said, one country can't have a free pass at destabilizing the whole region because they feel they've been given the shitty end of the stick. It's not something the world can pretend isn't an issue.
Things got so bad that the Arab World (historically opposed to Israel, both religiously and politically) have now aligned with them to curb Iranian influence and threats. That would have been unheard of if predicted 40 years ago.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door slashdotter3 op 25-09-2022 20:23:54 ]
We moeten afwachten , ben alleen bang dat ze (de bevolking) van de regen in de drup komen als die achterlijke geestelijke het veld hebben geruimdquote:
[..]
Chaos kan. ISIS heeft echter niet laten zien een grote voedingsbodem te hebben in Iran. Oppositie en terroristen genoeg maar Daesh krijgt weinig voet aan te grond. Irak heeft ook veel meer soennieten die tot voor kort veel politieke macht hadden, dat is ook wel een groot verschil.
Ik ben inmiddels overleden
Ik denk dat Iraniërs dat wel erkennen, maar dat risico voor lief nemen omdat er anders nooit wat zal veranderen.quote:
[..]
We moeten afwachten , ben alleen bang dat ze (de bevolking) van de regen in de drup komen als die achterlijke geestelijke het veld hebben geruimd
Het regime heeft echter wel de gewoonte georganiseerde oppositie gewoon te liquideren, zelfs in het buitenland. Dat maakt het natuurlijk lastig een alternatief op te zetten.
Incelfrikandel
Ik heb er ook wel een hard hoofd in, gaat gewoon met grof geweld neergeslagen worden. Dan ben je als ongewapende bevolking gewoon kansloos. Het is niet zo dat het regime zich wat aantrekt van hun imago in het buitenland, en aan sancties zijn ze ondertussen ook wel gewendquote:
[..]
Ik hoop het ook.
Maar het regime van Iran heeft ook Assad gesteund. De man die medeverantwoordelijk is voor 200.000 doden in Syrië..
Dat Iraanse regime krijg je helaas niet meer weg vrees ik..
Veel van die lui lijken de dictatuur daar echt beu te zijn.
Vóór het internet dacht men dat de oorzaak van domheid een gebrek aan toegang tot informatie was. Inmiddels weten we beter.
https://www.quora.com/Is-Iran-executing-protesters-Why
Q:What’s are the current Iran riots and protest really about?
A:It's really sad to see these protests. They will accomplish nothing. The Iranian government will not collapse due to popular pressure. It's not like the so–called Islamic Revolution this time. In the Islamic Revolution Iranians of all ideologies and backgrounds hated and wished death upon the Shah, and the army refused to back him and declared itself neutral. He fled because he had no defenders. But this time millions of poor and religious Iranians will defend their Islamic government no matter what, and the military is very much under the control of the ruling establishment. Even the Basijis, Iran's fanatically loyal equivalent of a National Guard, number 600 thousand men. They definitely know how to disperse crowds.
I remember when Neda Agha–Soltan was killed in 2009. The public showed much grief and anger, but nothing happened. I remember when Mir–Hossein Moussavi led the “Green Revolution" in the same year. 36 to 72 people died and Moussavi was placed under house arrest. He still hasn't been released and has all but disappeared from public awareness. As if he did die indeed.
There is no point to these protests. People are dying for nothing. They need to go home. The death of Mahsa Amini has triggered a national uproar and they can definitely get a few concessions from the government if they're reasonable, maybe some police reform and a more lenient hijab law. But rousing anarchy in the streets and attacking police will only result in the violent reimposition of law and order. If they think they can topple the government through a mass display of rage, they need to think again. The founders of the Islamic Republic seized power from the Shah in the same way, through displays of mass rage. They understand well how to defeat popular mobilization tactics that were their own path to power, and they can summon masses of supporters of their own.
I hate political Islam, Shariah and the Islamic fundamentalist character of the Iranian government, but all these protests are useless and all they're doing is sending people to be stupidly killed. The United States, the #1 cause of Iran's poverty and isolation in the first place, has of course taken the side of the protestors and it doesn't really mind how many of them will die for nothing. The US is rubbing its hands in hope and glee because this is what its sanctions have always been designed to do — create poverty, misery and hunger and force people to try to overthrow their government no matter what the cost. But not once have US sanctions succeeded in accomplishing this in any country. Even now the US knows the probability of Iranian regime change is very low, but it has nothing to lose by trying because it's not paying any price. The protestors are.
Iranians — go home. Don't get yourselves killed over nothing.
Q:What’s are the current Iran riots and protest really about?
A:It's really sad to see these protests. They will accomplish nothing. The Iranian government will not collapse due to popular pressure. It's not like the so–called Islamic Revolution this time. In the Islamic Revolution Iranians of all ideologies and backgrounds hated and wished death upon the Shah, and the army refused to back him and declared itself neutral. He fled because he had no defenders. But this time millions of poor and religious Iranians will defend their Islamic government no matter what, and the military is very much under the control of the ruling establishment. Even the Basijis, Iran's fanatically loyal equivalent of a National Guard, number 600 thousand men. They definitely know how to disperse crowds.
I remember when Neda Agha–Soltan was killed in 2009. The public showed much grief and anger, but nothing happened. I remember when Mir–Hossein Moussavi led the “Green Revolution" in the same year. 36 to 72 people died and Moussavi was placed under house arrest. He still hasn't been released and has all but disappeared from public awareness. As if he did die indeed.
There is no point to these protests. People are dying for nothing. They need to go home. The death of Mahsa Amini has triggered a national uproar and they can definitely get a few concessions from the government if they're reasonable, maybe some police reform and a more lenient hijab law. But rousing anarchy in the streets and attacking police will only result in the violent reimposition of law and order. If they think they can topple the government through a mass display of rage, they need to think again. The founders of the Islamic Republic seized power from the Shah in the same way, through displays of mass rage. They understand well how to defeat popular mobilization tactics that were their own path to power, and they can summon masses of supporters of their own.
I hate political Islam, Shariah and the Islamic fundamentalist character of the Iranian government, but all these protests are useless and all they're doing is sending people to be stupidly killed. The United States, the #1 cause of Iran's poverty and isolation in the first place, has of course taken the side of the protestors and it doesn't really mind how many of them will die for nothing. The US is rubbing its hands in hope and glee because this is what its sanctions have always been designed to do — create poverty, misery and hunger and force people to try to overthrow their government no matter what the cost. But not once have US sanctions succeeded in accomplishing this in any country. Even now the US knows the probability of Iranian regime change is very low, but it has nothing to lose by trying because it's not paying any price. The protestors are.
Iranians — go home. Don't get yourselves killed over nothing.
