Miscellaneous News

[manqiangrexue]

And Iran commonly fires on Israeli targets in a daily basis.

Where and what were those targets? Can you cite them?

To invoke my analogy again, if Ukraine was on a daily basis through RDK hitting Russian settlements and killing Russian soldiers, would you be OK with Russia just "commonly" (i.e. 1 time a year?) assassinates Ukrainians inside and outside Ukraine?

That wasn't what I asked you, I just used the example of Ukraine = Iran and Russia = Israel as 2 random countries. My point is that a country that can't beat proxy armies and has only carried out some dubious terror attacks on the core territory of their enemy is simply in an awful position when their enemy is hitting their cities, creating refugees and killing 10 000s of soldiers.

Proxies are not the official army. Iranian proxies inflict damage on Israel, then Israel deals an overmatch in damage back to them, and assassinates official Iranian government personel and scientists, sometimes in Iran. Iran attacks Israel through third parties while Israel attacks Iran directly and Iran cannot answer directly.

You mean Israel doesn't have such history? Or maybe that Israel does? Because that was the whole analogy. Anyways I can give you that point, but I don't think the idea that Israel starts off sluggish and then become indomitable

No, that is Russia, NOT Israel.

compensates enough for the fact they have essentially inflicted maybe a dozen casualties on IRGC (let alone Iran regular military and civilians), while they've lost 10 000s and are evacuating cities.

Proxies are not official entities while attacking the IRGC is attacking an Iranian official entity, and getting little to no official answer.

I used this analogy to show you that if not for people reading very propagandized sources, how absurd the assertion is when applied to any other conflict.

If you want an example closer to home: let me ask you, would you be satisfied with a crackdown on Taiwan where we lose 10 000 PLA for 30 000 partisans on Matsu and Kinmen, bomb the shit out of these 2 areas continously but leave the Formosa island untouched, blow up a few pagers in Kinmen, and plant a few bombs on the main island to kill some partisan liasons? Not even daring to use the PLAAF to directly airstrike Formosa. Not satisfied right? That's why Israel is also not satisfied and want US bailout at any cost.

Well, if the ROC started assassinating PLA generals and Chinese scientists, especially in China, I'd be crestfallen by anything other than a declaration of war with the PLA directly attacking the ROC, not the PLA staying home while some proxies go and do the fighting, suffer massive casualties and ultimately result in the ROC gaining territory and committing genocide on our allies.

 

[Index]

Where and what were those targets? Can you cite them?

The entirety of northern Israel? Iron dome batteries, settler concentrations, troops columns etc.

Proxies are not the official army. Iranian proxies inflict damage on Israel, then Israel deals an overmatch in damage back to them, and assassinates official Iranian government personel and scientists, sometimes in Iran. Iran attacks Israel through third parties while Israel attacks Iran directly and Iran cannot answer directly.

But Israel doesn't attack Iran directly. How many Iranian soldiers have been killed by Israel? Israel won't even fire a missile directly at Iran, they have to plant a bomb and avoid inflicting civilian losses, hitting only the representative of Hamas, who technically isn't even Iranian. While Iran's fighters will literally just direct strike Israel's houses, cars, buses etc.

I don't know why you'd assume Iran using proxies first means that Iran "cannot answer directly".

Proxies are not the official army. Iranian proxies inflict damage on Israel, then Israel deals an overmatch in damage back to them,

Switch "Iran" to US here and "Israel" to Russia and the same relation holds true. Does that now mean US is helpless to reply directly to Russia? No, it just means US/Iran benefits the most from using up willing proxies first to weaken the enemy.

Proxies are not official entities while attacking the IRGC is attacking an Iranian official entity, and getting little to no official answer.

But Israel is not attacking the IRGC. Iran's forces are blowing up Israeli vehicles every day, where is Israel defeating IRGC vehicles or hitting Iranian cities?

Well, if the ROC started assassinating PLA generals and Chinese scientists, especially in China, I'd be crestfallen by anything other than a declaration of war with the PLA directly attacking the ROC, not the PLA staying home while some proxies go and do the fighting, suffer massive casualties and ultimately result in the ROC gaining territory and committing genocide on our allies.

You've entirely missed the point.

What you're saying is Israel should be satisfied with it's performance of 10-20k to 30k K/D ratio against partisans while not even having started to touch Iran's main forces. And so I am asking you, would you feel satisfied if China put up the same performance as Israel?

You might be reading unbiased sources about China, but it's clear you've somehow accidentally consumed a toxic quantity of Zionist cope, because no power in the world would be satisfied with stalemating partisans while your enemy remains untouched and keeps sending missiles into your cities. Even the Zionists themselves don't believe it, hence why they are trying everything to bring US in and reset the whole battlefield.

 

[Minm]

This is what I think about it:

PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Foreign BRICS scholars condemn Lebanon bombings and criticize PRC for not holding Taiwan to account. Lmao, first the Russians, now the Arabs. Pretty soon the whole global south would want China to reunite with Taiwan :p

www.sinodefenceforum.com

I have no faith that Iran is as sophisticated as China and I have no trust in Iran's new president. And also, China never characterized Russia's actions as aggression in front of the UN.

Two things I can accept that would mean I jumped the gun in criticism:
1. Actions speak louder than words. If this is later seen as a trick in step with Russia, and it yielded some fruit, I would be impressed.
2. So far, we are listening to Western media's rendition of what was said, and not in its entirety. Being that Western media is known for lying whenever their mouths open not to eat, there is room for much to be misunderstood.

Right now, Iran would be lucky to be able to sacrifice itself to kill Israel. The bank account seems insufficient for the purchase at this point.

Iran would be wise to recognize that. So far, from their attitude towards China, I doubt they do.

No, Iran isn't as sophisticated as China in its foreign policy. But the same dynamics apply. Iran keeps denying selling drones to Russia even though we all know that this isn't true. Whether it's very effective to lie about something when everyone knows you're lying I don't know. But I believe the intention is to do business with Europe and Russia at the same time.
The new Iranian president was only speaking to journalists anyway, not at the UN general assembly.

China is following the same strategy and I agree with you, I wish the government didn't obey any western demands for boycotting Russia. But it's still better to deindustrialise the west with exports and not supply Russia with as much as they might want

3. The very fact that Iran doesn't dare fight Israel despite all its provovations while Russia has invaded Ukraine for much less and captured huge chunks of it, never to be returned, shows a different power dynamic

Sadly, these are the power dynamics between global south and western countries in all conflicts. If you fight back, the US will come and kill you. Iran could bravely fight and they'd lose. What's the point of that? Better to build your strength quietly and take the humiliation.

 

[Index]

No, Iran isn't as sophisticated as China in its foreign policy. But the same dynamics apply. Iran keeps denying selling drones to Russia even though we all know that this isn't true. Whether it's very effective to lie about something when everyone knows you're lying I don't know. But I believe the intention is to do business with Europe and Russia at the same time.
The new Iranian president was only speaking to journalists anyway, not at the UN general assembly.

China is following the same strategy and I agree with you, I wish the government didn't obey any western demands for boycotting Russia. But it's still better to deindustrialise the west with exports and not supply Russia with as much as they might want

Russia remains fully topped up on drones. Has it occurred to you that a global ban on offensive drone sales is circumvented just by gifting the drones for free?

You're blaming China for doing the correct thing and protecting it's ally. Out of NATO/Ukraine and Russia, the former benefit 100x more from being able to buy Chinese dual use products off the shelf. Because that's the only way they could get them.

If China had banned offensive drone sales to only Ukraine, the west would do sanctions circumvention by just sending their purchases to Ukraine. If China bans the whole west, it's immediately pissing them all off, including potential fencesitters. On the other hand, if China bans the whole world, they can keep sending to Russia from the domestic market, while in effect achieving the Ukraine ban, but no one can accuse them on unfairly targeting them.

 

[manqiangrexue]

The entirety of northern Israel? Iron dome batteries, settler concentrations, troops columns etc.

Are you talking about what Hezbollah did? Or that single missile strike episode?

But Israel doesn't attack Iran directly. How many Iranian soldiers have been killed by Israel? Israel won't even fire a missile directly at Iran, they have to plant a bomb and avoid inflicting civilian losses, hitting only the representative of Hamas, who technically isn't even Iranian.

Mossad is an official Israeli agency and the IRGC is an official Iranian agency. Mossad killing IRGC members is direct nation to nation killing.

While Iran's fighters will literally just direct strike Israel's houses, cars, buses etc.

First of all, what Iran's fighters? Its non-government proxies? Secondly, it's better if they can actually target and kill Israeli officials rather than hitting civilian crap.

I don't know why you'd assume Iran using proxies first means that Iran "cannot answer directly".

Because proxies means not answering directly. Mossad killing IRGC is answering directly as both are national entities.

Switch "Iran" to US here and "Israel" to Russia and the same relation holds true. Does that now mean US is helpless to reply directly to Russia? No, it just means US/Iran benefits the most from using up willing proxies first to weaken the enemy.

I believe the response from the US would go far beyond using proxies if any nation started assassinating American generals and nuclear scientists on American soil.

But Israel is not attacking the IRGC.

Assassinating its members and other members of Iran's government is not an attack?

Iran's forces are blowing up Israeli vehicles every day, where is Israel defeating IRGC vehicles or hitting Iranian cities?

Proxies are not really Iran's forces and while they're blowing up Israeli vehicles, they are suffering disproportionately high losses to their forces.

You've entirely missed the point.

No I don't think so and I think I've pinpointed the problem with your analysis below:

What you're saying is Israel should be satisfied with it's performance of 10-20k to 30k K/D ratio against partisans while not even having started to touch Iran's main forces. And so I am asking you, would you feel satisfied if China put up the same performance?

You might be reading unbiased sources about China, but it's clear you've somehow accidentally consumed a toxic quantity of Zionist cope, because no power in the world would be satisfied with stalemating partisans while your enemy remains untouched and keeps sending missiles into your cities. Even the Zionists themselves don't believe it, hence why they are trying everything to bring US in and reset the whole battlefield.

The problem here is that when proxies attack and deal damage, you want to count them as Iran attacking and dealing damage but when proxies get slaughtered back, you want to say that doesn't count as Iran taking losses. You can't have it both ways.

No, Iran isn't as sophisticated as China in its foreign policy. But the same dynamics apply. Iran keeps denying selling drones to Russia even though we all know that this isn't true. Whether it's very effective to lie about something when everyone knows you're lying I don't know. But I believe the intention is to do business with Europe and Russia at the same time.
The new Iranian president was only speaking to journalists anyway, not at the UN general assembly.

China is following the same strategy and I agree with you, I wish the government didn't obey any western demands for boycotting Russia. But it's still better to deindustrialise the west with exports and not supply Russia with as much as they might want

We're gonna have to see how smart Iran is. Their new president is unproven. The chance that he's a spineless stooge is easily as high as him being a fox.

Sadly, these are the power dynamics between global south and western countries in all conflicts. If you fight back, the US will come and kill you. Iran could bravely fight and they'd lose. What's the point of that? Better to build your strength quietly and take the humiliation.

This I agree with. I don't think Iran would be better off with a direct attack and I think that's telling of the power dynamic.

 

[Index]

Are you talking about what Hezbollah did? Or that single missile strike episode?

You can't separate Iran's war effort from... Everyone participating in it.

Mossad is an official Israeli agency and the IRGC is an official Iranian agency. Mossad killing IRGC members is direct nation to nation killing.

And they've done what? One person in a year of war? While Iranian missiles go to the Israeli border, and then end up hitting Israel almost every day.

No I don't think so and I think I've pinpointed the problem with your analysis below:

The problem here is that when proxies attack, you want to count them as Iran attacking but when proxies get slaughtered back, you want to say that doesn't count as Iran taking losses. You can't have it both ways.

That's the exact line NATO sold the public about Ukraine.

And if I was a Russian citizen, I'd not be entirely happy about my country sending men to the front, my cities being shelled, while my enemies sit at home. The odd death of a NATO advisor here and there, even US generals mysteriously dying in a "plane crash" a few hours after my country did airstrike, it does not weigh up for the fact that my military are dying in war while the enemy sit in peace and plan which weapons to send to kill as many of my countrymen as possible.

At least Russia can boast of frontline progress and an intact economy, so they don't have to be as desparate as Israel has been. But do I find Russia's position enviable? Hell no.

Israel had to empty the north of ~1 million people. If I was Russian and Russia had to empty out every province bordering Ukraine due to unsustainable levels of Ukrainian bombardment, you bet I'd ask for China to direct come down and clean up this gross humiliation, just like Israelis are asking for US to do.

 

[manqiangrexue]

You can't separate Iran's war effort from... Everyone participating in it.

And they've done what? One person in a year of war? While Iranian missiles go to the Israeli border, and then end up hitting Israel almost every day.

That's the exact line NATO sold the public about Ukraine.

And if I was a Russian citizen, I'd not be entirely happy about my country sending men to the front, my cities being shelled, while my enemies sit at home. The odd death of a NATO advisor here and there, even US generals mysteriously dying in a "plane crash" a few hours after my country did airstrike, it does not weigh up for the fact that my military are dying in war while the enemy sit in peace and plan which weapons to send to kill as many of my countrymen as possible.

At least Russia can boast of frontline progress and an intact economy, so they don't have to be as desparate as Israel has been. But do I find Russia's position enviable? Hell no.

Israel had to empty the north of ~1 million people. If I was Russian and Russia had to empty out every province bordering Ukraine due to unsustainable levels of Ukrainian bombardment, you bet I'd ask for China to direct come down and clean up this gross humiliation, just like Israelis are asking for US to do.

Just let me know how you'd like to continue this conversation:
A. The kills of Hamas and Hezbollah both count towards Iran's kills. And their losses both count towards Iranian losses.
B. Neither the damage inflicted by Hamas/Hezbollah nor the damage taken by Hamas/Hezbollah count for Iran.

What we CANNOT have is:
C. When Hamas/Hezbollah hits Israel, that counts towards Iran's merit. When they take damage getting killed by Israel, it has nothing to do with Iran.

 

[jiajia99]

Causus belli established:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1838802596066209994

He has to be a dumb mother forker if he honestly thinks that given the blatant attempts involving people that are not Muslims on his sorry life. If he ends taken out by a democrat (which I am convinced that this will be the case), I think I might just laugh since quite frankly, his Israeli support in this ongoing genocide isn’t helping anyone and I honestly think that if he is taken out and the ensuring chaos does mess up Israel’s ability to beg for aid, I think that alone would provide a greater net benefit to the world then his continued existence ever would, plus China would honestly prefer this double dealing con man to be out of the picture for good

 

[Chevalier]

Sadly, these are the power dynamics between global south and western countries in all conflicts. If you fight back, the US will come and kill you. Iran could bravely fight and they'd lose. What's the point of that? Better to build your strength quietly and take the humiliation.

China of 1930s had even less than Iran today and still fought. The difference is not about national strength but about calibre of people and frankly, I see Iranians as no different to cow belt Indians especially given Iranian intransigence when it came to china‘s generous billion dollar deal back in 2021. Infiltration and penetration of the Iranian security establishment such that Iranian presidents and scientists are assassinated make me doubt such assertions of Iranian intelligence passing American spyware to China, which lead to China closing the cia nets during the Obama years.

 

[Chevalier]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1838700261335769114

Baerbock’s hair looks shit btw, but in typical Anglo German fashion, can’t resist sanctimony.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1838987646456217843

begging your pardon, Mr President, but hasn’t this already happened? At Tver? At Kursk?