War with Iran Part II

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks.
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel.

The author is an expert on the Middle East, you twit. It's *you* who is constantly spewing your propaganda.

It’s a wish casting for Israel. Seriously no one but the most fanatical pro Zionist would think it is even coherent argument. It shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the ME.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks.
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel.

The author is an expert on the Middle East, you twit. It's *you* who is constantly spewing your propaganda.

It’s a wish casting for Israel. Seriously no one but the most fanatical pro Zionist would think it is even coherent argument. It shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the ME.

Right, because only you - no one else - could possibly know what they're talking about re: the Middle East. Just you and your obsession with "Zionists." You don't even see that the true fanatic is YOU. Your ego must be visible from space.

[Anonymous]

You gotta laugh at the videos being made

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks.
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel.

If you can't define the words shia and sunni without looking, your ignorant opinion isn't interesting.

Dp. I’m a Sunni and I have theological issues with twelver Shiism.

I agree with the PP that the post was propaganda and that Israel is the problem.

DP here and as someone very well aware of the Sunni vs Shia debate in that region, the post was propaganda and completely absolved Israel of causing havoc in the Middle East. Israel is just frustrated it can no longer play the Sunni vs Shia card and that the people in the Middle
East are moving past the theological differences and emphasizing the need for cooperation.

That post didn’t absolve Israel of anything. It just pointed out a basic fact that everyone whose mind is not totally clouded by anti-semitism and/or TikTok foreign affairs influencers understands … that Iran is broadly hated in the ME.

So is Israel. At the moment, Iran is a more rational actor (I can't believe I am typing that) who is not in the middle of committing genocide, so why should anyone put the interests of Israel above their own, or that of Iran, for that matter.?

Iran has been the rational actor for years. They only respond to Israel’s and US’s aggression. You know how many proxies both Israel and US arm and let loose on Iran?

Apparently, you two geniuses are able to selectively "forget" the thousands of Iranian citizens who were recently murdered by the regime. Oh, and the three men who were hanged but had committed no crime. But yes - so rational, so moral.

DP. But on top of that now our bombs have killed and displaced thousands of Iranians. How does that make anything better for them?

[Anonymous]

So ridiculous. Google shows once again what a shill zionist outfit they are. They allow all the screeching zionist banshees spewing genocidal proclamations but they take down a channel that makes political cartoons. YT also has been demonetizing for years videos critical of Israel and Epstein, so much so that people have had to use coded words.

They can still be found on Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, and most other socials.


YouTube removes pro-Iran channel producing anti-Trump videos
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/youtube-removes-iran-linked-channel-producing-anti-trump-animation

Google, the owners of YouTube, has removed a channel on the platform belonging to a pro-Iran group producing Lego-themed videos mocking Donald Trump.

"Upon review, we’ve terminated the channel for violating our Spam, deceptive practices and scams policies," a YouTube spokesperson told Middle East Eye.

"YouTube doesn’t allow spam, scams, or other deceptive practices that take advantage of the YouTube community."

Explosive Media's content largely consists of animations ridiculing the US war effort against Iran and poking fun at the US president.

YouTube did not specify how the channel had violated its policies, but the company has previously been described as being "aligned with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps".

[Anonymous]

LIAR

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks.
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel.

If you can't define the words shia and sunni without looking, your ignorant opinion isn't interesting.

Dp. I’m a Sunni and I have theological issues with twelver Shiism.

I agree with the PP that the post was propaganda and that Israel is the problem.

DP here and as someone very well aware of the Sunni vs Shia debate in that region, the post was propaganda and completely absolved Israel of causing havoc in the Middle East. Israel is just frustrated it can no longer play the Sunni vs Shia card and that the people in the Middle
East are moving past the theological differences and emphasizing the need for cooperation.

That post didn’t absolve Israel of anything. It just pointed out a basic fact that everyone whose mind is not totally clouded by anti-semitism and/or TikTok foreign affairs influencers understands … that Iran is broadly hated in the ME.

So is Israel. At the moment, Iran is a more rational actor (I can't believe I am typing that) who is not in the middle of committing genocide, so why should anyone put the interests of Israel above their own, or that of Iran, for that matter.?

Iran has been the rational actor for years. They only respond to Israel’s and US’s aggression. You know how many proxies both Israel and US arm and let loose on Iran?

Apparently, you two geniuses are able to selectively "forget" the thousands of Iranian citizens who were recently murdered by the regime. Oh, and the three men who were hanged but had committed no crime. But yes - so rational, so moral.

And how have America and Israel helped the protestors? We replaced the Ayatollah Sr with Ayatollah JR and shut down the Strait of Hormuz and denied the world of 20 percent of its energy and the fertilizer people need to grow food. How has that been helpful to Iranians?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks.
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel.

If you can't define the words shia and sunni without looking, your ignorant opinion isn't interesting.

Dp. I’m a Sunni and I have theological issues with twelver Shiism.

I agree with the PP that the post was propaganda and that Israel is the problem.

DP here and as someone very well aware of the Sunni vs Shia debate in that region, the post was propaganda and completely absolved Israel of causing havoc in the Middle East. Israel is just frustrated it can no longer play the Sunni vs Shia card and that the people in the Middle
East are moving past the theological differences and emphasizing the need for cooperation.

That post didn’t absolve Israel of anything. It just pointed out a basic fact that everyone whose mind is not totally clouded by anti-semitism and/or TikTok foreign affairs influencers understands … that Iran is broadly hated in the ME.

So is Israel. At the moment, Iran is a more rational actor (I can't believe I am typing that) who is not in the middle of committing genocide, so why should anyone put the interests of Israel above their own, or that of Iran, for that matter.?

Iran has been the rational actor for years. They only respond to Israel’s and US’s aggression. You know how many proxies both Israel and US arm and let loose on Iran?

Isis. I wonder if the Americans know Iran/hezbollah was passing out Christmas trees to Christians under siege by Isis in Syria and Lebanon. Isis was launched, funded, consists of Israeli spies and American spies like
The current Syrian President. A few years ago he was fighting in Al qaeda/syria and now he received a Promotion to President

[Anonymous]

How many thousands die in America because we don’t have universal healthcare or we have a poisonous food and water supply? Please don’t kid yourselves into thinking our government cares about the people

[Anonymous]

They don’t even care to retaliate against the nations that attacked us. Israel Uss liberty, Saudi Arabia 9/11. Our presidents were friends with the attackers. We look like idiots to the rest of the world for attacking Iraq. Then, to top it all off, the guy we spent 10 years looking for (OBL) was hiding out in nuclear armed Pakistan of all places. The same nation leading our negotiations now. If we had half a gnats brain and the sagas they told us are correct wouldn’t Pakistan be the biggest existential threat to the US not Iran? A nation with no nuclear weapons at all and a religious fatwa made by the ayatollah we killed against it. Why did the brain trust in Washington and Tel Aviv think killing the elderly ayatollah was going to automatically topple a government from a nation over 300,000 years old with centuries since their last invasion?

[Anonymous]

I hope Iran trolls Trump even more and renames the Strait of Hormuz after donald Trump just to remind him of his failure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks.
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel.

If you can't define the words shia and sunni without looking, your ignorant opinion isn't interesting.

Dp. I’m a Sunni and I have theological issues with twelver Shiism.

I agree with the PP that the post was propaganda and that Israel is the problem.

DP here and as someone very well aware of the Sunni vs Shia debate in that region, the post was propaganda and completely absolved Israel of causing havoc in the Middle East. Israel is just frustrated it can no longer play the Sunni vs Shia card and that the people in the Middle
East are moving past the theological differences and emphasizing the need for cooperation.

That post didn’t absolve Israel of anything. It just pointed out a basic fact that everyone whose mind is not totally clouded by anti-semitism and/or TikTok foreign affairs influencers understands … that Iran is broadly hated in the ME.

So is Israel. At the moment, Iran is a more rational actor (I can't believe I am typing that) who is not in the middle of committing genocide, so why should anyone put the interests of Israel above their own, or that of Iran, for that matter.?

Iran has been the rational actor for years. They only respond to Israel’s and US’s aggression. You know how many proxies both Israel and US arm and let loose on Iran?

Apparently, you two geniuses are able to selectively "forget" the thousands of Iranian citizens who were recently murdered by the regime. Oh, and the three men who were hanged but had committed no crime. But yes - so rational, so moral.

You mean where Trump openly-admitted they sent weapons to protesters and that Mossad/israel admits to having agitators on the ground?

Can your stupid a$$ explain how it is that over a two year period and using the equivalent of 6 Nukes in Gaza which is far smaller than Iran, Israel killed "70,000," but Iran --from the ground in like two days---killed 40, 000? Explain how your brain processes such absolute rot.

[Anonymous]

So does Saudi Arabia want to restart the war because they're afraid the Iranians plan on spanking them in the future for muslim treachery... or do they want to get to a peace settlement so that their economy doesn't tank any more and their populace won't riot?

[Anonymous]

Anti-war protesters arrested in New York urging end to Israel weapon sales

300 Protesters Arrested Outside Schumer's NYC Office Over weapons Sale | VERTEX

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks.
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel.

If you can't define the words shia and sunni without looking, your ignorant opinion isn't interesting.

Dp. I’m a Sunni and I have theological issues with twelver Shiism.

I agree with the PP that the post was propaganda and that Israel is the problem.

DP here and as someone very well aware of the Sunni vs Shia debate in that region, the post was propaganda and completely absolved Israel of causing havoc in the Middle East. Israel is just frustrated it can no longer play the Sunni vs Shia card and that the people in the Middle
East are moving past the theological differences and emphasizing the need for cooperation.

That post didn’t absolve Israel of anything. It just pointed out a basic fact that everyone whose mind is not totally clouded by anti-semitism and/or TikTok foreign affairs influencers understands … that Iran is broadly hated in the ME.

Give it a rest, you amateur. Outside of the CORRUPT LEADERS who are all servile dogs of Isr whether paid to play nice w/ isr and turn against their brethren who are being slaughtered by isr (Jordan/Pakistan/Egypt) or even more pathetic, PAY to be servile losers (Gulf states), the majority of SUNNI Muslims are absolutely rooting for Iran.

And it's so ludicrous you condescendingly mention "TikTok influencers" as if "thinktanker" ZJs like Richard Haass and every other warmongering, decrepit, bloodthirsty loser like him who never saw bloodshed in the ME that didn't get them hard, have credibility on this subject. We've had to sit through years of racist, supremacist, Z monsters from these disgusting, Israel-First thinktanks like AEI/Foundation for Def. of Dem/Heritage/ Fed.Soc/blah/blah/blah, be a part of every god-damned roundtable discussion to talk about the MIDDLE EAST/MUSLIMS/ARABS. No one needs to hear the opinions of someone who is literally why the ME is f***ed. It's like inviting on a rapist or friend of a rapist to discuss the victim.