limonfiesta

deleted by creator

I’ve heard many different explanations for the differences, the simplest being the older generation were more moderate and the younger more hardline.

But I think that’s oversimplifying it.

One of the more compelling explanations I’ve heard from an Irianan academic is the difference in the wars each generation of leaders were forged in.

Basically his explanation states that the older generation were veterans of the Iran-Iraq war, which was the largest conventional war since WW2.

And that was the lens they viewed a potential conflict with America through, purely conventional.

Whereas the new generation were forged in Iraq and Syria, fighting with asymmetrical warfare.

Note that this war, while not quite over, has been waged mostly asymmetrically.

Sure, they used their conventional forces to attack America’s conventional forces, but their primary thrust was exerting asymmetric economic pressure through oil and gas infrastructure and closing off the straight.

I’m looking forward to reading the historical accounts of this conflict in the hopefully not too distant future.

A plan did exist, and it was serving the interest of the American Empire quite well.

Iran was effectively contained and economically suppressed by America and its Epstein class allies in the GCC and Israel.

But that plan was successful in part because of the conflict adverse posture of the Iranian leadership.

So when they were all killed, that plan went poof.

Whoopsie daisy.

Now we have no plan.

First off, that would be awesome. I stupidly never saved any of my old freedom fries receipts, and I’ve always regretted that.

Unfortunately for me, our societies relationship with our political system is so radically different from the early 2000s, that I don’t think that specific type of cultural short circuit is possible.

It’s the Italian bureaucracy, I think it’s safe to assume pettiness is the chief motivating factor here.

I’ll take it, don’t get me wrong, but let’s not get it twisted.

It hard to replace currency with a speculative commodity.

So we’re simping for Orban now?

Garbage source for a garbage story that’s trying to provide political cover for a garbage human being.

Because everyone implicated here isn’t just still in power, they’ve been in power for a long time.

Lest we forget that the Biden administration had these files as well. Why do you think they didn’t pursue them?

MIC entities are always legitimate targets.

This is real.

I welded the cages myself, but then I got FPV’d

RIP me.

It is pretty wild to just watch Microsoft voluntarily and aggressively piss away the core product that brought them all their success, and that is still critical to their future success.

It’s called used car salesman chic.

Just because I’m pointing out just some of the deeply unjust and inherent flaws in your proposal, doesn’t mean it’s spin.

You realize that you’re not making these arguments on a libertarian forum, right?

The vast majority of us here are left wing and not inherently opposed to the concept of government or regulation, yet the vast majority of us here seem very much opposed to your ideas.

Just some food for thought.

Yes, all adults.

Unless you’re proposing that these people on your offender lists are only allowed to date other offenders.

You are saying that person B is not allowed to date person A, even if both adults consent to enter a relationship, because one of those parties can be sent to jail for the crime of entering into a private consensual adult relationship.

Ergo, you have removed the ability of both parties to have a mutually consensual relationship of their choosing.

You haven’t even left the confines of Lemmy, and you’re already running headfirst into unintended consequences.

Every one of your replies simply adds rhetorical flair to my assertion that you are proposing the government should have regulatory power over the rights of adults to engage in private consensual relationships, which would be handled by the criminal legal system.

The state has different obligations to protect children than they do adults. Which is why we have things like drinking age laws and legal concepts such as in loco parentis.

You are completely removing the agency of adults to make their own choices, and instead, inserting the government into those relationships, under the penalty of incarceration and government sanctioned violence, for the crime of having an unauthorized interpersonal consensual relationship between two adults.

And that’s only taking your proposal at face value and ignoring the plethora of unintended consequences, such as perverse political incentives and privatization.

they should be disallowed from participating in a close, intimate relationship

The legal mechanisms required to enforce that would be some form of government permission and approval structure, such as licensing.

No amount of rhetorical flourish can get away from what they are essentially presenting, which is requiring government permission for interpersonal relationships.

How would the government track an individuals approval for personal private relationships?

How would the government enforce penalties on private citizens who engaged in an unauthorized private relationships?

And then we get to some fun questions, like what happens if the government privatizes the relationship approval system that OP is proposing?

Plenty of people that commit certain crimes have conditions for re-entering society in whole and I don’t think what I’m suggesting is unreasonable.

You are suggesting government issued licenses/permission for private people to engage in private relationships.

You could have just said yes.

Are you proposing that people should have to obtain a government-issued licenses for private interpersonal relationships?