Monday, March 2, 2026

this should not happen and i would call on americans to mobilize to stop it.

at
Location:
this is toronto recently.



at
Location:
the reality is that opposition to these strikes is likely to find little support in canada, and it is because of the high immigrant population here, not in spite of it.
at
Location:
what is canada's position on iran?

1) canada has a large iranian diaspora that supports the strikes by the united states more than our government does, which is awkward. while mostly white fake left americans are protesting the american attacks, iranian-canadians are dancing in the streets. it's actually a pretty stark contrast. most of these voters are far more liberal than arab voters, but the demographic is also up for grabs. it's also a relatively wealthy diaspora that contributes substantively to political campaigns. it follows that smart politicians in canada need to be careful that they don't alienate iranian voters by condemning the attacks or standing up for the regime.

2) anti-israeli politicians have been extremely unsuccessful in canada, going back to the social credit collapse.

3) canada is a major oil producer and benefits from supply disruptions.

4) however, canada also benefits from what it calls international law, which is not written anywhere, and cannot be enforced with any meaning.

it follows that canada is forced into blatant hypocrisy, in supporting the strikes because they are popular amongst iranian-canadians, while trying to balance threats of us hegemony it perceives as aimed at itself.

canada actually has an opportunity to propose reforms to the international order, but it isn't doing it, because it's being driven by cynicism from both sides of it's ass. it should be. it should be arguing in favour of rules that allow for this kind of intervention when it is justified, to dismantle states that are willing to slaughter their own people by the thousands at a time, which i would argue includes ukraine.

taking the initiative to write new rules of intervention that clarify when and how intervention can happen when it should, and it should, is a more principled position than canada is currently taking, or appears willing to take.

sovereignty is not the same thing as self-determination, and is a stupid idea in the global integration of the 21st century.
at
Location:
i have been unable to get "circular materials" to confirm they are recycling even #1 or #2 plastic.

they probably aren't.
at
Location:
if recyclers won't actually recycle plastic, even though they can, and laws should exist forcing them to (even at a financial loss) that our political class won't legislate because they're corrupt, manufacturers should focus on more glass production, and consumers should take note of it.

they will recycle glass and metal.
at
Location:
the french should not be building more nuclear weapons, and they should be economically sanctioned and isolated if they insist on it.

at
Location:
hey, if the iranians want to weaken the saudis a little on their way down, that's just gravy.

let the fascists kill each other.

great!
at
Location:
the united states should not negotiate with iranian leadership, and time is of the essence in ridding the planet of the regime.
at
Location:
the americans are not doing this for the reasons i'm suggesting, but i don't care why the americans are doing this, and if it blows up in america's face, that's irrelevant to me. i am not supporting these strikes because i care about american security, even if i agree that it will advance it. the destruction of iranian fascism is a necessary precondition to advance socialism in the area, and if america can be used as a blunt implement for that reason, socialists should support that. the overthrow of fascism cannot be done peacefully, as was just demonstrated in iran.

i understand that the americans just want the oil.

that is of no relevance to my calculations.
at
Location:
libya should be remembered as the larger blunder than iraq, but fake leftist hypocrites run the media.

iraq was moral, but stupid.

libya was both immoral and stupid.

iran might be immoral if judged solely by the administration's motives, but i don't think it's stupid, and it might work, despite being immoral, because it's not stupid. we'll see if it works.

....and it's worth remembering that afghanistan was a united nations isaf mission to install a government and not a regime change operation. really, libya is overdue for the same kind of un mission that afghanistan saw.

arming the kurds to fight isis, and fighting isis directly, was both moral and not stupid.

immoral stupid
libya ✓ ✓
iraq X ✓
iran ✓ X
isis X X
at
Location:
lebanon, for example, is frustrating. the lebanese are not extremists, they are secularists and want democracy, and they want to rid themselves of the plague of hezbollah, and of being colonized by shiite muslims. however, they refuse to fight to assert their self-determination. an attack like this would not be successful in lebanon and should be avoided, even if the israelis have no choice but to keep degrading hezbollah as much as possible.

turkey would be a good candidate for regime change but the dynamics are more complicated and this is unlikely to be a realistic policy decision.

an operation like this might work in dismantling the new fascist regime in syria, which replaces a moderate one, which fell in a moment of poor decision making by the russians. it was a mistake for the russians to let syria fall. however, syria will need time to build the kind of serious democratic opposition to fascism that already exists in iran, after 45 years of resistance. the situation in syria for many years was such that socialists and secularists did not mobilize because it was more strategic to back the assad government as a lesser evil, as they were fighting the islamists. now, syria will need to build a resistance against fascism. that resistance should be supported when it develops.

there is currently no substantive resistance against the fascist saudi arabian monarchy to support. the resistance in egypt and algeria needs to be rebuilt. libya was one of the most progressive states in the region before it was attacked by a psychotic lunatic named hillary clinton that sadly destroyed it. there is no resistance left to support because the americans destroyed it. it will need to develop as well.

in iran, there is a resistance and there is revolutionary potential. the conditions are met for revolutionary overthrow, and the international order should support that revolutionary overthrow or itself be reformed so that it does.
at
Location:
sovereignty has no value in an interconnected world and is foolishness masquerading as principle. democracy is valuable and is worth the use of force to implement.

iraq was stupid because it was obvious that it wasn't going to work, not because it infringed on some moral principle. from a purely moral perspective, iraq should have been obliterated, and there remain a number of countries in the region that ought to collapse or be collapsed. it just had no chance of success because iraq is a deeply conservative society that wanted more religion and not less of it. 

there's a good chance that this might work in iran and if it does work in iran it should be repeated in other states that it would have a high likelihood of success in, although there are few of them. iran is actually almost unique in that sense.

if the guardian claims that revulsion with the iranian regime is not a justification for force, i disagree. some level of tolerance for people different than you is perhaps required in this world, but slaughtering tens of thousands of your own civilians is not something that can or should be tolerated.

the international order needs to be reformed to ensure that states that act like iran are held accountable by it. 

at
Location:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)