Iran Reportedly Warns Apple is Among Potential Targets

[IIGS User]

I am always intrigued to read an American's logic when it comes to government affairs. Europeans speak with largely one voice, America has gone mad, the leadership has thrown international law, domestic law and convention out of the window at the say so of a babbling idiot. This is largely England's position, we feel sorry for America and the sabotage on their respectability.

So I read your logic and try to picture how do you get to the position where it America is the good guy in this?

When we look at the invasions of others countries around the world in the last few decades, Vietnam, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Korea, Greenland. It is clear that America is an aggressor. What has Iran done? Funded some groups that don't like Israel, had a big fight with Iraq. There is no evidence that they would behave any worse than America or Israel.
On Day zero, America started an unprovoked, illegal in domestic law, war. Everything after that, Diego Garcia, Qatar, UAE, Straits of Hormuz was consequence, not evidence.

Do we like Iran's treatment of its citizens? Obviously not, they are at least as bad as ICE maybe even worse! But who cares? We in the west live in relative freedom, we are the minority, most countries oppress, to some degree, their citizens, should we invade them all? Of course not.

Geeze Louise let's just cut to the chase, say Trump is Adolph Hitler and call it a day here. "at least as bad as ICE, maybe even worse". That speaks volumes about your viewpoint.

There is no comparing ICE to the human rights situation in Iran. The two simply aren't on the same page period.

Iran kills protesters BY THE THOUSANDS. Over a 1,000 people were sentenced to death and executed in Iran in the past year. And not for murder, but for what would be petit drug charges in the West, or simply going against the Mullahs.

Women's rights are essentially non existent in Iran right now. The "morality police" beat women for not wearing the hijab.

LGBTQ+ people are routinely beaten, jailed, and can receive the death penalty for male/male relationships. Again, this is where your "morality police" come in.

Don't misinterpret what I'm saying. I'm not saying human rights violations in Iran justify a war. I'm not saying I don't have issue with how ICE operates in the US. I'm not saying I'm a fan or a supporter of this war. I simply stated I understood the basic logic behind it.

You state "most countries, oppress to some degree, their citizens".

Iran is clearly in a whole other league here, and I think you're either reaching, or showing bias by trying to compare ICE in the US to human rights violations in Iran. There simply is no comparison.

 

[Artemiz]

Again, no one is defending the Iran regime here. But there are lots of terrible regimes out there. We don't go to war with all of them. Especially ones in geopolitical critical areas that impact the world economy, when they pose no imminent threat to the United States, without (apparently) stopping to consider what the ramifications of going to war and that Iran might use every level to retaliate.

That’s the playbook for the right.

Blame Netanyahu for starving children and you’re an antisemite.
Criticize needless wars without an actual plan or a thought about consequences, and you’re defending Iran regime.

One look at their arguments objectively and they’d know how funny and nonsensical they sound. They don’t have a proper argument without getting defensive.

 

[siddavis]

Seriously? The US attacks Iran and you don't expect Iran to use all the leverage it has? Of course this is terrorism and despicable on the part of Iran but this is also expected of Iran. Iran has been sponsoring terrorism for decades but apparently the world leaders thought (before Trump) that the terrorism was small scale enough to not be worth the fallout from a full-scale war. The US should have known and planned for this, if they didn't then this is a result of the US choosing to wage war on Iran.

(my emphasis)
Seriously? Iran has been attacking the world for decades - your words - and you don't expect a response? The world leaders have been wrong. Actually, they always verbalized the threat, but were too cowardly to do anything about it.

 

[Zenman12]

This war, as currently sold, won't work. It won't topple the regime, it wont result in them never posing a threat in the future, and it wont stop them pursuing a nuclear weapon.

If you really believe war and regime change are the only way to stop Iran then that is going to mean a long protracted war with American boots on the ground and actually doing the hard work to go in and secure the country...

The war (as it is currently being sold) as short easy thing with minimal casualties, is not going to work (~is very very unlikely to work long term but I've been surprised before)

You want me to believe that you are stopping the bad guy from doing bad things, you aren't unless you actually go in and make sure there aren't anymore bad guys running the country. You aren't going to do that with air strikes.

Quickly becoming my favorite guy (or girl) on here, bcortens.

I don't think the war as currently pitched will ultimately stop them, it may slow them down, but unless you actually topple the regime and have a friendly one in place it won't stop them. I don't think they are going to be successful in toppling the regime without boots on the ground.

Though I wouldn't rule out a coup from within that coddles up to the US but leaves the country still under the control of corrupt authoritarians (I still think this is unlikely).



I think they always had the incentive but this makes it a more pressing concern, they have more incentive now than previously and they are likely to be even more secretive and put their facilities deeper underground due to this war.

It is the fault of the US for making them want to be more terroristy because if you only wound them they are going to view additional levels of terror and nuclear weapon acquisition as the only way to avoid being attacked by the US.

The US (IMO) either has to fully go in and take control or it will have to resign itself to a terrorist Iran and even a nuclear Iran at some point in the future.

Half-ass measures are arguably the worst thing you can do.

Do enough damage to encourage nuclear development due to death and destruction, at best “setting them back (won’t know for sure),” but not enough to actually end the regime which is what would be required to truly end any nuclear aspirations. Want an easy war that doesn’t require the sacrifice, blood, sweat, tears, gold, but want to make sure you’re going to prevent nuclear proliferation instead of kicking the can down the road.

Madness.

 

[BaldiMac]

Yes, this action will result in a more peaceful world overall. Neutering a state sponsor of terror will have that effect.

Or it will inspire a new generation of terrorists who watched the US break its word, invade, and threaten war crimes.

 

[steve62388]

Yes, this action will result in a more peaceful world overall. Neutering a state sponsor of terror will have that effect.

1. You haven’t done that yet, and I’d question whether you’re really even capable of doing so. At this point in time all you’ve done is shown that the much vaunted American military’s capabilities are actually very limited, and that Iran is capable of upheaving the world economy by disrupting the Straits of Hormuz. On balance I would say you’ve strengthened Iran’s hand. All they have to do to win is survive, and they’re doing a pretty good job job of that at the moment.

2. How did that turn out in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan for you?

 

[jon9091]

Yes, this action will result in a more peaceful world overall. Neutering a state sponsor of terror will have that effect.

Interesting. It was Saudi terrorists that attacked the twin towers on 9/11. So does allowing them to take over the PGA count as neutering?

 

[bcortens]

(my emphasis)
Seriously? Iran has been attacking the world for decades - your words - and you don't expect a response? The world leaders have been wrong. Actually, they always verbalized the threat, but were too cowardly to do anything about it.

The point I was making is that Iran is a terrorist state and if you attack a terrorist state they aren't going to suddenly stop doing terrorism and will in fact escalate it. That's the expected outcome. So if the US attacks the terrorist state they better have a plan to deal with that escalation or else they (the US) are at least partially responsible for the escalation. The world had (based on their collective lack of action) decided that the low level terrorism of Iran was acceptable due to the much larger downside of waging the war required to actually replace the regime.

Don't get me wrong, I think a lot of the incentives in globalized politics are pretty bad and that the idea that trade will somehow make everyone friends has been proven false over time. I think there are lots of horrible countries that we should do more to deal with but it is very very very hard to come up with a plan that won't just make things worse.

That doesn't mean I think this war, as currently conceived, will actually solve anything. Nor is it clear that even if the US took over Iran that 20 years from now they wouldn't pull out and just leave the IRGC or its successor in charge again (see Afghanistan).

 

[Banan911]

Yes let’s get mad at our own leadership

Tell me you’re US American without saying you’re US American.

Only US Americans think they’re the center of the world and alone in the room like this. The main character syndrome is very strong. First of all. It isn’t only US Americans use MacRumors. Secondly the rest of the world despise your administration. We don’t wanna be associated with any of this.

God forbid we assist real liberals in Iran who are being slaughtered by the 10s of thousands, simply for speaking up. The real liberals have their lives on the line, they are fighting real oppression. They took to the streets because their regime had them starving with no food and limited water. They would pray to live in existence where their biggest fear was a $1 rise in the price of gasoline for a few months.

Do you really think Trump or Israel went to war with Iran to protect women’s rights. That’s very cute.

 

[ForkHandles]

Geeze Louise let's just cut to the chase, say Trump is Adolph Hitler and call it a day here. "at least as bad as ICE, maybe even worse". That speaks volumes about your viewpoint.

There is no comparing ICE to the human rights situation in Iran. The two simply aren't on the same page period.

Iran kills protesters BY THE THOUSANDS. Over a 1,000 people were sentenced to death and executed in Iran in the past year. And not for murder, but for what would be petit drug charges in the West, or simply going against the Mullahs.

Women's rights are essentially non existent in Iran right now. The "morality police" beat women for not wearing the hijab.

LGBTQ+ people are routinely beaten, jailed, and can receive the death penalty for male/male relationships. Again, this is where your "morality police" come in.

Don't misinterpret what I'm saying. I'm not saying human rights violations in Iran justify a war. I'm not saying I don't have issue with how ICE operates in the US. I'm not saying I'm a fan or a supporter of this war. I simply stated I understood the basic logic behind it.

You state "most countries, oppress to some degree, their citizens".

Iran is clearly in a whole other league here, and I think you're either reaching, or showing bias by trying to compare ICE in the US to human rights violations in Iran. There simply is no comparison.

Iran, Korea, Russia, Eritrea, Afghanistan. The list goes on. All as bad as each other.

The ice part was tongue in cheek. That might not have come across, though kidnap, abduction of minors, theft and illegal detention, murders are a bit naughty.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Yes let’s get mad at our own leadership rather than the regime that is targeting ships belonging to various non involved third party countries, causing fuel prices to surge. And let’s post this sentiment on a story about a regime threatening corporations rather than military targets. Let’s not focus our anger at pure unhidden, direct in your face terrorism.

Next thing you are going to tell us is that it’s the women’s fault in Iran for getting assaulted because they didn’t wear their face cover. Same exact logic.

I am liberal, but this hijacking of the democratic party by people who are constantly on the side of the worst human rights violating dictators, has got to go. It’s super bizarre to see Americans calling themselves liberals, marching on the streets against real liberals from other countries who are fighting for the families and friends back home to have a chance at freedom. You know darn well something super bizarre is going on and folks are being manipulated, when a literal Nobel Peace Prize winning liberal is battling against American liberals with factory printed signs.

God forbid gas prices are temporarily the same price as they were 4 years ago. God forbid we assist real liberals in Iran who are being slaughtered by the 10s of thousands, simply for speaking up. The real liberals have their lives on the line, they are fighting real oppression. They took to the streets because their regime had them starving with no food and limited water. They would pray to live in existence where their biggest fear was a $1 rise in the price of gasoline for a few months.

Well yes "Yes let’s get mad at our own leadership rather than the regime that is targeting ships" when our own leadership was what started this unnecessary war.

 

[Tim Jobs the 2nd]

Tell me you’re US American without saying you’re US American.

Only US Americans think they’re the center of the world and alone in the room like this. The main character syndrome is very strong. First of all. It isn’t only US Americans use MacRumors. Secondly the rest of the world despise your administration. We don’t wanna be associated with any of this.

Xenophobia is a bad thing.

 

[Artemiz]

Interesting. It was Saudi terrorists that attacked the twin towers on 9/11. So does allowing them to take over the PGA count as neutering?

Nope! He’s neutering them by pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars the last few years.

 

[Tim Jobs the 2nd]

Do you really think Trump or Israel went to war with Iran to protect women’s rights. That’s very cute.

The leaders of Iran are the only ones who treat women like property and give them basically no rights. That doesn't happen in America or Israel.

 

[jon9091]

Nope! He’s neutering them by pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars the last few years.

More like Billions…

 

[Artemiz]

Your friends in Iran are the only ones who treat women like property and give them basically no rights. That doesn't happen in America or Israel.

Says the side who’s literally trying to take away a woman’s right to vote.

 

[TruthAboveAllElse]

Appearances and religious affiliations aside, this can be said about a vast majority of governments, including the US. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That’s a false equivalence.

 

[jon9091]

Yes let’s get mad at our own leadership rather than the regime that is targeting ships belonging to various non involved third party countries, causing fuel prices to surge. And let’s post this sentiment on a story about a regime threatening corporations rather than military targets. Let’s not focus our anger at pure unhidden, direct in your face terrorism.

They weren’t targeting ships until they were attacked. Now…tell us how you feel about the US indiscriminately attacking boats from Venezuela?

 

[Allen_Wentz]

I guess you haven't heard of ballistic missiles... or assassination attempts or plots... or "death to America"... or Iran's allies and who they fund... and on and on.
Also, by this logic, we should only wait until the capabilities are built up to the point where a lot of blood would most certainly be shed in fighting these radical lunatics. It is logic like this that actually makes wars worse than they should be.

You are correct that the world is an unsafe place (duh). But starting an unnecessary war was not the way to make it safer. Every analyst predicted the stupid pickle the USA is now in. You do recall the previous (reported as effective by Trump) bombings, right?

 

[ArrayDecay]

Donald Trump: the Gil Amelio of American presidents.

 

[steve62388]

(my emphasis)
Seriously? Iran has been attacking the world for decades - your words - and you don't expect a response? The world leaders have been wrong. Actually, they always verbalized the threat, but were too cowardly to do anything about it.

Remind me how many countries Iran has invaded since the formation of the Islamic Republic, and how many the United States has?

 

[rafark]

Had to be done. Short term pain for long term peace & gain.

What had to be done? Iran wasn’t an aggressor and was attacked in the middle of negotiations.

 

[RemedyRabbit]

Gas prices were higher at times during Biden's term but the media and liberals were silent about it.

So higher gas prices are ok?

 

[klasma]

Stopping them from having nuclear weapons is a colossal mistake?

This war is highly unlikely to achieve that goal unless you mount a full-scale invasion. The closest we were from preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons is when there was a treaty and continuous inspections by the IAEA. We are now farther away than ever from that.

 

[jon9091]

Trump’s rating are in the toilet. That’s why he attacked Iran. He was “advised” that this war would unite the American people behind him as it did for Bush. In reality, he’s handing both The House and The Senate to the Democrats.