Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
Free speech and religious freedom mean jack shit to you. The Chinese Communist Party thinks like that too. Quit that "separate state from religion" bullshit. You can do whatever you want in America. Nobody forces you to have a religion. On the other hand, people that want to change the doctrines of millennia-old religions are the true authoritarians.
Larijani and Basij force chief are dead , at this rate all of the remaining top commanders are getting eliminated . Major W for Israel that ill definitely dent IRGC's moral. Lets see how it transpires .
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/live...lies-for-not-joining-strait-of-hormuz-mission
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/live...lies-for-not-joining-strait-of-hormuz-mission
anything right of radical liberalism for these people is right-wing, that isn't really true and it is visibly quite difficult for such ravenous people in here to look at figures like Trump, who even during his ideological peak in 2015, was not "right-wing" but more of an anti-globalist/populist/nationalist guy
in fact, in 2016 he did not even run as a Republican but an independant, and in the 90s he was a Democrat
hard for this forum to wrap their head around as well but many voters are middle of the road or single-issue voters, including many Trump voters who are not ideologically right-wing at all but middle of the road people who chose the candidate that was focused on 1 issue they dislike (say, with Trump, stopping immigration or ending the Ukraine war)
in fact, in 2016 he did not even run as a Republican but an independant, and in the 90s he was a Democrat
hard for this forum to wrap their head around as well but many voters are middle of the road or single-issue voters, including many Trump voters who are not ideologically right-wing at all but middle of the road people who chose the candidate that was focused on 1 issue they dislike (say, with Trump, stopping immigration or ending the Ukraine war)
The left is just hypocritical. While the Israel-Palestine and Ukraine-Russia wars were going on, there were literal massacres happening in non-Western nations, and nobody on the left said shit. China is literally persecuting Christians and Muslims and y'all worried about Trump not endorsing woke BS? Lmfao. You people are pathetic. Know who kills gay people? Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran.
Bolsonaro had multiple social democratic policies and left-wing opinions. They will label anyone that isn't part of their mafia as a "radical extremist right-wing." Now he is in jail for crimes that don't even exist in our penal code, and these people are celebrating that a "fascist" got jailed. If they had one drop of honesty, I would feel pity for their low iqs, but since they have proven multiple times that there are no morals in the left side of the political spectrum, I only feel disgust for these people. They are dumb and evil.
Asked Claude it gave open ended conclusion :
That's the big question everyone is asking. Let me pull together the latest analysis on what comes next.Honestly, nobody knows for sure, but the expert analysis clusters around a few possible trajectories. Here's how things look after today's developments:
The regime isn't collapsing — but it's being hollowed out
US intelligence assessments say Iran's regime will likely remain in place for now, but weakened and more hard-line, with the IRGC exerting greater control. The systematic killing of senior leaders — Khamenei, now Larijani, the Basij commander, the IRGC aerospace chief — is extraordinary, but the Islamic Republic was designed from the outset not to be merely the shadow of a single man. The constitution itself was drafted with the spectre of a power vacuum in mind.
That said, the regime may not fall, but it could emerge from this war exhausted and more closed in on itself — greater reliance on the IRGC, less space for politics, and a stronger inclination toward internal security contraction.
Three broad scenarios analysts are modelling:
First, the "1990s Iraq" outcome — the high-intensity military campaign ceases having degraded Iran's military capabilities, but without regime change. The US and Israel patrol Iran's skies and strike at will if Tehran tries to rebuild. CNN's analysis calls this the most likely scenario.
Second, regime collapse — but this is considered lower probability. Military analysts warn that without "boots on the ground" or a fully armed organic uprising, the state's deep security apparatus can survive simply by maintaining cohesion. And critically, there are no reports yet of significant security force defections or of urban areas falling outside government control — which would be the real signs of collapse.
Third, and perhaps most dangerous — the regime might collapse but be replaced by leaders even more repressive and less inclined to make concessions, or regime collapse could inaugurate a period of sustained conflict and political instability that would be difficult to contain within Iran's borders.
The wildcards right now:
The new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei still hasn't appeared publicly and may be injured. If he's dead or incapacitated, there's a genuine leadership vacuum. Another figure who could be running things behind the scenes is Ahmad Vahidi, the new IRGC leader, who was relatively unknown until December.
The Strait of Hormuz remains closed, oil prices are up 40%+, NATO allies are refusing to help reopen it, and the war is spreading — Israel just invaded southern Lebanon, Iraq is being hit, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are taking Iranian drone and missile strikes. Iran is aiming to increase economic pain to influence Trump to call the war short.
And there's a real tension between the US and Israeli objectives. Israel almost certainly has set regime collapse as a strategic objective, while Trump has been calling it a "short-term excursion." If a gap opens between those goals, Trump will likely be the one who decides when it ends.
The bottom line from one of the sharper analyses: this war may not end the regime, but it may end what remains of its flexibility. When regimes lose flexibility, they may prolong their life by force, but at the same time they begin a slow internal drain.
It's a genuinely uncertain situation — the kind where anyone claiming to know exactly what happens next is probably wrong.
That's the big question everyone is asking. Let me pull together the latest analysis on what comes next.Honestly, nobody knows for sure, but the expert analysis clusters around a few possible trajectories. Here's how things look after today's developments:
The regime isn't collapsing — but it's being hollowed out
US intelligence assessments say Iran's regime will likely remain in place for now, but weakened and more hard-line, with the IRGC exerting greater control. The systematic killing of senior leaders — Khamenei, now Larijani, the Basij commander, the IRGC aerospace chief — is extraordinary, but the Islamic Republic was designed from the outset not to be merely the shadow of a single man. The constitution itself was drafted with the spectre of a power vacuum in mind.
That said, the regime may not fall, but it could emerge from this war exhausted and more closed in on itself — greater reliance on the IRGC, less space for politics, and a stronger inclination toward internal security contraction.
Three broad scenarios analysts are modelling:
First, the "1990s Iraq" outcome — the high-intensity military campaign ceases having degraded Iran's military capabilities, but without regime change. The US and Israel patrol Iran's skies and strike at will if Tehran tries to rebuild. CNN's analysis calls this the most likely scenario.
Second, regime collapse — but this is considered lower probability. Military analysts warn that without "boots on the ground" or a fully armed organic uprising, the state's deep security apparatus can survive simply by maintaining cohesion. And critically, there are no reports yet of significant security force defections or of urban areas falling outside government control — which would be the real signs of collapse.
Third, and perhaps most dangerous — the regime might collapse but be replaced by leaders even more repressive and less inclined to make concessions, or regime collapse could inaugurate a period of sustained conflict and political instability that would be difficult to contain within Iran's borders.
The wildcards right now:
The new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei still hasn't appeared publicly and may be injured. If he's dead or incapacitated, there's a genuine leadership vacuum. Another figure who could be running things behind the scenes is Ahmad Vahidi, the new IRGC leader, who was relatively unknown until December.
The Strait of Hormuz remains closed, oil prices are up 40%+, NATO allies are refusing to help reopen it, and the war is spreading — Israel just invaded southern Lebanon, Iraq is being hit, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are taking Iranian drone and missile strikes. Iran is aiming to increase economic pain to influence Trump to call the war short.
And there's a real tension between the US and Israeli objectives. Israel almost certainly has set regime collapse as a strategic objective, while Trump has been calling it a "short-term excursion." If a gap opens between those goals, Trump will likely be the one who decides when it ends.
The bottom line from one of the sharper analyses: this war may not end the regime, but it may end what remains of its flexibility. When regimes lose flexibility, they may prolong their life by force, but at the same time they begin a slow internal drain.
It's a genuinely uncertain situation — the kind where anyone claiming to know exactly what happens next is probably wrong.
As expected from someone who happily advocates for millions to be killed yet accuses others of being morally compromised.
All these ramblings and whataboutism from you has nothing to do with what I said. China, Iran, Communism etc. is completely irrelevant to what I said. My words were direct and to the point.
Pretty much and more. His communist rants is completely irrelevant what I said.
All these ramblings and whataboutism from you has nothing to do with what I said. China, Iran, Communism etc. is completely irrelevant to what I said. My words were direct and to the point.
Pretty much and more. His communist rants is completely irrelevant what I said.
@RyoQ
This book here sums up this phenomena perfectly. It's psychopaths radicalizing hysterical individuals.
https://www.amazon.com/Political-Ponerology-Science-Psychopathy-Totalitarianism-ebook/dp/B09VZBYS34
Too bad most left-wingers only smell their own fart and never indulge in self-criticism.
This book here sums up this phenomena perfectly. It's psychopaths radicalizing hysterical individuals.
https://www.amazon.com/Political-Ponerology-Science-Psychopathy-Totalitarianism-ebook/dp/B09VZBYS34
Too bad most left-wingers only smell their own fart and never indulge in self-criticism.
Last edited: