Hacker News Reader

Comment by DoctorOetker | Hacker News Reader

I'm explaining why a European holds this position, Iran approaching nuclear weapons capability, approaching ICBM launch capability, approaching re-entry vehicle capability is the "lebensraum" we shouldn't tolerate.

Watching from the sidelines disapprovingly, while benefiting in this sense from the US/Israeli mission objectives, and even being "willing to go as far as" effectively posing in a security theater role (since a single shot fired would imply abortion of the mission), wasting tax payer money on symbolic gestures, is what I protested.

But it matters little now, European countries are starting to turn around and think a little deeper than the b-hurt mentioned earlier.

View on HN

Lebensraum? Lebensraum is a very nice word. Israel has been the only country in this that is engaging in Lebensraum. Europe would have negative benefit in joining a stupid war created by fanatical Israeli and American governments.

I don't vouch for the incentives nor actions of Israel, I vouch for why a nonzero number of Europeans (including me) think Europe should get involved in disarming Iran, and prevent it from attaining the "lebensraum" to threaten Europe with nuclear weapons.

Why not? Then I should in WW2 times have said we must oppose jews and work our hardest to disarm jews and their defenders. Hitler did Lebensraum? I don't vouch for the incentives nor actions of Israel.

You seem to have some kind of hallucinatory issue where you see chemical weapons where there are none, and accuse a country that has never done and shown no signs of Lebensraum of doing so while completely ignoring the only country in that region actively doing Lebensraum.

If you worry about Lebensraum you should be working urgently to control and make toothless the only country thats actually doing Lebensraum, not live in made up stories with of your own making that have absolutely zero even speculative sense and getting scared off of them.

> Why not? Then I should in WW2 times have said we must oppose jews and work our hardest to disarm jews and their defenders. Hitler did Lebensraum? I don't vouch for the incentives nor actions of Israel.

I don't understand your argument?

> You seem to have some kind of hallucinatory issue where you see chemical weapons where there are none, and accuse a country that has never done and shown no signs of Lebensraum of doing so while completely ignoring the only country in that region actively doing Lebensraum.

If you believe such discussion would be fruitful I am more than willing to describe what I see when, and how I collate evidence and arrive at my conclusions. I did ask you if you watched the long multi-segment version of Mahsa Amini at the fashion police, or just a short one.

Also take note that anyone else reading along will think it strange that of all possible manners of dying you mentioned the right mode before I mentioned it to you, basically saying you also see it.

It seems you don't understand the concept of lebensraum, I'm not worried about European lebensraum you seem to be referring to: while we failed to learn our lesson after WW1, the mandatory education programmes after WW2 seem to have worked much better, and European nations haven't been lobbing chemical weapons at each other for roughly 100 years now, it works, and we know it works, we disapprove of Iran's regime, not because of their religion (there are muslims in the West as well), not because of skin tone, nor because of the oil under their feet, we disapprove of Iran's regime because we recognize our former collective selves (by education, since almost every direct witness has withered away by the passage of time).

I'm worried about Iran's concept of "lebensraum" involving the capability to threaten Europe with nuclear weapons. Yes Russia, Pakistan, India, China, ... can already do that. Our inability to disarm established nuclear powers should not be confused for acceptance of upcoming nuclear powers. If we can nip those in the bud, we could, we should and I assure you we will.

>I don't understand your argument?

Yes, you seem to be having some issue with your glasses or monitor today, so I will just write it again to make it clearer.

Israel is the only country in this conflict who has and is engaging in Lebensraum.

I think your problem with your monitor might cover a large swath of the screen so it is beneficial for me to repeat the key text a few more times, so that it has a better chance of getting past your screen's problems:

Israel is the only country in this conflict who has and is engaging in Lebensraum.

>Also take note that anyone else reading along will think it strange that of all possible manners of dying you mentioned the right mode before I mentioned it to you, basically saying you also see it.

That's because its the only logical reading of your brain machinations I can think of when seeing a video of a person fainting, when literally no other news in the world seems to say chemical weapons about her, even if it mentions chemical attacks on other people. Again, you have another weird thing where you feel a country would bring out obscure chemical war agents just to kill a single person. Chemical agents are for the battlefield to kill thousands of people. For a single person, any perfectly mundane poison or chemical is fine even if that were actually the case.

Who said anything about European Lebensraum?

Israel is ALREADY AND EXPLICITLY ENGAGING IN LEBENSRAUM. Israel is the only country doing lebensraum. Iran has shown no interest in Lebensraum. If you are so concerned about Lebensraum, go attack Israel and decapitate their military capabilities.

Both Iran and Israel are governed by religious fanaticism, if you wish to twist and redefine Lebensraum to be something ridiculous it clearly isn't then Israel is engaging in DOUBLE LEBENSRAUM, not just the original Hitleric definition of Lebensraum but also your completely made up imaginary definition of Lebensraum. Again, go launch a military campaign against Israel if you are so worried about that.

Since you love puzzles so much, I will give you a much better puzzle with clear objective answers. Tell me who said this quote, and whether the nations he mentioned have ever threatened his country:

"We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force."

It's Martin van Creveld, an Israeli military theorist and military historian.

To my knowledge European nations have never threatened his country, if you mean the modern state of Israel.

If you refer to the holocaust during WW2, then yes multiple European nations were collaborators and participated in the holocaust.

If you refer to earlier events, then also yes, there is a long history of persecution and Diaspora.

As I said, there are many nations that possess nuclear weapons, the non-proliferation treaties don't describe how to treat possessors of nuclear weapons, it describes agreements on how to prevent new nations from acquiring the capability.

Can you please tell me if you watched the long multi-segment video of the surveillance footage surrounding Mahsa Aminis death, or just the single scene of her collapse?

No, you first tell me. Why shouldn't Europe want to completely eliminate and contain Israel when Israeli government and Israeli agents say deranged things like this. Iran hasn't said they want to nuke every single European country. An Israeli did. Israel is engaging in Lebensraum. You accused Iran of Lebensraun. Iran never did Lebensraum. Israel does. You accuse Iran of threatening Europe with nukes. Iran never threatened Europe with nukes. Israel has threatened Europe with nukes. It is very clear who Europeans should neutralize.

A historian is not the government?

If European countries had to justify every utterance by European historians they'd be busy for a long time...

You just keep ignoring how non-proliferation works, if you find evidence that Israel is approaching nuclear weapons capabilities, approaching mature ICBM capabilities, and if you have evidence that they are not quite there yet, then YES nuclear powers should collaborate on neutralizing the threat. There is disagreement if we are or are not too late on North Korea, hence why many oppose attempting to disarm it. But in the case of Iran it's not too late yet.

All the nuclear superpowers essentially developed their capabilities in sufficient stealth to attain those powers.

This is basic real politik.

As I have stated elsewhere I find Iran and Israel not particularly better than either, and Israel worse in terms of psychotic unprovoked violence to others and things which the other parties they attacked have never done to Israel (poisoning other countries crops via plane!!). In that light, I will be frank, I don't mind Iran getting nukes. If Iran getting nukes puts a balance in the power differential and silences Israel's belligerence that would be a great achievement.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com