Iran threatens 'complete and utter annihilation' of OpenAI's $30B Stargate
tomshardware.com
tomshardware.com
I'm of the opinion that while e.g. xAI is in a pump game, OpenAI is at least trying to make money. But even if they're not, even if the DCs are as you say "a financial/political vehicle to pump the markets", they can still be physically real things.
That said, I have no idea how close to complete the Stargate UAE site is.
At the very least dangle a shiny gold ball tickling trophy in his eyeline to briefly gain attention.
not sure what the point of this propaganda is?
ukraine doesn't shoot rockets at appartments.
hitting (dual use) energy infrastructure is a completely different level then targeting civilian homes.
Nevertheless, this is the one of the vanishingly few conflicts where there is a good guy and a bad guy. Sometimes the universe gives us a break from endless grey areas. This is one of those!
If you find the idea of an autonomous sovereign state defending it's borders 'triggering' I might suggest some soothing jazz and a warm milk.
All the best
And the reason is not just rules of engagement - such targets simply have negative value for attacker.
From the armchair perspective, these sorts of strikes are exactly what I'd imagine that China is advocating for behind closed doors. A few well-placed drone strikes can cause more economic damage than any SAM shootdown or embassy attack could, tactically accelerating the war and strategically entrenching Chinese technology.
But I must be missing something.
Idk what you are missing... maybe that people don't want to be killed and try to implement strategies to not get killed?
"The roaming of the Islamic Republic's proxies in Iran; entry of "Zainabiyoun" of Pakistan after "Hashd al-Shaabi" of Iraq and "Fatemiyoun" of Afghanistan
Reports of the presence of forces affiliated with the Zainabiyoun Division of Pakistan have been published in various areas of Sistan and Baluchestan province."
It's the same fatalistic mentality as in Russia. They don't give a shit. They almost enjoy suffering as it's part of their ethos.
We actually have no idea who's in charge of Iran (the stated ruler has yet to be seen and probably was severely injured in the same blast that killed Khamenei), but it's a pretty good bet that they are even more extreme and hard-line than before.
We've shown that Iran has complete and total control over the global economy via energy markets.
Every other country in the region wants Iran gone. Or to put it in more direct terms, the US kind of needs to "finish the job".
If we back down now, Iran wins, and that may actually be the worst possible situation to end up in.
To everyone who voted for Trump ... YOU VOTED FOR THIS. THANKS.
You might have not voted for Trump, but you sure agree with him on that "finish the job". So... thanks?
> If we back down now, Iran wins...
How about some radical change and we just let them win and negotiate some better deal for us?
This conflict was obvious and inevitable (and called out by literally anyone with half a brain) and exactly what every single one of them voted for. Don’t ever let them pretend otherwise.
But who knows, if you take Trump’s incompetence, plus the possibility of global economic collapse, plus the possibility of global food shortages, we just might see it.
The only question is which country he's hurting more, the US or Iran.
Completely overplayed. Epstein (and fiends) will be the cause of more mass slaughter, starting with a school full of little girls. Of course, little girls.
The world is being run by a gang of narcissistic, sociopathic fiends thanks to all the idiots who fell for their racist, misogynist, nationalist, religious fanaticism.
Buddhist leader Daisaku Ikeda:
To end the human institution of war, to relegate it to history with such barbarous practices as slavery―at one time also considered a natural, inevitable, “part of human nature”―we must establish respect for the inviolable dignity of human life as the core value of our age.
Every war, when viewed from the undistorted perspective of life’s sanctity, is a “civil war” waged by humanity against itself.
Still, the fact that the US can kill people without any cost because they send drones to do it doesn't sit well with me at all.
Also: Azov battalion.
Was a direct result of russian invasion in 2014. Also not a government sponsored terrorist organization.
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Russia's economy and military have been flogged by their war in a way America's has not. Moreover, we have midterms this year and a Presidential election in 2. Moscow has no similar 'fuck it' exit option.
The two powers have wildly different militaries and strategies. Comparing body counts is never gonna be a super helpful metric by itself.
Russia's military power has been vastly diminished by its war. If America committed to a ground invasion and then stuck with it through the next President, yes, we'd probably see similar degradation of American martial ability over years.
> two powers have wildly different militaries and strategies. Comparing body counts is never gonna be a super helpful metric by itself
Agree. But it does point to the extent to which one system will go to reduce loss of life.
No, we're not. It's bad. But it's nothing compared to Russia.
No. I'm calling out bullshit. If someone says Bob is a terrorist, and I say no, Bob is not a terrorist, I'm not damning Bob "with faint praise" by calling out a nonsense comparison.
There is plenty bad America is doing and threatening in this war. We don't need word games to discuss them adultly.
It hasn't happened. The narrative of Iran being a funder of terrorism is essentially bullshit, particularly in relation to America, and no less in relation to Israel (a state founded on acts of terrorism against the British and Palestinians.)
It's a fools errand, especially on Hypocrisy News, a politer version of Reddit.
...anyway... Seriously bros, this is a war where one side is making wildly inflammatory, specific and credible threats against the civilian infrastructure of the other and this is a response to that, hardly even a response in kind. If they strike these assets it will cause financial burden for rich people, not plunge millions of civilians into darkness as the POTUS is credibly threatening to do.
Iranian attacks on US soil: Fuck all! So why is America fighting Iran? Insane ziofascist cultists picking fights on the other side of the planet to provoke the Apocalypse so they can all be raptured to paradise. (Translation: boomers are getting old and they want to see burning flesh one more time before they die.)
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-live-hegseth-and...
> In a Truth Social post on March 30, Trump warned that the U.S. would obliterate "all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet 'touched.'"
AFAIK there is no exemption that says it is OK to commit war crimes if the other side does.
If attacking power plants and oil production is a war crime, then Russia, Ukraine, and many other countries are guilty of it.
Of course not, but I still think the expectation that someone doesn't commit war crimes against you disappears relatively quickly when you're openly and proudly admitting you'll open to violating the rules of war and saying international humanitarian law doesn't matter.
It's Iran. They haven't been following international law since 1979. That isn't an excuse to commit war crimes against them. But Iran really doesn't have any legs to stand on when it comes to complaining about targeting civilian infrastructure–they and their proxies have been doing this for decades.
History doesn't start in 1979. Why not go back to 1953? Overthrowing another country's elected government is no more conscionable under international law.
Nobody said you can't. I don't think the point is undermined. Neither the U.S. nor Iran have shown any consistent affection for international law.
Stubbing one's toe and complaining "both sides" - the pebble and me.
Complaining I am being hit back because I hit first, does not elicit support. Especially, when one is less than forthcoming about who made the move on a sovereign country first. Made a move just because that country had resources you are interested in.
If you want the resource then buy it. Norway nationalised it's oil, Iran had equal sovereign right to do so.
You and I agree on many things. This one is not one of them.
Trying to disentangle who did what first in the Middle East is a fool's errand. Practically any living human can trace descendence to someone who was harmed by any other group in that region because that's where the first civilisation was born and almost every one after it had cause for crossroads.
> Complaining I am being hit back because I hit first, does not elicit support
If one dude stabs another, they're at fault. If that dude stabs the first one back, I'm sympathetic to their cause of action but not how they prosecuted it.
> Norway nationalised it's oil, Iran had equal sovereign right to do so
If Iran nationalised its oil and then didn't go on a vendetta against Israel, together with various spawned proxy groups dotting the region, every one of their neighbors wouldn't be standing by today while they get pummeled.
Not at all and we are talking Iran not ME in general. Your sentence recalls to the mind that famous quote by Upton Sinclair about self imposed lack of comprehension.
It's ridiculous to think of a just prosecution when only one side is held accountable and the other gets hegemony enforced immunity.
When Iran nationalised their oil US used a military coup to upend their parliamentary democracy and place a puppet dictator in place, who among other things ran torture camps for dissenters. Iran's action are a retaliation against US and its proxies who have meddled and attacked Iran's sovereign destiny and financial health.
CNN: Trump threatens Iran ahead of deadline: "A whole civilization will die tonight" (speaking about 92 million people)
Sort of? I don't think that's really how war crimes work. Unless we're objectively in eye-for-an-eye territory, in which case we're not really talking about international law anymore. (To be clear, I think everyone talking about international law in this conflict is posturing. We've been collectively setting new norms for years, and between Russia, China and America, the rules seem to have inched closer to total war.)
Or threatening some water facility in a country with functioning air defense vs threatening entire population of 92 million with complete anihilation ("A whole civilization will die tonight" like Trump just said on behalf of all americans - credible threat from a nuclear superpower with enough nukes to spare), in a country where they can't really defend against this other than spreading the costs on enemy-allied countries.
There's bad, and there's 100x worse. And yeah, people should focus on stopping the 100x worse first, is my belief.
That's fair. When I see conflicts like this, I tend to sit back and observe. There are enough conflicts on the planet where both sides are not being bastards, and where the diffences in scale of bastardly doesn't clearly map to differences in capability (versus will).
I remember national state TV in Russia talking about "we are ready to nuke United States if needed" in 2014 [1].
So, domestically, government made sure people believe that the West is the mortal enemy and we were are already at some kind of cold war since Crimea annexation, it's just West didn't notice, seems like.
Then, there were also artifical immigration crisis at EU borders created by Russia and Belarus.
And many other various hybrid and asymmetrical attacks.
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA9mVLomYo8
So, USA recognized the danger and started dismantling the problem piece by piece, to ensure a long term peace and safety of its people. Could it be better organized and coordinated with allies? Probably, yes, but the meaning stays.
I think you are right that the West is complacent about its enemies because it cannot really shake the belief in its superiority that came from winning the cold war and dominating the world in the decades after, I just do not think that is the biggest threat.
Putting these all in the same list conflates very different situations.
- Big actual threat with body count: Russia.
- Russian proxies: Syria (very lethal, but mostly within Syria, not a "threat to the west", complicated by Daesh and AQ)
- Nasty autocracy but stable cold war: NK
- Autocracy, but largely minding their own business and with no real capability to threaten: Cuba, Venezuela
- Major trading partner: China
Trump era has systematically downplayed the threat from Russia. And let's not forget how many members of Trump campaign staff were jailed due to Russian influence.
China has a far bigger economy and far bigger armed forces. It has a history of aggression and has border disputes with multiple countries.
I strongly suspect that people who downplay the risk from China have not yet internalised the fact that no-white countries are powerful too now.
There's a lot of things that China "might" do but hasn't so far translated into significant violence, beyond the low-intensity border dispute in the mountains with India. Do they have power? Yes. Are they making threats? Other than a war of words with Japan, not really. What is this "history of aggression"?
Between China and the US, only one of those two has made threats to the territorial integrity of Europe.
By becoming part of the problem? Trump threatening to invade Greenland was a wake-up call for Europe. Actively supporting forces that want to tear down democracy in Europe isn’t particularly helpful either.
If we become like China and Russia then why is our civilization in any way better?
Iran is not passive - iran is active, a wannabe us (lets call it micro-satan) - that wants to do what russia did along its borders.
Iran doesn't use any of these to attack America. You seem to be confusing Israel for America, a common problem in American politics.
The post was replying to this:
>Iran doesn't use any of these to attack America.
This is false, as the post explained.
Saying “what about the US attacking Iran?” does not change the above being false. In fact the US attacking Iran does not change the above false either.
Even if we accept both things as true:
1. Iran has historically attacked the US 2. The US has historically destabilized/attacked Iran
It doesn’t change the fact that “Iran does not use any of these (proxy groups) to attack America” is a false statement.
Skip me with your emotional arguments because I’ll just think you’re posturing and just trying to advance your agenda :-)
More so if those primary attacks had 50K killed by way of proxies (100K according to more realistic estimates).
Sometimes, what one dishes out, comes back. If it does, rest of the world thinks it is only fair. Yes Iran has been retaliating, very weakly, to counterbalance attacks on itself by the US and its proxies.
There is not much doubt on who acted in bad faith first.
The US hurting its toe by kicking a stone and then complaining that it is the stone that attacked is not a good argument.
It was the US that upended Iranian parliamentary democracy with a military coup, sponsored chemical weapons attacks on Irani population (through its proxy Iraq). This killed some 30k to 50k by way of chemical attacks alone. Credible sources estimate 100K killed by these chemical weapons attacks alone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_chemical_attacks_against...
US shot down their passenger jet. US has imposed crippling sanctions that have decimated the economic well being of the country compared to what it could have been.
Iran Air Flight 655 was an international scheduled passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai via Bandar Abbas that was shot down on 3 July 1988 by two surface-to-air missiles fired by USS Vincennes, a United States Navy warship. The missiles hit the Iran Air aircraft, an Airbus A300, while it was flying its usual route over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, shortly after the flight departed its stopover location, Bandar Abbas International Airport. All 290 people on board were killed. No apologies yet.
Talking about Iranian proxies alone is one-sided if you don't consider what US-Israel proxies have been doing to them. US Israel have inflicted 10 to 100X more Irani deaths than what Iran has done in retaliation.
You are either ignorant or deliberately underplaying that. Most likely the latter.
That would be ultra orthodox zionists and illegal settlers that has been stealing land for decades now.
https://www.primevideo.com/detail/Louis-Theroux-The-Ultra-Zi...
An illuminating documentary. Everyone should give it a watch to understand the Zionist belief system.
There is very little room to doubt who the bad actor is and was. No matter how many canards you can try and thrust, how many attempts you make to color this as a religious holy war.
That the Islamic revolution was and is against Jews is a lie. In any case the Islamic revolution happened because of excesses by the US sponsored Shah who was put in charge after the US dismantled Iran's parliamentary democracy.
Even today Tehran hosts Dr. Sapir Hospital and Charity Center, a Jewish charity hospital, the largest charity among the religious minorities in Iran. It is doing well, thank you.
Ayatollah Khomeini himself wrote a personal note thanking the hospital for its help after the revolution succeeded.
Synagogues in Tehran are doing very well in the Islamic regime, thank you. Except for one that US+Israel bombed recently in Tehran.
This is in contrast to Israeli false flags, such as the Lavon affair and Baghdad synagogue bombings by Israel to drive a rift between Jews and the country they were residing in. Israel has a long documented history of bombing synagogues in other countries in false flag operations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950%E2%80%931951_Baghdad_bomb...
In fact Irani Jews have often criticized Israel when Israel has acted against Palestinians. Chief Rabbi of Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehuda_Gerami has denounced Zionist and Israeli policies.
https://www.csmonitor.com/1998/0203/020398.intl.intl.3.html
""" It comes as a surprise to many visitors to discover that Iran, a country so hostile to Israel and with a reputation for intolerance, is home to a small but vibrant Jewish community that is an officially recognized religious minority under Iran's 1979 Islamic Constitution.
"Khomeini didn't mix up our community with Israel and Zionism - he saw us as Iranians," says Haroun Yashyaei, a film producer and chairman of the Central Jewish Community in Iran. """
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%202...
"When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.
If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you"
Not to mention Israel's acts on Middle Eastern Jewish people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950%E2%80%931951_Baghdad_bomb...
America never invaded Greenland. Nevertheless, we're facing blowback because we threatened it.
Iran has been chanting "death to America" for decades. That isn't casus belli. Not by a long shot. But pretending Iran hasn't been playing the part of belligerent for years is rewriting history.
1983 Apr - Beirut, Lebanon — 17 Americans killed (U.S. Embassy bombing)
1983 Oct - Beirut, Lebanon — 241 U.S. military killed (Marine barracks bombing)
1984 Mar - Beirut, Lebanon — 1 American killed (CIA chief Buckley kidnapped, later killed)
1985 Jun - Beirut, Lebanon — 1 American killed (TWA Flight 847 hijacking)
1989 Jul - Lebanon — 1 American killed (Col. Higgins murdered)
1995 Apr - Gaza Strip — 1 American killed (car bomb)
1995 Aug - Jerusalem, Israel — 1 American killed, 100+ wounded (bus bombing)
1996 Feb - Jerusalem, Israel — 3 Americans killed, 3 wounded (bus bombing)
1996 Mar - Tel Aviv, Israel — 2 Americans killed (shopping center bombing)
1996 May - West Bank — 1 American killed, 1 wounded
1996 Jun - Khobar, Saudi Arabia — 19 Americans killed, ~500 wounded (Khobar Towers)
1997 Sep - Jerusalem, Israel — 1 American killed, 7 wounded (mall bombing)
1998 Aug - Nairobi/Dar es Salaam — 12 Americans killed, thousands wounded (embassy bombings)
2001 Sep - New York/Washington D.C. — Iran facilitated transit of hijackers (2,977 total killed)
2002 Jan - West Bank — 1 American killed
2002 Jul - Jerusalem, Israel — 5 Americans killed (Hebrew University bombing)
2003 Aug - Jerusalem, Israel — 5 Americans killed (bus bombing)
2003 Oct - Gaza Strip — 3 Americans killed (diplomatic convoy bombing)
2003-2011 - Iraq — 603 U.S. troops killed (Iranian-backed militia IED/EFP campaign)
2011 - Washington D.C. — 0 casualties (assassination plot on Saudi ambassador foiled)
2019 Jun - Strait of Hormuz — 0 casualties (U.S. Global Hawk drone shot down)
2019 Sep - Saudi Arabia — 0 American casualties (Abqaiq oil facility drone strike)
2019 Dec - Baghdad, Iraq — 0 casualties (U.S. Embassy stormed)
2020 Jan - Ain al-Assad, Iraq — 100+ U.S. troops with traumatic brain injuries (ballistic missile strike)
2021-2022 - Iraq/Syria — ongoing U.S. base attacks by Iranian-backed militias
2023 Oct-Nov - Iraq/Syria — 60+ attacks in Iraq, 90+ in Syria; scores of U.S. troops wounded
2024 Jan 28 - Tower 22, Jordan — 3 Americans killed, 34+ wounded (drone strike)
2024 - Red Sea/Yemen — ongoing Houthi drone/missile attacks on U.S. naval assets
2024 Nov - United States — 0 casualties (Trump assassination plot foiled)
This is an active unhealed wound in Iran. Families of the dead still grieve those killed in cemeteries and graves that are there in almost all their major cities.
Iran has every reason to not like the US which has been destabilising and killing and crippling them economically for several decades.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_chemical_attacks_against...
Iran Air Flight 655 was an international scheduled passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai via Bandar Abbas that was shot down on 3 July 1988 by two surface-to-air missiles fired by USS Vincennes, a United States Navy warship. The missiles hit the Iran Air aircraft, an Airbus A300, while it was flying its usual route over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, shortly after the flight departed its stopover location, Bandar Abbas International Airport. All 290 people on board were killed.
No apologies have been forthcoming.
Iran's targeting strategy has been a capability restrained tit for tat, for the most part. This is true except for attacks on other gulf states right after US-Israel decapitation strike.
The 47th war criminal in chief Trump and his Secretary of War(crimes) is making threats on TV and social media.
I would love to see the terrorist regime of Iran collapse but in this scenario, sorry, the US is completely in the wrong.
Blame is a weird word for geopolitics. I think Iran fucked up hitting those targets pre-emptively. Someone at home had to show their hard-liner boss that they were just as hard-line as he is. So they did something macho. The consequences be damned.
The mirroring of dysfunction on each side of this war is uncanny.
Sounds like a thing a state would not want to do to their neighbor out of the blue.