McNadoMDMar 1

This may shock some folks, but it is OK to simultaneously say that Khomeini had it coming and is a piece of shit who deserved what he got, and to say that a US president shouldn’t be assassinating foreign leaders without authorization from Congress. We can do that. We can have complex discussions. It is possible.

Edit ** as many have pointed out, the guy I was posting about here is Khameini (perils of late night posting). Khomeini died of cardiovascular disease in 1989.

Show threadMela Bee
@mcnado
Yes. Because it feels good to hear Iranian people cheering from apartment buildings and see them celebrating in the streets BUT the US taking unilateral action against the leader of a sovereign nation is not going to end well. It cannot be up to one nation to decide who is good an evil... I wonder why they didn't just fund a revolution/coup like they usually do - much more subtle and subject to less scrutiny and outrage.
Mar 1 at 7:36amWeb
Show threadusmu 🍋🏳️‍🌈🤟Mar 1
@Melabee @mcnado Subtlety? In this political climate?
Show threadAaronMar 1

@Melabee

Was it the US taking unilateral action? Or was it one man, Trump? They didn't fund a revolution because publicity is the point for him. He wants to deflect from Epstein, and simultaneously make himself feel powerful and special. That's why he defied our congress and law and went straight to executing another "big man" (his implied perspective, not mine).

Part of me wonders if maybe it isn't better this way. Maybe world leaders should all just start assassinating each other instead of dragging the rest of us into wars and getting all of us killed. I can think of quite a few I wouldn't miss. If it catches on, it might even force a reorganization of governments around the world into *not* centralizing power into the hands of one or a handful of people, which would be absolutely great for most of us. This is idle speculation and wishful thinking, of course. The real world never works so nicely.

@mcnado