Mastodawn

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.

@mcnado you mean, if Congress approved, its okay to assassinate foreign leaders? That’s your idea of a complex discussion?

@mativity @mcnado why should leaders get special protection over the citizens of a country?

GreenSkyOverMe (Monika)Mar 1

@bweller @mativity @mcnado There is an international contract specifically about not assassinating foreign leaders. The US has agreed to this.

@GreenSkyOverMe that's a pretty good reason

@mativity @mcnado

@GreenSkyOverMe @bweller @mativity @mcnado And yet they keep assassinating leaders …

It seems to me that Trump is daring other world leaders to put him out of our misery.

@GreenSkyOverMe @bweller @mativity @mcnado

@GreenSkyOverMe @bweller @mativity @mcnado The US can barely follow its own laws these days, let alone international agreements which they hiatorically only remember qhen its convenient.

Schafstelze Mar 1

@GreenSkyOverMe @bweller @mativity @mcnado leaders made a rule that they aren't legit targets? Fuck THAT rule first of all!

Misuse Case Mar 1

@mativity @mcnado

Softspeak Mar 1

@mativity @mcnado

You probably do not want a single man with uncheck war powers. Especially when that man is 80 years old and throws tantrums.
A lot of American think this is a victory, but remember real change of regime requires people within that country to make that change.
In a few years when the military moves out, it'll just collapse back into a rogue state just like Afghanistan all over again.

Dźwiedziu Mar 1

@mativity
I'll bite the bait: saying that something's wrong does not imply that the opposite* is right.
The above does not imply a binary dilemma.

You've filed in a rhetorical blank left by the OP.
Asking about that blank is valid.
Filling that blank yourself and pivoting is less so.

Even so the binary dilemma presented isn't about equal choices viewed trough different lenses: ethical, moral, law, etc. (And that isn't even going down the path of objective morality not existing.)

@mativity @mcnado Its the difference between the State taking action, with checks and balances, as flawed as it may be, versus it all being up to one megalomaniac.

FrauZeitlos Mar 1

@mativity @mcnado and it's an especially slippery slope if you have a leader that a lot of people also would love to see assassinated internationally.

@mativity @mcnado With or without Congress, assassination is always illegal. https://theconversation.com/assassination-is-always-unlawful-regardless-of-who-is-killed-and-on-whose-orders-236004

Assassination is always unlawful − regardless of who is killed and on whose orders

The release of a Russian hit man and the assassination of Israel’s enemies in Lebanon and Iran have shone a spotlight on killings carried out on state orders.

The Conversation

Chad McCullough Mar 1

@mativity No, I think you missed the point of this post. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think this means a president should NOT be allowed to do anything like attack a country without authorization from Congress. It doesn't mean it's right to attack a country even if Congress approves the action.

@mcnado

Insurgo Formica Mar 1

@mcnado well, yes, but what if the Iranian congress agree it's OK to assassinate your leader, is that legit?

Jan Antoš Mar 1

@InsurgoFormica @mcnado given the fact fact that they have/had Fatwa in Iran issued by now dead demagogue, I am ok that he is out. Trying to kill Hitler was also fairly legitimate. And killing wanna be human who pray for and declare annihilation of another nation/state is from my side morally ok. And given some videos I have seem now from Iran, it doesn’t look like Iranians are crying for his loss. I think it should be them who should judge this act in first place.

Insurgo Formica Mar 1

@janantos @mcnado well yes, so OK if they kill your leader? That's the point.

Jan Antoš Mar 1

@InsurgoFormica @mcnado if my leader is killing my friends, family and oppressing my nation, that it is from my side OK-ish. The same way, Brits killed Heidrich (who was defacto nation leader that time) during German Nazi occupation in Prague during WW2.

bencourtice Mar 1

@janantos @InsurgoFormica @mcnado the modern equivalent of assassinating Hitler would, of course, be killing Trump not Khameini.

Jan Antoš Mar 1

@bencourtice @InsurgoFormica @mcnado I am in no way defending Trump, but Putin is better equivalent.

bencourtice Mar 1

@janantos @InsurgoFormica @mcnado I'm fine with that definition, but you don't assassinate foreign leaders (or bomb the population) unless you're at war. Unprovoked war/war of aggression is a crime against humanity since about 1945 at least.

Jan Antoš Mar 1

@bencourtice @InsurgoFormica @mcnado it is hard to say if in case of Iran it was unprovoked given the Irans statements of annihilation of state of Izrael and supporting terorist group around the world and technically supporting Russian invasion of Ukraine. I understand it is hard to explain to citizens of never oppressed nation (except WW2). But I was raised in country where was more than 40 years oppression from communist regime. My family was stripped of farm, declared “enemy of state”, stripped of posibility to study on university, etc. And being under soviet occupation for more than 20 years, now living as expat in country that have been oppressed by Soviet Union since 1940 till USSR collapse and about every seventh citizen have been removed (killed/deported to Gulag). This historical and family/friends experience is giving completely different perspective. No one on you never shouted while being first grade pupil, that you called teacher miss teacher and not comrade teacher. No one called your parent to school to make issue of it. And no one disallowed you to attend hobby lessons because of this and your ancestors. So forgive me, that I have different opinion and feelings.

bencourtice Mar 1

@janantos @InsurgoFormica @mcnado that's all very well but this is not Czechoslovakia 1968, it's not about you, its about US and Israel imperial ambition in the present day. Different countries, different issues. The principles banning wars of aggression can't be forgotten whenever it's convenient. As someone in a small nation near a big aggressive power you should be more aware of that, not less.

Jan Antoš Mar 1

@bencourtice @InsurgoFormica @mcnado and Estonia same narrative from Russia that Estonia does not deserve existence. Sorry I see parallel. I don’t agree with Israel politics, but Iran declares anihilation of state if Israel, I don’t see Israel narrative to govern Iran. Do you? And btw it is Czechoslovakia since 1948 - 1989 (1991)

bencourtice Mar 1

@janantos @InsurgoFormica @mcnado I think they want to reinstall the shah of Iran to make the country compliant, but I doubt it will work. 1968 was a reference to the Prague Spring uprising crushed by Soviet tanks. They did their own version of installing a shah.

Insurgo Formica Mar 1

@bencourtice @janantos @mcnado to both of you, it depends where you stand, so in the end, there is justification for everyone killing everyone.

@InsurgoFormica @mcnado Americans in the Fediverse «yes please»

Insurgo Formica Mar 1

@oblomov @mcnado yeah, I think we all agree with this one, but...

Patch You Up Mar 1

@oblomov @InsurgoFormica @mcnado Unfortunately, that's one of my nightmare scenarios. The last thing we need is for the zealots to have their god-king martyred. And then you get Vance in charge, who is such an obvious Thiel puppet with absolutely zero backbone.

Disisdeguey🔻PalestineAction🇵🇸Mar 1

@InsurgoFormica @mcnado Also, if they kill you leader AND in the process they kill a thousand people around Washington,is that ok?

Insurgo Formica Mar 1

@disisdeguey @mcnado good question!

Patch You Up Mar 1

@disisdeguey @InsurgoFormica @mcnado Depends. If the govt murdered >40k Americans during the No Kings protests (casualties scaled for population) I think many of us would take that offer.

hajovonta Mar 1

@mcnado
who do you want to have conversations with

hajovonta Mar 1

@mcnado
also, it was an Israeli strike as per official stance

ᴮᵉⁿ ᴿᵒʸᶜᵉVOTE IN THE PRIMARIES Mar 1

dear McNadoMD,

as the elected leader of the tankie alliance on the fediverse, it is my duty to inform you that we must kneejerk defend the govt of iran, despite the govt of iran being used toilet paper

your talk of nuance is horrifying

everything is black and white, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, you're either with us or against us, tribalism uber alles, blah blah blah

oppose the govt of iran *and* the govt of the usa... at the same time?! wtf?

thank you for your time

(/s)

@benroyce @mcnado Speaking of nuance, Khomeini died of a heart attack in 1989.

Mirko Schenk Mar 1

@mcnado
I'd rather say at least UNO, but any checks and balances would be nice at this time.

warning low flying owls Mar 1

@mcnado "Authorization from Congress?" I hope this is some kind of clever sarcasm, or I have to conclude that Americans are so imperialism-pilled that they say shit like this seriously.

@Pyrogenesis we really have been that imperialism pilled. It's very bad

@mcnado Khamenei

@mcnado The only thing worse than a live Ayatollah Khomeini is a martyred one.

Space Hobo Mar 1

@pliny @mcnado Lucky for you he died of a heart attack in 1989.

Chery (Great Australian Pods)Mar 1

@mcnado Khamenei - Khomeini was the previous supreme leader.

GeraintLlanfrancheta Mar 1

Comrade elronxenu Mar 1

@mcnado We can have complex discussions, but it's hard to do when the politicians who make the decisions act like utter imbeciles.

@mcnado @pojntfx Well. From Iranian perspective I think it feels a bit different. Previously only people were getting hurt by “diplomatic measures” like sanctions while the regime was becoming more and more emboldened. So yes. Assassination. But also putting innocent civilians that never had a choice in any of this into poverty and exclusion and claiming that it is for them, is also an action. (1/2)

For me it is worrying where the help came from but it is also very clear that this was one of the best helps we ever got from other countries. (2/2)
P.S. of course I acknowledge that this was a clear failure of checks for American people and probably a distraction from what is going on with US and Epstein at the moment.

@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.

usmu 🍋🏳️‍🌈🤟Mar 1

@Melabee @mcnado Subtlety? In this political climate?

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.

Barney Dellar (he/him)Mar 1

@mcnado @GreenSkyOverMe The US shouldn’t be assassinating foreign leaders WITH the authorisation of Congress either.

Cybertronhacker.com Mar 1

@mcnado Oh absolutely — imagine that. Adults capable of holding two thoughts at once. Wild concept.
You can think Khomeini was a terrible human being and still believe a U.S. president shouldn’t unilaterally assassinate foreign leaders without congressional authorization. That’s not hypocrisy — that’s understanding that moral judgment and constitutional limits are two different conversations.
It’s almost like complex geopolitical issues require… complexity. Shocking, I know.

warning low flying owls Mar 1

@Tonybent @mcnado Khomeini was a terrible human being indeed, but he's also been dead since 1989. The bare first step towards complex understanding is to learn the names of the people you are talking about.

Anders Gulden Olstad Mar 1

@mcnado @kallekn Khomeini almost fell out of his coffin by ecstatic ayatollah gropers, back in 1989. Wether it was deserved or not, I can’t say.