this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2026
331 points (98.8% liked)

World News

55406 readers
219 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Recent reporting from the Financial Times reveals it was President Trump, not the Iranian government, who was begging for a ceasefire.

FT reports that the Trump administration had been privately pushing for a ceasefire for weeks to alleviate the economic strain caused by Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz, and depending on Pakistan for mediation. Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir was communicating with Iranian officials, special envoy Steve Witkoff, Vice President JD Vance, and Trump himself even after the president threatened to wipe out Iranian civilization on Tuesday.

According to the five people familiar with the diplomatic back channel, Trump had been asking for a ceasefire since as early as March 21, when he first threatened to bomb Iran’s power plants.

This contradicts virtually everything the Trump administration has claimed about Iran—that Trump’s constant bombings and threats of extinction caused a wounded, demoralized Iranian regime to limp to the negotiating table, desperate for a deal with the U.S.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CainTheLongshot@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If I could put my tinfoil hat on for just a moment, i would say an indefinite war was the intent. If you have an unruly populace, what better place than the front lines to send them? The gulag? Nah, they aren't producing anything while sitting in a prison. Meanwhile, the front lines are wearing down an enemy populace, and if they are killed there, great. One less dissident to worry about. It's also a great way to consolidate even more power, if those dissidents happen to be part of the oligarchy who grew a conscience.

But this tinfoil theory would imply he's playing 4D chess out there, and i don't think there's any evidence to support that. Even if it's a convenient way to remove dissidents, and likely being done to a certain extent, i would surmise this extended war effort is due to plain incompetence and decades of greed surfacing and not the main objective. Slava Ukraini ✊🏻

My next tinfoil hat theory is that this assumes Iran a willing participant in this circle jerk war. Seeing how Iran came out on top in that brief crease fire deal, it could be possible that targets hit so far were considered "soft targets". Now I'm not so callous to say a school full of children is a soft target, but with the players currently involved, i wouldn't put it past them to purposefully hit civilian targets to drum up recruitment for the other side, to give yourself more hard targets to hit. And any major attack against a hard target could be seen as letting one in to not give away the game at hand. Even the initial attack against the old leadership could be seen as letting the new leadership in, but that's so much tinfoil, my fillings are starting to buzz.

There would have to be an investigation into the targeting choices to try and figure out if that's what's really going on, in which under a certain threshold and i would classify those as deliberate.

Now i will fully admit that I'm talking out of my ass here as i haven't really been closely following Operation Epstein Fury. But there are certainly some news pieces recently that lead me to suspect something fucky is going on in the background, even if it turns out it's just what we already know: market manipulation and gambling on war.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

What you are describing is not really tinfoil hat.

You are basically describing the poltical theory of oligarchical collectivism, as outlined by Emmanuel Goldstein, in 1984.

Go read 1984 again.

The entire operating concept of the forever war between Oceania, EastAsia and Eurasia is that they all throw their economic might into never ending wars, to solve the capitalist problem of overproduction, and also simultaneously create totalitarian police states that keep the proles under control, to keep the oligarchs comfy and in power.

Like the entire genre of cyberpunk... its a 'this was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual' situation.

[–] CainTheLongshot@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're right, I should go read 1984 again, lol.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

At this point I would suggest grabbing a physical or local digital copy, before it becomes a thoughtcrime.