Iranian Chill Thread

[SalarHaqq]

Launch an extended UCAV border patrol mission

Iran's been making extensive use of UAV's to secure the border with Pakistan. Remember the repeated instances of Iranian drones crashing either in Sistan-Baluchestan province or in Pakistan itself. Imagine how many UAV's must be overflying the area 24/7.

---

you have a really disgusting habit of trying to 'expose' people then making ridiculous statements like 'nobody will want to associate themselves with such a traitor like you'

You're blatantly twisting my words. I did not call any forum user a traitor.

I highlighted someone's attempt to legitimize employment by hostile foreign powers. I don't think this is a mundane position to take, nor do I think anyone would want to associate themselves with it (i.e. with said position). If you do then you can say so openly, no need to issue false claims.

people can draw their own conclusions about who might want to cause such division

People can draw their conclusions about users who suggest it's in order to receive payments from the US, European or zionist regimes in order to bring down the political order in Iran. Yes.

Again if you concur with that notion, or if you think it's simply a legitimate opinion among others then nothing should prevent you from being explicit about it. If not then you'll actually be confirming my point.

 

[Blue In Green]

That they've been behaving antagonistically as of late isn't lost on anyone, but to conclude that war is what they're aiming for would be a stretch based on what's known.

Fair, but I did say "elements" within Taliban, not the entirety of the organization.

Naturally there would be strong opposition within the group, pushing against any notion of getting into a conflict with the Islamic Republic.

On the topic of UAV/UCAV border patrol with regards to the expansive Eastern borders. It may be pertinent for Iran to increase (principally speaking) armed drone overwatch and monitoring at all times. This recent skirmish proved very successful for Iranian border guards as the seemed to ready and willing to do what was necessary to neutralize threats.

Truthfully speaking, I have zero idea of just how many drones/patrol missions Iran is conducting in the area, hopefully its sufficient.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Fair, but I did say "elements" within Taliban, not the entirety of the organization.

Naturally there would be strong opposition within the group, pushing against any notion of getting into a conflict with the Islamic Republic.

Uncontrolled factionalism among the Taleban is a commonly held belief. Academics specializing on Afghan politics have questioned it though. I have a source but it's a video of a conference not held in English nor in Persian otherwise I'd have shared it. As in any organization of that scale, a varying views will be featured among the Taleban on given topics, however it's unlikely that a minority faction could successfully provoke war with a neighbor. Anyway, if this is their goal then we will certainly find out soon enough.

 

[Blue In Green]

Uncontrolled factionalism among the Taleban is a commonly held belief. Academics specializing on Afghan politics have questioned it though. I have a source but it's a video of a conference not held in English nor in Persian otherwise I'd have shared it. As in any organization of that scale it will feature a variety of views on given topics, however it's unlikely that a minority faction could successfully provoke war with a neighbor. Anyway, if this is their goal then we will certainly find out soon enough.

I pray we don't have to see another war in our region... god knows we don't need another one. But if worst comes to pass... Iran must be ready.

 

[SalarHaqq]

I pray we don't have to see another war in our region... god knows we don't need another one. But if worst comes to pass... Iran must be ready.

The Islamic Republic has successfully navigated hostility of superpowers for over four decades, which includes avoidance of numerous plots they hatched to entrap Iran in unnecessary wars. I have no reason to distrust the Iranian Leadership and its proven ability to maintain Iran's strategic position all the while of neutralizing threat after threat. The current Taleban challenge doesn't look too hard to master in comparison.

 

[HGV]

People can draw their conclusions about users who suggest it's in order to receive payments from the US, European or zionist regimes in order to bring down the political order in Iran. Yes.

Again if you concur with that notion, or if you think it's simply a legitimate opinion among others then nothing should prevent you from being explicit about it. If not then you'll actually be confirming my point.

Every day you are spamming essays trying to expose others here, it's really quite strange behaviour

Accepting funds from hostile foreign governments is indeed grounds for suspicion of treason. I think Hack-Hook's point was that this isn't the current stated position in Iranian law, nothing more (although I can't speak for him). He is a semantics guy and because of this the rest of us have to see you two argue all day in every thread

 

[SalarHaqq]

Every day you are spamming essays trying to expose others here

Not really, no.

I think Hack-Hook's point was that this isn't the current stated position in Iranian law, nothing more (although I can't speak for him). He is a semantics guy and because of this the rest of us have to see you two argue all day in every thread

In response to a post of mine where I highlight the unacceptability of cooperating with foreign-funded opposition, why would anyone possibly want to claim there's no specific law against it, and repeat this over and over again? Especially considering that my remark was directed at a number of reformists and moderates who recently declared their readiness to work with the opposition in exile, and knowing that this user is an avowed reformist supporter?

To eliminate any doubts, people can look up the starting point of the discussion in question:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/lead...-is-superior-to-iranian-culture.765797/page-3

So it's pretty clear that the user is seeking to justify these sort of actions. Which also stems from a statement like this:

I denounce oppositionists who accept foreign funding and this type replies "it's not applicable in a court of law but with anarchist grouplets and their supporters" who "think they are above the law".

Doesn't get any more obvious than that, does it. No way one could spin this to mean something else.

To state that placing oneself at the service of hostile foreign powers amounts to treason, is to call a spade a spade. What laws say on the matter has strictly nothing to do with it, and to constantly reference them represents a clear diversion. Not to mention that as little as unarmed militancy at the behest of a foreign enemy can easily fall under laws banning activities against national security, but that's not the issue.

 

[tsunset]

Fair, but I did say "elements" within Taliban, not the entirety of the organization.

Naturally there would be strong opposition within the group, pushing against any notion of getting into a conflict with the Islamic Republic.

On the topic of UAV/UCAV border patrol with regards to the expansive Eastern borders. It may be pertinent for Iran to increase (principally speaking) armed drone overwatch and monitoring at all times. This recent skirmish proved very successful for Iranian border guards as the seemed to ready and willing to do what was necessary to neutralize threats.

Truthfully speaking, I have zero idea of just how many drones/patrol missions Iran is conducting in the area, hopefully its sufficient.

Iran striking Afghanistan, held by Taliban or not, would be the perfect excuse for the west to do something with people's consent.

They were capable to defend ISIS militants that made terror attacks inside Iran and defend cannibal Chechens tribesmen, they are capable of supporting Taliban, anything, if it is against Iran, they will support it.

 

[OldTwilight]

The problem is that these cave-dwellers have nothing they really care about. We can starve their population but that won't harm the Taliban and nor is it a valid military strategy.

So now we have porous borders with Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. From Iraq there are Kurdish separatists arming and training themselves to re-enter Iran easily (and Mossad HQs), in Azerbaijan we have more Mossad bases and a militaristic separatist regime wanting to cut Iran off from Armenia which is heavily supported by Israel and Turkey, in Afghanistan we have Islamic fundamentalists with a massive collection of US weapons and in Pakistan we have Wahhabi terrorists regularly infiltrating Iran and kidnapping incompetent 18 year old Iranian border guards for fun.

Their men should be killed and their young women and girls taken as war booty .... Act like this and you will found out they have things to care about....

 

[HGV]

In response to a post of mine where I highlight the unacceptability of cooperating with foreign-funded opposition, why would anyone possibly want to claim there's no specific law against receiving financial aid from enemies?

I can't speak for him, but as I said he focuses on semantics, and anyway highlighting technical deficiencies in the law is not a bad thing.

Especially considering that my remark was directed at reformists and moderates who recently declared their readiness to work with the opposition in exile, and knowing that this user is an avowed reformist supporter?

Your agenda and personal attacks come through again

To state that placing oneself at the service of hostile foreign powers amounts to treason, is to call a spade a spade. What laws say on the matter has strictly nothing to do with it, and to constantly reference them represents a clear diversion. Not to mention that as little as unarmed militancy at the behest of a foreign enemy can easily fall under laws banning activities against national security, but that's not the issue.

I am unfortunately inclined to agree with you here, but no need to carry on your disagreement with him and reference that in every thread

Their men should be killed and their young women and girls taken as war booty .... Act like this and you will found out they have things to care about....

Then you are no better than them

 

[OldTwilight]

I can't speak for him, but as I said he focuses on semantics, and anyway highlighting technical deficiencies in the law is not a bad thing.

Your agenda and personal attacks come through again

I am unfortunately inclined to agree with you here, but no need to carry on your disagreement with him and reference that in every thread


Then you are no better than them

I rather to be tyrant than oppressed ...

You can fight Nobel and lose or be savage and win ....

You can't fight wolfs with honor

 

[jauk]

text of law please

Are you supporting foreign monies or are you obviating the lack of rules and suggesting there should be in place?

I certainly hope not the former.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Are you supporting foreign monies or are you obviating the lack of rules and suggesting there should be in place?

I certainly hope not the former.

i say Salar have no right to call people of the parties who don't belong to his beloved party everything he like.
the text of law is clear , our law is clear and nowhere in it there is a clause that allow him to call everybody he don't like or oppose his views as traitor . he suggest here a certain act is treason , i dare him to show us where in the law that certain act is illegal or considered treason.


till now his answer was i feel it most be so and he started this nonsense by cutting selective part of my post not all of it that was in response to his usual rants and paste it in every post he made today and i again ask him show us where in our law that act is considered treason

 

[SalarHaqq]

highlighting technical deficiencies in the law is not a bad thing.

That was not the purpose of the user's statement, quite obviously.

If it was, it wouldn't have taken more than a brief one liner to shed light on and thereby settle the discussion. Instead, the user kept rehashing the same affirmation on top of deriding anyone who legitimately views working with enemies as treason.

Your agenda and personal attacks come through again

No such thing (what personal attack?). It's simply a relevant element in grasping what the user means in the context of the specific exchange at hand. As said if any doubts subsist then reading the discussion from the start will clarify what my point was, and why countering it through this sort of a contention implies taking issue with the gist of my initial statement against oppositionists on enemy payroll.

I am unfortunately inclined to agree with you here, but no need to carry on your disagreement with him and reference that in every thread

You may issue this note of protest when I actually reference the matter in 'every' thread (or say, in more than two). Moreover this isn't about me having a mere disagreement with the user as much as it is about pointing out their position that accepting payments from foreign enemies to work against the Iranian government is legitimate.

On a side note, you ought to show evidence for the claim contained in the "Tweet" you shared according to which Iranian authorities "lied" about a recent martyr's cause of demise. I searched but couldn't find anything other than gratuitous claims by opposition sources.

 

[Blue In Green]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1662501162677944321