What's new

Iranian Chill Thread

Why not paying someone inside Israel to stab or shoot at a checkpoint?

Why not sending a suicide drone inside Azerbaijan close borders and say that it was a malfunction of the drone?

Just why not selecting Israel-tied militias in Lebanon/Syria/Iraq? There is the FSA and PJAK ready to be targeted

Or, flying a drone over Israeli airspace via Hezbollah?
 
Why not paying someone inside Israel to stab or shoot at a checkpoint?

Why not sending a suicide drone inside Azerbaijan close borders and say that it was a malfunction of the drone?

Just why not selecting Israel-tied militias in Lebanon/Syria/Iraq? There is the FSA and PJAK ready to be targeted

Or, flying a drone over Israeli airspace via Hezbollah?
The only appropriate response to Israel killing Iranians is Iran killing Israelis.
 
Don't worry, Islamic Iran will do a decisive suicide drone attack to tickle an Israeli owned ship.

Then we will implement strategic patience until they repeat again.

It comes down to concept of martyrdom. They have gone to far.

The west treats the loss of every inbred hick with an IQ of room temperature as if they lost an Apostle of Jesus. Meanwhile, Iran treats every soldier lost as if they are Star Wars storm troopers.

In fact, I remember that being a criticism of Solemani’s war planning…..his command took too many casualties due to his concept of martyrdom. His battlefield tactics were costly in human life and hail back to the Iran-Iraq war.

There is a fine line between being careless and noble cause of Martyrdom. Iran is losing sight of that. This is not 1980’s, troops wether on border patrol or in external conflicts need to be protected. IRANIAN LIVES MATTER.

Instead among the axis powers, Iran-Russia-China all have followed western rules that their soldiers lives are only 1/10 the value of a western soldier.

Shameful to say the least.

Why not paying someone inside Israel to stab or shoot at a checkpoint?

What is with this obsession of killing poor border patrol guards?

Be tatical and powerful in your response, not petty. These are human lives we are talking about. An Israeli border patrol soldier wants to be there as much as Iranian one does.

Many of you on this board are religious, if you believe in God then you should realize that all human life is precious and valuable regardless if they are the enemy. Thus human life should only be taken when needed, and if it is needed then it should be done in a way to prevent further bloodshed.

Why not sending a suicide drone inside Azerbaijan close borders and say that it was a malfunction of the drone?

Doesn’t scare anyone

Just why not selecting Israel-tied militias in Lebanon/Syria/Iraq? There is the FSA and PJAK ready to be targeted

PJAK and PKK are already routinely targeted. You think Israel cares about the lives of brown people lost? They don’t even care that Iran killed the US contractor

Or, flying a drone over Israeli airspace via Hezbollah?

Already been done numerous times.
 
Last edited:
Can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not lol.

But let me tell you, many Iranians fought in Syria, spent billions of dollars in Syria, to prevent them falling into Takfiri hands, where women in Syria are able to be free and dress both in Hijab and in modesty, able to watch football together with men and woman, but in our Islamic Republic it is not allowed are the beaten for Hijab which is optional in Syria, but even husband and wife are separated to watch football.

One can only laugh at the hypocrisy that everyone sees. Go look at street walking in Damascus, women who do not wear hijab still dress modestly, while you will also find chadori women, and you will find more freedom that we fought to protect and continue to fight.

Inoperative equivalence. Islamic Iran did not intervene in Syria to uphold secularism, which is a Syrian domestic matter. Iran assisted Damascus because the latter is a strategic ally linked to Iran through a mutual defence treaty, in order to safeguard the land bridge connecting members of the Resistance Axis, and because the terrorist aggression of Syria was conceived by NATO and the zionists as a prelude to destabilization operations against Iran herself.

Iranians who were martyred in Syria by the way, are holding favorable views of the Islamic dress code. So no hypocrisy to be detected here.

Naturally some believe they can continue to operate in this fashion despite the clear trend & hypocrisy, and their will continue to be riots and deaths among both rioters and security staff that will only intensify with time.

Where does the systematic misspelling of the adverb 'there' (spelled as the possessive pronoun 'their') stem from?

To see the trend, all you have to do is look at 1985 Iran vs 2023 Iran in public videos. Now by 2045 what would it look like? Either they will give up or the country is led straight to civil insurgency and possible war.

Personally, I think Syria is a good example of what Iran can and would likely work best at to obtain a balance between peoples.

No mentally balanced person will engage in acts of violence nor welcome armed conflict for something as secondary as dress code regulations. It's zio-American propaganda, psy-ops and cultural aggression which leads to such irrational behaviour on the part of a dwindling but noisy minority.

As for social-cultural evolutions, these aren't necessarily linear. As a matter of fact Iranian demography is declining, which has two implications among others: one, there will be less and less Iranians below the age of 30 to whom "hejab" represents an existential issue and who would be willing to partake in violent actions against state authorities; and two, the proportion of culturally uber-westernized secularists among the Iranian population will decline because this group tends to generate even less offspring than religious Iranians respectful of Islamic traditions.

It is strange, because everyone I know who is pro-Islamic Republic are frustrated with the lack of determined responses. The lack of deceisive response is a result of WEAKNESS, not of patience.

It is the understanding that we DO NOT have the upper hand in Syria. We are unable to escalate responses. If we did have the upper hand, they would not dare do anything.

Are these people "pro-Islamic Republic" in the same manner as yourself by any chance? Referring to the President as an "illiterate", speaking with disdain about so-called "akhoonds" and predicting the imminent "downfall" of the Revolution as exiled oppositionists are used to do?

Don't worry, Islamic Iran will do a decisive suicide drone attack to tickle an Israeli owned ship.

Then we will implement strategic patience until they repeat again.

But, the Islamic Republic is collapsing anyway as per your erudite analysis. Why would you care so much?

If these phantom responses are real, then it still does not create the necessary cost to deter continuation of strikes.

And?

I would say the timing of these operations is odd, but it is actually the norm. Albiet, we are clearly being provoked.

Who is 'we', I wonder?

Their are alot of dangers occurring right now, and the Government has decided to add another layer to danger by creating enemies inside the country.

Eh no the government hasn't decided such a thing. Rather, Iran's existential enemies have spend hundreds of millions brainwashing some Iranians into radical opposition against existing legislation.

Since they can see the weakness, they will attack harder and harder until we are forced to leave.

A prediction which ought to be bookmarked. Heard this sort of forecast somewhere... and it was not in IR-friendly nor even in pro-Iranian media. According to those sources, it's been about a decade that Iran has been "forced" to "leave soon". Aren't they amusing?

Since the Islamic Republic is more concerned about self-preservation (even though it has also failed at that), it's responses are muted and unrespectable for the military power it has shown. The deaths of personal in Syria? No biggie, they died for Imam Hossein and are cheaply martyred.

This type of narrative lacks coherence. Insinuating on the one hand that the Islamic Republic's supposedly "muted" response is hastening its collapse; on the other hand claiming that the reason behind this modus operandi is the Islamic Republic's concern for self-preservation. Nice self-contradiction right there.

Slight detail to ponder: if the Iranian Leadership's decision making was overly risk-averse and self-preservation its exclusive motivation, then the Islamic Republic would not have chosen to frontally challenge zionist and USA imperialists in the first place.

Why would Government officials and Akhoonds risk attacking Israel or heavily attacking US forces in Syria in response when it risks all the wealth they have acclimated in Europe and Iran. Better to just absorb the deaths of soldiers than to risk their money and lives. Blood is cheap.

Could you point me to a political leadership which put themselves in the line of fire as much as the revolutionary core of the Islamic Republic?

What country's head of state has literally lost a limb in a terrorist bombing? Which government had not only a President but also close to a hundred of its top officials murdered in the past half of a century? Louder please, we can't hear you.

Better yet, apart from not too smart figures such as Saddam whom you'd apparently like Iran to emulate, what political leadership will steer their country on a path leading to the destruction of the state?

Also, what "wealth" is the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution supposed to have accumulated? Ditto IRGC commanders.



'killing all of our best scientists and generals with impunity is all they can do' can this guy hear himself

Considering that international zionism happens to be the most powerful entity on the planet, it would either take a certain amount of naivety or perhaps unavowed ulterior motives to promote the idea that a nation could possibly muster enough bravery to fight zionism without incurring losses in the process. Same applies to rhetoric attempts at blowing out of proportion the strategic impact of said losses, and at depicting them as harbingers of defeat.

Israel could assassinate Salami, Hajizadeh, Shamkhani and Khamenei himself and one user here would tell us these are the desperate actions of a regime that can't do anything else and shows the genius and success of Iran's strategic foreign policy. Oh and of course Iran still wouldn't dare to respond to that.

The undeniable genius and success of Iran's policy is evidenced by the fact that the Islamic Republic is the only existing government bold enough to confront both the zionist entity and the US empire, whilst remaining resistant to the point not only of surviving the inevitable onslaught which such a noble choice is bound bring about, but of experiencing steady development in the process as well as managing to expand strategic depth for close to four and a half decades in a row.

An occurrence which is visibly troubling you.

Before the IRI ruling elite could think of a phantom response to the last IRGC martyr from only a few days ago, Israel now kills a second IRGC soldier in Syria in three days.

Let's put general HGV in charge. They will show the "IRI ruling elite" how it's properly done. :lol:

Undoubtedly. But what annoys me is not the fact that Israel has qualitative superiority and dominance over Syria

1) There is no legitimate government by the name of Israel.

2) The zionist regime is not exercising any "dominance" in Syria. If it were the case, President Assad would have met a fate similar to Qaddafi's, Syria would be ruled by rabidly anti-Iranian elements, the geographic continuity of the Resistance Axis would have been disrupted and Iran would not be operating dozens of military posts across Syria in addition to deploying Resistance groups on the very boundary of occupied Golan.

but that even our highest ranking officials invent lies to explain this, such as phantom operations that they can't tell us about. If they were real they would be in the news and, additionally, might create deterrence. Neither of those is the case, so logically, they are lying to us.

Media reported extensively on the explosions and fatalities in question.

That Iranian officials rather than zionist-controlled media manipulated the truth in this regard i.e. that the zionist propaganda machine should be considered more credible than Iranian officials is your subjective interpretation, not an established fact.



It comes down to concept of martyrdom. They have gone to far.

The west treats the loss of every inbred hick with an IQ of room temperature as if they lost an Apostle of Jesus. Meanwhile, Iran treats every soldier lost as if they are Star Wars storm troopers.

Iran and the Islamic Resistance cherish and commemorate their martyrs in a manner unseen anywhere in the west.

In fact, I remember that being a criticism of Solemani’s war planning…..his command took too many casualties due to his concept of martyrdom. His battlefield tactics were costly in human life and hail back to the Iran-Iraq war.

There is a fine line between being careless and noble cause of Martyrdom. Iran is losing sight of that. This is not 1980’s, troops wether on border patrol or in external conflicts need to be protected. IRANIAN LIVES MATTER.

Instead among the axis powers, Iran-Russia-China all have followed western rules that their soldiers lives are only 1/10 the value of a western soldier.

Shameful to say the least.

Another 'candidate' for the supreme command of Iranian armed forces, confident to the extent of assuming they could overshadow shahid Soleimani.



If you want to fix the morality of the country, start by fixing the economy. powerty leads people to immoral behavior.

Not necessarily. A wide range of immoral behaviours tend to be more widespread in the wealthiest of countries.

Make it easier for people to get married and have stable families and you will have a stable society.

Statistically, marriage is more firmly institutionalized and fertility higher in poverty-stricken societies.
 
Last edited:
Inoperative equivalence. Islamic Iran did not intervene in Syria to uphold secularism, which is a Syrian domestic matter. Iran assisted Damascus because the latter is a strategic ally linked to Iran through a mutual defence treaty, and in order to safeguard the land bridge connecting members of the Resistance Axis.

Iranians who were martyred in Syria, by the way, are among those who hold favorable views of the Islamic dress code. So no "hypocrisy" to be detected here.
Why did we make a defense treaty with a country without Sharia law?

In another question of hypocrisy, why were our men and women separated in Azadi Stadium when Iran played Russia, but Russian wifes and husbands were allowed together? Do Islamic law apply only to Iranians? Does it not apply to everyone in the land?

Are these people "pro-Islamic Republic" in the same manner as yourself? Referring to the President as an "illiterate", despising so-called "akhoonds" (sic) and predicting the imminent "downfall" of the Revolution as exiled oppositionists are used to do?
Their are plenty of Pro-IR Telegram channels, you can see the comments for yourself.


I can only wonder if Khomeini was in charge with even 1/10th of the weapons that are available today. He was truly one of a kind, and would've never allowed many of the blows that were received by both Israel and Israel's presence in Azerbaijan.
 
What is with this obsession of killing poor border patrol guards?

Be tatical and powerful in your response, not petty. These are human lives we are talking about. An Israeli border patrol soldier wants to be there as much as Iranian one does.

Many of you on this board are religious, if you believe in God then you should realize that all human life is precious and valuable regardless if they are the enemy. Thus human life should only be taken when needed, and if it is needed then it should be done in a way to prevent further bloodshed.

Some attribute a response in the form of killing random Israeli's on the street by Palestinians. Civilian deaths is not an impactful response. Targeting military infrastructure in the Golan with twin Dezful's would be more impactful.
 
Why did we make a defense treaty with a country without Sharia law?

Because it had been resisting the zionist regime for decades and is a member of the Resistance Axis, so geopolitically there is common ground and this led to the formation of a bilateral alliance. Because Syria stood by Iran during the Sacred Defence, as one of very few countries to do so.

In another question of hypocrisy,

There is no hypocrisy in this. Islamic Iran's mission is not to police other countries according to her own laws.

why were our men and women separated in Azadi Stadium when Iran played Russia, but Russian wifes and husbands were allowed together? Do Islamic law apply only to Iranians? Does it not apply to everyone in the land?

It applies to everyone, hence why foreigners in Iran are required to observe the same dress code for instance. The anecdote you relate is a micro-event which hardly affects the general norm.

This said, if the few well-defined exemptions offered to religious minorities were to be lifted - e.g. the possibility for non-Moslems to brew, store and consume alcoholic beverages in their private premises, then the first ones to cry foul would be those same secularists who cite these examples in hopes of delegitimizing sharia law. How's that for a two-faced stance?

Their are plenty of Pro-IR Telegram channels, you can see the comments for yourself.

*There. And I doubt they'll adopt a type of rhetoric that takes aim at the Leadership etc.

I can only wonder if Khomeini was in charge with even 1/10th of the weapons that are available today. He was truly one of a kind, and would've never allowed many of the blows that were received by both Israel and Israel's presence in Azerbaijan.

Iran today is in a strategically stronger position than during the 1980's, thanks to the continuation of Imam Khomeini's (r.A.a.) line by seyyed Khamenei (h.A.). The leadership's following the same revolutionary principles.
 
Last edited:
هیچ وقت اساتید فکر کردید حمله زمینی اسراییل به جنوب سوریه و انضمام خاکشرو چطور جواب بدید؟
به جز جنگ فرسایشی و حمله به زیر ساخت

در جنوب غرب سوریه برتری آتش نداریم فعلا
وضعیت در دیرالزور خیلی بهتره
 
Because it had been resisting the zionist regime for decades and is a member of the Resistance Axis. Because it stood by Iran during the Sacred Defence, as one of very few countries to do so.



There is no hypocrisy in this. Islamic Iran's mission is not to police other countries according to her own laws.



It applies to everyone, hence why foreigners in Islamic Iran are required to observe the same dress code for instance. The anecdote you relate is a micro-event which hardly affects the general norm.

This said, if the few well-defined exemptions offered to religious minorities were to be lifted - e.g. the possibility for non-Moslems to brew, store and consume alcoholic beverages in their private premises, then the first ones to cry foul would be those same secularists who cite these examples in hopes of delegitimizing sharia law. How's that for a two-faced stance?



*There. And I doubt they'll adopt a type of rhetoric that takes aim at the Leadership etc.



Iran today is in a strategically stronger position than during the 1980's, thanks to the continuation of Imam Khomeini's (r.A.a.) line by seyyed Khamenei (h.A.). The leadership's following the same revolutionary principles.
Bro, people who loves nudity of girls in Iran, how do u think of them?? they loves sexy girls....and western cultures...
And also i have noticed to theirs too many atheist or anti Islamic personals in Iran, weather they are in PDF or twitter..they show pure hatred .
 
Bro, people who loves nudity of girls in Iran, how do u think of them?? they loves sexy girls....and western cultures...

My views adapt to their behaviour; brother. They have their opinions and at the end of the day it's their problem. Generally speaking it's incumbent on the government and on pious Moslems to convey the righteousness of religion through efficient, productive and non-conflictual means. Those however who start targeting the Revolution and/or Islam in a hateful manner aimed at causing social-political turmoil and undermining public order or national security, must obviously be brought under control.

And also i have noticed to theirs too many atheist or anti Islamic personals in Iran, weather they are in PDF or twitter..they show pure hatred .

Do not take their prevalence on the internet as an adequate reflection of Iranian society. Such currents of thought came into being in Iran (and elsewhere as well) with the introduction of "modern" western ideologies in our part of the world during the 19th century and the subsequent irruption of cultural alienation. However the internet tends to offer a distorted representation of this demographic's importance. Over the past couple of years religious Iranians have somewhat boosted their presence on "social media" despite being subjected to censorship by western-controlled websites, but the great majority of them are posting in Farsi exclusively.

Keep in mind also that no other country is subjected to a such a degree of informational and cultural warfare against its legitimate government and the values incarnated by it. The enemy is promoting both hatred of the Islamic Republic (including through wolves in sheep's clothing, elements which will pretend to be on Iran or the Revolution's side only to operate a sudden u-turn at a given point in time or to constantly inject subtle propaganda between the lines, BBC-style), as well as extreme secularism, anti-clericalism and liberalism (sometimes in an ultra-nationalist garb) coupled with contempt for Islam.
 
Last edited:
Some attribute a response in the form of killing random Israeli's on the street by Palestinians.

Only cowards kill civilians. How can followers of Imam Ali kill civilians and call themselves religious men of God? Hell awaits those that kill civilians wether they walk with the enemy or not.

Civilian deaths is not an impactful response.

Civilian deaths is going against God. Only a sick minded immature individual gets pleasure when a civilian dies.

Nothing is achieved by civilian deaths. No God would sanction civilian deaths to achieve objectives.

Targeting military infrastructure in the Golan with twin Dezful's would be more impactful.

Responses should be kept to the battlefield and done in a way to advance objectives and prevent further bloodshed. Bloodshed to match bloodshed is not honorable nor in line with God.

There use to be honor to warfare. Then the barbarians from the East showed up and destroyed that. Thousands years later, humanity has supposedly advanced, but the barbarians are even more blood hungry than ever.
 
It makes sense..

Why would Government officials and Akhoonds risk attacking Israel or heavily attacking US forces in Syria in response when it risks all the wealth they have acclimated in Europe and Iran. Better to just absorb the deaths of soldiers than to risk their money and lives. Blood is cheap.
people are growing frustrated at current regime especially after the engineered election and soft purge of anyone who does not have official view ...
The hypocrisy is sky rocketing like the prices of goods ...

تا زمانی که حکومت یک دست نشده بود، می تونستند تقصیرها رو بندازند تقصیر دولت ، ولی حالا نه ...

ساسانیان هم زمانی شروع به سقوط کردند که حکومت نیمه فدرال ایران رو تبدیل کردند به حکومت تماما مرکزی استبدادی ...

Why did we make a defense treaty with a country without Sharia law?

In another question of hypocrisy, why were our men and women separated in Azadi Stadium when Iran played Russia, but Russian wifes and husbands were allowed together? Do Islamic law apply only to Iranians? Does it not apply to everyone in the land?


Their are plenty of Pro-IR Telegram channels, you can see the comments for yourself.


I can only wonder if Khomeini was in charge with even 1/10th of the weapons that are available today. He was truly one of a kind, and would've never allowed many of the blows that were received by both Israel and Israel's presence in Azerbaijan.


پان ترک اللهی ها با ظاهر مذهبی و احکام رادیکال درون حکومت نفوذ زیادی دارند بنابراین به عنوان ستون پنجم عمل باکو عمل می کنند

Some attribute a response in the form of killing random Israeli's on the street by Palestinians. Civilian deaths is not an impactful response. Targeting military infrastructure in the Golan with twin Dezful's would be more impactful.
They don't dare to do anything ... they even don't dare to response to Taliban ...
 
people are growing frustrated at current regime especially after the engineered election

The election wasn't rigged. Liberals lost because people had enough of them after eight years of abysmal performance by the Rohani administration. Moreover some of the their usual support base failed to mobilize.

and soft purge of anyone who does not have official view ...

Maybe this is why we can witness this many oppositionists express their misled opinions freely. If Iran had a pervasive and unpermissive system of political control in place (like China for instance), none of them would be voicing such diatribes.

تا زمانی که حکومت یک دست نشده بود، می تونستند تقصیرها رو بندازند تقصیر دولت ، ولی حالا نه ...

ساسانیان هم زمانی شروع به سقوط کردند که حکومت نیمه فدرال ایران رو تبدیل کردند به حکومت تماما مرکزی استبدادی ...

The Rohani cabinet left a catastrophic legacy of such proportions, that it will take years to compensate for.

So far the current administration has done a commendable job by and large. On the economic front there's essentially one area in which it has yet to deliver, and that's inflation. Granted, this right now is affecting citizens the most and the government has the obligation to fix it however this should not distract attention from successes achieved elsewhere - in contrast to the previous cabinet's across the board failure.

پان ترک اللهی ها با ظاهر مذهبی و احکام رادیکال درون حکومت نفوذ زیادی دارند بنابراین به عنوان ستون پنجم عمل باکو عمل می کنند

Those pan-Turkist traitors are not influencing strategic decision making in matters of national security. The mission assigned to them by their foreign masters is to foment separatist and "ethno"-nationalist sentiment among Azari Iranians, and to promote "ethnicist" thinking in society and politics.

Also authorities have begun clamping down on these elements, as shown by several recent arrests as well as Ghazipour's disqualification from the parliamentary election.

They don't dare to do anything ... they even don't dare to response to Taliban ...

They just dare to be the only country on earth brave enough to arm Palestinian and Lebanese Resistance groups against zionist occupiers, which has officially earned them the title of "biggest threat to Isra"el"" as per every zionist "prime minister" since decades.

As for the Taleban, what aggression are they supposed to have committed since their return to power which Iran allegedly failed to respond against?
 
Last edited:


«وقتی احتمال زندگی در غارت بیشتر باشد و احتمال گرفتار شدن کمتر، افراد ترجیح می‌دهند کارهای سخت را رها کنند و با غارت و کلاه‌برداری زندگی کنند. اگر نهادها هزینۀ تخلف را پایین بیاورند و امکان زندگی در غارت را گسترش دهند چون مردم خُرده‌هوشی و تُنُک‌عقلی دارند این مسیرها را شناسایی می‌کنند و ترجیح می‌دهند "غارتی – رانتی" زندگی کنند. اگر به شکل و رنگ خاصی درآمدن و رییس شدن هزینه‌ای نداشته باشد همه هوس می‌کنند رنگ عوض کنند و رییس شوند. چون اگر نشوند چیزی را نباخته‌اند و اگر شدند ملت، بازنده است و آنها برنده!»
درسته. اگه این همه خائن و مرغ خور زر زن تو مملکت نبود اوضاع سریعتر پیش میرفت. کاش مرد عمل بیشتر بود. توصیه می‌کنم جنابعالی کمی به عملکردن گرایش بفرمایید بجای زدن زر.
 
Back
Top Bottom