Unclear if threat has been carried out or if move will jeopardise talks with US scheduled for Sunday
Iran has said it is closing the strait of Hormuz after waves of Israeli strikes in Lebanon in a move that threatens to derail the fragile interim peace deal with the US, signed just days ago.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned ships not to approach the strategic waterway, which before the war carried a fifth of global oil and liquid gas supplies, citing what it called Israeli crimes in Lebanon and a US violation of commitments to establish a ceasefire there.
It was unclear if the threat had been carried out, or if it would jeopardise talks in Switzerland scheduled for Sunday that were supposed to start the process of turning the current interim agreement between the US and Iran signed this week into a more detailed deal covering Iran’s nuclear programme.
Some dude who just bought an F150 at a Carmax somewhere in Georgia
“FUCK, REALLY?”
All you need to know:
Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, has vowed to keep Israeli forces in southern Lebanon until any threat to Israel is eliminated. Hezbollah has refused to halt its attacks unless Israel commits to withdrawing from Lebanon, which Iran says is also a condition of the deal.
All this chaos cause Israel thinks it can take land to stop attacks instead of triggering more attacks.
The Guardian:
Iran has said it is closing the strait of Hormuz after waves of Israeli strikes in Lebanon in a move that threatens to derail the fragile interim peace deal with the US, signed just days ago.
So, Israel doing the very thing which was explicitly in the peace deal as something that couldn’t happen isn’t at all the “move that threatens to derail the fragile interim peace deal”, it’s Iran reacting to the peace-deal itself being broken that’s the thing threatening it.
And some people actually think this Manufacturing Consent specialist pro-Zionist English newspaper is left-of-center …
to be technical, it’s more trump’s fault for promising something the US could not guarantee. of course it’s israel’s fault for doing all this war in the first place but creating an unworkable deal is trump’s fault.
you can of course be left-and-center and still make mistakes such as this. despite what it was in the 1930s, guardian has been pretty consistently fair about this
I suggest you go check the Manufacturing Consent community if you think The Guardian has been fair - they’re a pretty reliable presence there when it comes to anything involving Israel.
i have just scrolled through ten days without finding a trace. search results, the recent one is about the news item itself without any objections to the wording. the rest are from months ago and mostly do the same or are using guardian as a counterexample or pointing out the common use of passive voice in news headlines. the exceptions i didn’t find convincing
Every time The Guardian says “the Iranian Regime” but not “the Israeli Regime”, they’re framing both sides differently, which they do all the time time.
Ditto when they say that Iran “claims” but US/Israeli sources “say”, again countless times - in one of those for example within a single paragraph (the 3rd) you have “Iran claims” and “US officials said”.
I bet you’re so used to them using differently charged words for different sides you just accept it as natural without spotting that they’re using differently charged words and implying different levels of trustworthiness for each side, which is exactly how Manufacturing Consent techniques work on people who don’t try and spot such forms of manipulation.
- as bad as Israel is, it is not an authoritarian state oppressive of its “own” people, even though that doesn’t justify invading Iran. it is trending that way but it’s somewhat far from having an IRGC
- you’re not comparing “Iran claims” to “US said”; you’re comparing “Iranian claims” to “US said” instead of “US statements”. here, “claims” is just shorter. in your example the word “claims” is used at the same frequency for trump and iran. google results suggest “US statements” is used at about the same percentage as “Iranian statements”
Iran being a guarantor of collective security and enforcer of international law was not on my bingo card.
The only people willing to stand up to Israel are the nations it seeks to destroy because it bribes the rest into compliance
With American tax dollars
Seems like it seeks to destroy the nations supporting it too, the US isn’t exactly doing so hot right now.
The only people willing to stand up to Israel are the nations it seeks to destroy because it
bribesblackmails the top politicians of the rest into complianceFTFY.
bribes, threatens and bombs the rest into compliance
FTFY.
the axis of resistance’s goal is to maintain its collective security, after all
Sometimes, dicks fuck assholes too
Perfect
Gas jumped .50 today in my city. I should have filled up yesterday.
Fair enough. Fucks us all economically, but that’s a lot ofl lives currently at risk in Lebanon.
It’s not about Lebanon. It’s about peace in the Middle East or bombed out desalination plants and mass migrations into Europe.
The sooner people start realizing this the sooner Hormuz opens.
Shias have the right to defend themselves.
As soon a s the Stock Market goes DOWN enough to buy cheap then the strait will open so they can sell those stocks they bought.
Buy low, sell high. There is no other way to do it.
This is just what unconditional surrender looks like
The most brutal bombings and killing always happen during ceasefires. /s
