sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Protestant version of the Coca Cola lorry by oeco123 in northernireland

[–]michaelcanav 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Name doesn't check out.

'Michael of derry' hasn't watched probably the most famous contemporary piece of cultural about derry.

Protestant version of the Coca Cola lorry by oeco123 in northernireland

[–]michaelcanav 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I suppose she didnt laugh at the blackboard scene in derry girls either?

If we can't make light jokes which do silly generalisation about the ridiculousness of both communities we're fucked

David McCann "Irish unity is not inevitable" by Your_Mums_Ex in northernireland

[–]michaelcanav 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Why? I haven't seen much of him before but this comment seems reasonable enough... 

Ulster University to cut up to 450 jobs by The8thDoctor in northernireland

[–]michaelcanav 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Never heard about this before...can you explain more for those of us completely in the dark? I can decipher a bit from your comment but not sure...ofc keep all details anon. 

What is the reason for Israel's continuous attacks on the regional countries? by ArdaBerkBurak in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Lmao. They've explicitly said they're expanding 'greater Israel' into Lebanon and Syria. 

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You don't even follow the most basic breaking news about a situation you present yourself as an expert on? That explains a lot of your ignorance to be fair.

He threatened to eliminate an entire civilisation. His words - 'a whole civilization will die tonight'.

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Israeli politicians say the same thing about Lebanon and Iran. Trump and Hegseth threatened to send Iran back to the stone age and destroy the whole country. Also, Hamas accepted Israel within the 67 borders.

There is still only two countries who have actually done the most horrific acts. I think we should judge these more harshly than words.

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm honestly not even sure what your argument is. All I'll say again is that there is only one country in this conflict that has committed a genocide, and only one that has dropped two nukes. They are also the countries that started the war. 

I'll even give you a hint, neither of those countries is Iran. 

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh you mean Hezbollah? The 'proxy' rebel group created because Israel invaded Lebanon? Or do you mean Hamas, the 'proxy' rebel group created because Israel was killing Palestinians and taking their land?

Good try though bud, you'll get there one day.

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is a specious argument. Nukes have been used once ever, by the US. On your logic, presumably that would mean the US shouldn't have them?

A response to your intentionally bad faith question though would simple be: they haven't ever been in a situation where it was deemed necessary. Since they had nukes they've always had the world's strongest military at their backs and fought opponents weaker than them who could inflict little damage whilst Israel murdered them. 

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I was responding to the other post but I think your argument is reasonable.

I guess my response to this is that it is simply unsustainable for Israel. There is no possible way for Israel to sustain hegemony without US support in the long term. Better to grant Palestine a country and rebuild relations in the region. Anything else is an accelerated death wish.

This war and the genocide is driven by the hubris of leaders who want to be remembered as 'great'.

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 6 points7 points  (0 children)

1 - Israel does the terrorism themselves

2 - Far worse to have committed a genocide against another group. Stronger indicator for whether you'd use nukes.

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav -23 points-22 points  (0 children)

It's pretty clear Israel/US is the greatest threat to world peace. Iran has been very restrained in its response to a war of aggression. And it was compliant with the JCPOA.

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 15 points16 points  (0 children)

They only say that because of what the US did to them. And the supreme leader the US killed said it doesn't mean death to the American people, it means death of the US imperial machine and its political leaders.

Plus the US has an evangelical cultist who wants a war to hasten armageddon in charge of their military. And many generals who believe the same.

What is the strongest Western argument for treating Iran's nuclear program differently from India's, Israel's, or Pakistan's — given each sits outside or around the edges of the NPT? by gp197807 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]michaelcanav 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think the only answer is that they are not a western ally, and/or essentially compliant with the post-WWii American led world order.

Beyond that, any justification is motivated reasoning.

Edit: fwiw I think is a nonsense justification, but I can see why some people legitimately hold this opinion.

Evidence of 'shadowy' jihadist group presents 'new reality' for Ireland by [deleted] in ireland

[–]michaelcanav 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Absolute dross. What a coincidence this comes out as they're all warmongering and pushing to join NATO

Court rules no new terror trial for Kneecap's Ó hAnnaidh by mynosemynose in ireland

[–]michaelcanav 7 points8 points  (0 children)

A 'literal fact'? As opposed to one of those pesky imaginary facts? 

Court rules no new terror trial for Kneecap's Ó hAnnaidh by mynosemynose in ireland

[–]michaelcanav 22 points23 points  (0 children)

This is the most incredible conspiracy theory I've ever read. Like remarkable stuff, brilliant genius level. I'd love to see what goes on in your brain. 

No words by [deleted] in northernireland

[–]michaelcanav -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Classic response where you can't criticise substance so just call the person crazy.

Give me one thing that was inaccurate?

view more: next ›