• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I’ll try to explain this to you one final time. These troops are ‘defending’ military bases which are used to attack Iran. Let me know what part of that you’re still struggling with. Bases that are used to attack Iran and countries hosting them are the aggressors.

    • Saapas@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      It’s just that your first comment seemed to imply that the troops were going there with the goal of helping the US, when that wasn’t the goal but rather an effect from the goal of the troops defending the Gulf allies and Cyprus. That’s all. There’s really no need to get snarky about this, friend

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        I mean they are literally helping the US by working at the bases the US is using to attack Iran. You’re trying to draw a weird distinction here between them providing support by operating at these bases and actively engaging in attacks. In both cases they are active participants in the war of aggression against Iran.

        • Saapas@piefed.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          It’s not a weird distinction between a goal (why they’re going there) and a (side-)effect (what is something that’s happening as a result of it), when someone seems to confuse the two lol

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            The only one confused here is you. The goal is to enable military operations against Iran. That’s why those bases exist in the first place. These troops are part of the war of aggression, and whether they have an offensive role or not is utterly irrelevant to the discussion. To put it in terms you might understand easier, if you’re a getaway driver for a bank robbery, you can’t use that an excuse to claim that you weren’t part of the robbery.

            • Saapas@piefed.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              22 hours ago

              It doesn’t look like that’s why those troops are being send there right now though. These troops are for the Gulf allies and Cyprus.

              You are angry about the British role in the Iran war and I feel you, but I’m just talking about why these troops are going there.

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                22 hours ago

                I’m not angry. I’m pointing out the simple fact that the reason those bases are being attacked by Iran is because they’re used to wage a war of aggression against Iran. I’m just trying to explain to you why those troops are active participants in this war. I don’t know why it’s so difficult for you to understand that frankly.

                • Saapas@piefed.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  22 hours ago

                  It’s just that you’re talking about a different thing to me. You’re explaining things that weren’t under question and don’t really relate to what I said. I was solely talking about why these troops were being sent there right now.

                  I appreciate the enthusiasm but it’s just a bit off this topic and more a general discussion about the war.