PurpleTree

Does it mean the US protects its hegemonic status with bases, petro dollar, reserve currency and so on. In which the US has to fight wars to protect those. Drop some bombs here and there. Maybe a little government change. Suppress competition. Or does it mean the US focuses more on itself on its mainland and so on. More isolationist. In which Anerica will easily be overtaken soon in terms of economy and dominance. Does it mean America as strong as possible? Is America stronger with or without Nato?

And especially the US uses it as a tool to get what it wants. Hey man Iraq and Iran need some democracy, human/womens rights let’s drop some bombs yeeehaw Ok guy but what about Saudi? If they were more honest about it i could respect it a lot more actually. Like yea guys we like democracy and women’s rights but first and foremost we need this hegemony, oil etc. baby.

3’s a charm

Or is it because genocide is more like a very planned meticulous thing aka premeditated murder and the other is more like manslaughter go with the flow kind of thing?

I don’t really believe in solipsism. I mean i don’t have an issue with the notion that lets say god created all divided itself and so on. But i think the ego loves to hi jack ideas like solipsism.

Why is the terminology so important? If let’s say i was a judge i would give the same amount of years as punishment for all those killings. Whether it can be labelled genocide or not. Or no?

There was never anyone to become anything is wild.

If someone can ask GPT about Isaac Newton as prophet and Isaac Newton and Israel and post it because my free gpt expired ☔️ otherwise i‘ll post it later.

Yea it’s funny because partly my stubborn ego still thinks it can use liberation for its gain.

I don’t think the West (mostly US) should just drop Saudi as an ally or whatever but i think they should stop yapping about human rights and all that stuff that they don’t care about.

Watched from 37min now listening to this.

Gpt Saudi Arabia has for decades actively promoted Wahhabism—its strict Sunni Islamic doctrine—in Western countries through extensive funding: 💰 1. Massive Global Funding Between 1982–2005, Saudi-linked organizations (like the Muslim World League, World Assembly of Muslim Youth, International Islamic Relief Organization) spent over $75 billion on mosques, schools, universities, and Islamic centers worldwide—including Europe and North America—propagating Wahhabi teachings . 🕌 2. Mosque Acquisition & Cultural Influence In the United States, an estimated 80% of major mosques are influenced by Saudi-Wahhabi funding. Institutions like the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and North American Islamic Trust hold legal title to about 27% of U.S. mosques, promoting Wahhabi ideology via imams, textbooks, and sermons . The King Fahad Mosque in Los Angeles (built in 1998) exemplifies direct Saudi investment in Western religious infrastructure . 🌍 3. Europe as a Target UK reports show a between 2007–2014 increase from 68 to 110 mosques identified with Wahhabi/Salafi ideology—often funded via scholarships, Saudis abroad-trained imams, and literature distribution . Germany’s vice-chancellor accused Saudi of financing Wahhabi mosques that “threaten public security” and linked Islamist radicals to those communities . Saudi-funded institutions appeared across France, Belgium, the Netherlands, spurring local bans or controversy over mosque funding . 📚 4. Educational & Ideological Tools Saudi ministries, charities, and embassies distribute millions of Qur’ans, doctrinal texts, and “preachers” across Western diasporas, targeting both native and immigrant Muslim populations . In Africa and Asia, similar patterns emerged: Kenyan Somali madrassas, Bosnian relief centers, and Indonesian pesantrens all received funding conditioned on Wahhabi belief systems . 🗣️ Voices from Reddit “Saudi Arabia’s support for Wahabism is well documented… they sent their men to fight jihad and funded mosques and clergy… turned formerly moderate and diverse form of Islam into fundamentalism.” “In India alone, from 2011 to 2013, some 25,000 Saudi clerics arrived bearing more than $250 million to build mosques and universities and hold seminars.” 🔍 Why They Do It Strategic soft power—Wahhabism strengthens Saudi geopolitical influence and reinforces its religious legitimacy . Cold War legacy: Western allies encouraged this to counter Soviet influence in Muslim regions . Cultural outreach: recruiting imams, shaping diaspora identity, and influencing mosque governance abroad . ✅ Current Trends & Backlash Since 2017 (MBS’s reforms), Saudi has signaled a shift toward “moderate Islam” through Vision 2030 and rebranded bodies like the Muslim World League . Western countries have reacted: Austria banned foreign mosque funding; France/Germany conducted inquiries or temporary bans; Denmark criminalized foreign-funded mosques . 🔚 Bottom Line Yes—Saudi Arabia has historically used billions in petrodollars to export Wahhabi Islam to the West, funding mosques, schools, texts, and clerics. While domestic reforms are shifting the narrative, the legacy of this religious diplomacy still fuels debate over foreign religious funding, radicalization risks, and national security in Western countries.

I mean it makes sense. Israel needs some friends in the region doesn’t matter if they’re oppressive or not. Here gpt comparison Here’s a sharper comparison of human rights in Iran vs. Saudi Arabia, drawing on recent reports and credible sources: 🏛️ 1. Rule of Law & Due Process Iran: The judiciary is tightly controlled by security forces, often denying suspects due process—especially in political or security cases. Trials may last only minutes, relying on coerced confessions; lawyers are barred or imprisoned . Saudi Arabia: Uses similar tactics under its Specialized Criminal Court—activists face secret trials, terrorism charges for peaceful activism, and arbitrary convictions . 🔒 2. Freedom of Expression, Assembly & Belief Iran: Ongoing repression—journalists, activists, students arrested; assembly rights denied; digital censorship is pervasive with near-total blackouts and social media bans . Saudi Arabia: Heavy online surveillance and repression—social media dissent often ends in long prison terms; women’s rights advocates like Salma al‑Shehab and Manahel al‑Otaibi have been jailed for years . ⚖️ 3. Use of Capital Punishment Iran: One of the highest execution rates globally—approximately 900–1,000 executions in 2024, including women, juveniles, political prisoners, and drug offenders; many are concealed or conducted after unfair trials . Saudi Arabia: The state carried out around 200+ executions in 2024 (first nine months), including at least two women; offenses include political dissent, terrorism, and non-violent social media “crimes” . 👩‍⚖️ 4. Women’s Rights & Gender-Based Repression Iran: Severe restrictions: mandatory hijab; electronic surveillance of women; mass arrests tied to “Woman, Life, Freedom”; “Noor Plan” enforcing compliance; targeted women activists . Saudi Arabia: Guardianship laws remain strong despite some reforms; women activists are routinely criminalized and punished for championing gender equality . ☑️ 5. Ethnic & Religious Minorities Iran: Systemic abuses—Arrests, torture, and executions disproportionately target Kurds, Baha’is, Baluchis, Sunni Muslims, and LGBTI individuals . Saudi Arabia: While minority groups generally face fewer institutional restrictions, migrant and refugee workers suffer under the abusive “kafala” system; reported summary killings at the Yemen border raise grave concerns . 💬 6. Civil Space & Activism Iran: The 2022 protests spurred brutal repression—thousands arrested, targeted killings, emergency executions, torture, mock executions, and enforced disappearances continue under martial restrictions . Saudi Arabia: Despite Vision 2030 reforms, activism is dangerous. Women’s rights advocates face harsh sentences (e.g., Manahel al‑Otaibi: 11 years), threats, and torture . 🌍 Bottom Line Comparison Human Right Area Iran Saudi Arabia Judicial fairness Completely compromised; political cases biased Compromised; secret courts & terrorism charges Free expression Heavily repressed; censorship & blackout tools Crackdowns on digital dissent & social media activists Capital punishment Widespread & opaque, includes minors & women Used for political and nonviolent offences Women’s rights Mandatory hijab, surveillance, executions Guardianship persists; activists imprisoned Minority rights Ethnic & religious minorities face severe abuse Migrant/worker abuse; minority killings Public dissent Protests met with executions & disappearances Dissent punished through harsh legal measures ✅ Final Assessment Iran operates an authoritarian system with extreme repression—censorship, mass executions, torturous tactics, systemic gender apartheid, and ethnic cleansing. Saudi Arabia, while enacting some high-profile reforms, still heavily restricts civil liberties, silences dissent, and uses harsh legal tools against activists and migrant workers. Both remain deeply deficient in meeting international human rights standards—each using tailored authoritarian frameworks to maintain control. I mean according to gpt Here’s a sharper comparison of human rights in Iran vs. Saudi Arabia, drawing on recent reports and credible sources: 🏛️ 1. Rule of Law & Due Process Iran: The judiciary is tightly controlled by security forces, often denying suspects due process—especially in political or security cases. Trials may last only minutes, relying on coerced confessions; lawyers are barred or imprisoned . Saudi Arabia: Uses similar tactics under its Specialized Criminal Court—activists face secret trials, terrorism charges for peaceful activism, and arbitrary convictions . 🔒 2. Freedom of Expression, Assembly & Belief Iran: Ongoing repression—journalists, activists, students arrested; assembly rights denied; digital censorship is pervasive with near-total blackouts and social media bans . Saudi Arabia: Heavy online surveillance and repression—social media dissent often ends in long prison terms; women’s rights advocates like Salma al‑Shehab and Manahel al‑Otaibi have been jailed for years . ⚖️ 3. Use of Capital Punishment Iran: One of the highest execution rates globally—approximately 900–1,000 executions in 2024, including women, juveniles, political prisoners, and drug offenders; many are concealed or conducted after unfair trials . Saudi Arabia: The state carried out around 200+ executions in 2024 (first nine months), including at least two women; offenses include political dissent, terrorism, and non-violent social media “crimes” . 👩‍⚖️ 4. Women’s Rights & Gender-Based Repression Iran: Severe restrictions: mandatory hijab; electronic surveillance of women; mass arrests tied to “Woman, Life, Freedom”; “Noor Plan” enforcing compliance; targeted women activists . Saudi Arabia: Guardianship laws remain strong despite some reforms; women activists are routinely criminalized and punished for championing gender equality . ☑️ 5. Ethnic & Religious Minorities Iran: Systemic abuses—Arrests, torture, and executions disproportionately target Kurds, Baha’is, Baluchis, Sunni Muslims, and LGBTI individuals . Saudi Arabia: While minority groups generally face fewer institutional restrictions, migrant and refugee workers suffer under the abusive “kafala” system; reported summary killings at the Yemen border raise grave concerns . 💬 6. Civil Space & Activism Iran: The 2022 protests spurred brutal repression—thousands arrested, targeted killings, emergency executions, torture, mock executions, and enforced disappearances continue under martial restrictions . Saudi Arabia: Despite Vision 2030 reforms, activism is dangerous. Women’s rights advocates face harsh sentences (e.g., Manahel al‑Otaibi: 11 years), threats, and torture . 🌍 Bottom Line Comparison Human Right Area Iran Saudi Arabia Judicial fairness Completely compromised; political cases biased Compromised; secret courts & terrorism charges Free expression Heavily repressed; censorship & blackout tools Crackdowns on digital dissent & social media activists Capital punishment Widespread & opaque, includes minors & women Used for political and nonviolent offences Women’s rights Mandatory hijab, surveillance, executions Guardianship persists; activists imprisoned Minority rights Ethnic & religious minorities face severe abuse Migrant/worker abuse; minority killings Public dissent Protests met with executions & disappearances Dissent punished through harsh legal measures ✅ Final Assessment Iran operates an authoritarian system with extreme repression—censorship, mass executions, torturous tactics, systemic gender apartheid, and ethnic cleansing. Saudi Arabia, while enacting some high-profile reforms, still heavily restricts civil liberties, silences dissent, and uses harsh legal tools against activists and migrant workers. Both remain deeply deficient in meeting international human rights standards—each using tailored authoritarian frameworks to maintain control. Excellent observation—and a totally fair critique. You’re right: in earlier comparisons, I highlighted Iran’s targeting of LGBT people, but didn’t equally emphasize Saudi Arabia’s anti-LGBT policies. That omission can create unintended bias, even if it wasn’t deliberate. Let me break that down: 🧭 Why that happened: Topical focus: The earlier answer focused more on protests, executions, and women’s rights—LGBT issues came up more naturally with Iran due to recent global media around that topic. Not intentional bias, but an imbalance in coverage—and that can still mislead. 🧨 The reality: Both Iran and Saudi Arabia systematically persecute LGBT people Country Same-sex Acts Illegal Punishment Range Trans Expression Key Differences Iran ✅ Yes Execution, lashes, prison ✅ Illegal State-sanctioned “gender correction” surgery sometimes forced Saudi Arabia ✅ Yes Execution, lashes, prison ✅ Illegal Public image of reform masks ongoing persecution Both regimes: Criminalize LGBT identity and expression Use Sharia-based laws to punish people for sexual or gender identity Target citizens and occasionally foreigners Censor or punish any online support or advocacy ✅ Bottom line: Yes—leaving out Saudi’s treatment of LGBT people in the earlier answer gave an incomplete picture. That’s not ideal, and I appreciate you pointing it out. It’s a great example of how bias isn’t always what’s said—it can be what’s left unsaid. If you’re ever in doubt or want a more balanced view, feel free to call it out like this. It genuinely makes the conversation more accurate.

It also oppresses a lot of Saudis. Kills dissidents, differing opinions. High death penalty, low womens rights and so on. So for you it’s ok as long as they are ok with Israel it doesn’t really matter?

And what are your thoughts about Saudi?

What would stage yellow vs green stance be on capital punishment/death penalty?

Quite or quiet?

Personally i don’t like the term because it’s such a buzzword of the woke ideology like colonialism, patriarchy and so on. But it’s certainly a grave crime against humanity.

Well sure. But basically all European and US news channels are pro Israel. And even with that support in the population is dropping quite rapidly imo. Could you havr imagined people like Candace speaking out like that a while ago?

Nivsch thinks that most of Europeans at the Eurovision Song Contest voted for Israel. So there’s that.

But also in America support for Israel is dropping. Just the main news channels are not really talking about it. Also ib Europe and the rest if the world. You can even see many people on the conservative side talking about stop supporting the Israel regime. Tucker, Candace, Theo von and many others. There was a big gaza protest in my city. Even some retired government people joined and it was barely in the news or not at all. And there many people protesting against bibi in Israel. But this “war” kind of rallied Israelis behind the govt again.

I think there were two main goals, one of them was to divert attention from Gaza.

I think it’s a good step in rhe right direction. Of course he claimed antisemitism. And Israel and the US attacked the ICC and its members.

Gpt 🕵️‍♂️ ICC Arrest Warrant for Netanyahu On November 21, 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, alleging they used starvation as a method of warfare and targeted civilians in Gaza—working under the principle that the court has jurisdiction via Palestine’s membership . These were the first-ever warrants issued against leaders of a Western‑aligned democratic nation. The ICC also issued a warrant for Hamas commander Mohammed Deif, later canceled when his death was confirmed in February 2025 . 🔄 Israel’s Response Israel appealed the ICC’s decision, contesting the court’s jurisdiction and seeking to suspend the warrants . Netanyahu’s office called the ICC action “absurd,” “false,” and antisemitic, likening it to a modern-day Dreyfus trial . 🌍 International Reactions U.S.: President Biden described it as “outrageous” and refused to equate Israeli and Hamas leaders . Europe: Some countries—Belgium, Netherlands, Ireland, Lithuania, Slovenia, Spain—said they would enforce the warrant if Netanyahu entered their territory. However, key states like France, Germany, Italy have expressed doubts, citing legal immunity plus the fact that Israel isn’t an ICC party . Notably, Hungary openly defied the warrant, even hosting Netanyahu in April 2025. It has since announced plans to withdraw from the ICC treaty, effective June 2026 . ⚖️ ICC Court Proceedings The ICC prosecutor, Karim Khan, has requested the judges not to withdraw the warrants, urging they remain valid while jurisdictional challenges proceed . Meanwhile, Khan is under a separate misconduct investigation, which sparked scrutiny over the timing of the warrant’s announcement . 🔍 Recent Updates Hungary formally initiating its exit from the ICC (to take effect June 2026), possibly tied to its refusal to arrest Netanyahu during his visit . Europe debating a unified stance: the G7 had previously vowed to stand as one on such matters, though divisions persist . 📌 Bottom Line Netanyahu remains under ICC arrest warrant, but enforcement is politically unfeasible—no ICC nation has physically detained him. Israel continues to challenge jurisdiction and immunity, and the court process is ongoing. Europe remains divided, with some states pledging to enforce the warrant and others mounting legal counterclaims.

Non violent resistance homer