Image is of the damage caused by an Iranian Kheibar Shekan ballistic missile in Israel, causing dozens of injuries.

Now in our second week of the conflict, we have seen continuing damage to both Israel and Iran, as well as direct US intervention which nonetheless seems to have caused limited damage to Fordow and little damage to Iran’s nuclear program. Regime change seems more elusive than ever, as even Iranians previously critical of the government now rally around it as they are attacked by two rabid imperialists at once. And Iran’s government is tentatively considering a withdrawal, or at minimum a reconsideration, of their membership to the IAEA and the NPT. And, of course, the Strait of Hormuz is still a tool in their arsenal.

A day or so on from the strike on Fordow, we have so far seen basically no change in strategy from the Iranian military as they continue to strike Israel with small barrages of missiles. Military analysts argue furiously - is this a deliberate strategy of steady attrition on Israel, or indicative of immense material constraints on Iran? Are the hits by Israel on real targets, or are they decoys? Does Iran wish to develop a nuke, or are they still hesitating? Will Iran and Yemen strike at US warships and bases in response to the attack, or will they merely continue striking only Israel?

And perhaps most importantly - will this conflict end diplomatically due to a lack of appetite for an extended war (to wit: not a peace but a 20 year armistice) or with Israel forced into major concessions including an end to their genocide? Or even with a total military/societal collapse of either side?

Last week’s thread is here. The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on Israel’s destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.

  • Redcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    25·
    5 days ago

    NATO Summit’s Viral ‘Daddy’ Joke Exposes Europe’s Sidelined Agenda - Telesur English

    Article

    The summit reflected NATO’s shift toward U.S.-centric theatrics, with Europe’s core concerns largely pushed aside. The two-day NATO summit that concluded Wednesday in the Netherlands will be remembered less for its policy outcomes than for a flippant moment that dominated headlines: the now-infamous “Daddy” joke.

    During the summit, U.S. President Donald Trump likened Israel and Iran to unruly children, while NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, in a display of flattery, compared Trump to a “dad” stepping in to discipline them. “Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get them to stop,” Rutte said.

    Trump appeared quite pleased with Rutte’s “Daddy” nickname, telling reporters at a later press conference Wednesday that the remark was meant “very affectionately.” “Daddy, you’re my Daddy,” Trump mimicked.

    Rutte later defended the comment, but only doubled down on the flattery, calling Trump a “good friend” and insisting that his military strike on Iran “deserves all the praise.”

    While the “Daddy” joke went viral, the actual summit yielded little of substance. Media outlets noted that the fawning “Daddy” joke ended up stealing the spotlight, underscoring a sobering reality: The summit reflected NATO’s shift toward U.S.-centric theatrics, with Europe’s core concerns largely pushed aside.

    The final communique, just five paragraphs long, was the shortest in NATO’s history and focused heavily on military spending, at Washington’s insistence. Britain and the Netherlands indeed announced new military aid packages for Ukraine.

    However, these commitments were made bilaterally rather than through NATO’s collective framework. Notably, the summit’s final communique omitted the 2024 declaration that Ukraine’s path to NATO membership was “irreversible,” signaling a potential shift in the alliance’s stance.

    In their place came a symbolic commitment to boost defense spending, largely intended to appease Trump. NATO members agreed to raise military spending to 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035, more than doubling the previous 2-percent guideline.

    Yet even as Trump made clear that the United States would not be bound by the new target, he insisted that others must comply. Spain, Slovakia, and Belgium openly questioned the feasibility of such increases, citing domestic constraints and economic priorities.

    Amid chuckles and laughters prompted by the “Daddy” jest, a fact about NATO is evident: Europe has to give in from time to time while Washington never forgets to take advantage of the situation.