Taft

Politics_And_Law

The Israeli-American strike against Iran’s ayatollahs ended much faster than expected. This is good news—ceasefires and peace have almost always proven to be far better solutions than war. But the news gets even better: day by day, it becomes clearer that this short war has indeed damaged, to some extent, Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

Still, it turns out this wasn’t just a short war—it was also a strange one: there were only winners, and no losers. At least on the propaganda front, all three warring parties have, over the past few days, crafted their own victorious narrative.

1. Iran’s Narrative

Iran claims the ceasefire came as a direct consequence of its strike on the largest American base in the region. It’s a classic peacock-style claim, puffed up far beyond the reality. The aim is to tell the Iranian people that the ayatollahs’ regime is strong enough to stand up to powerful armies and nations, forcing them to abandon war and make peace.

But when you put this delusional claim side by side with reality, you’ll see far more feathers than flesh—in the end, the propaganda peacock is reduced to a mere chicken leg. The strike on the Al Udeid airbase—the largest in the region—was more symbolic than strategic. In fact, reliable sources report that Iran had warned the Americans beforehand, allowing them to evacuate soldiers and military equipment in time.

Despite its obvious propagandistic nature, the ayatollahs' narrative seems to be working in their favor: it has sparked a wave of near-universal nationalism, strong enough to somewhat dampen the widespread dissatisfaction with the regime.

2. Israel’s Narrative

Israel has also released its own victorious narrative. To be fair, Israel may indeed be the actual winner of this war. After weakening Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Iranian allies in the region over a two-year period, it carried out aerial strikes against Iran that damaged, at least partially, its nuclear infrastructure and killed a significant number of high-ranking military officials and scientists involved in uranium enrichment. And as the cherry on top, Netanyahu managed to draw the Americans into the operation.

Still, Israel’s narrative also contains more feathers than flesh—more propaganda than reality. The damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure isn’t as extensive as Tel Aviv claims. Moreover, Israel’s air defense systems didn’t live up to the myth long constructed around them. As a result of Iran’s missile attacks, Israel suffered considerable damage to its infrastructure and civilian casualties.

Nevertheless, the carefully crafted winner’s narrative coming out of Tel Aviv serves some very deliberate purposes. A war “won” in 12 days helps Israel retouch, to some extent, the humiliation of October 7th, when its military and intelligence services were caught off guard by Hamas, which killed 1,200 Israelis and abducted 250 more.

The moral and logistical support Israel received from France, the UK, and other Western nations during Iran’s air raids was used to deflect some of the international criticism of its inhumane treatment of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. The 12-day war also served as a distraction from Gaza’s atrocities. Over 100 Palestinian civilians were killed during that period near food distribution centers by Israeli forces, but media attention was focused on the skies—on rockets, jets, and drones.

3. The American Narrative

The lightning-fast airstrikes by American bombers on three of Iran’s uranium-processing centers—followed by an immediate ceasefire accepted by both Iran and Israel—are being presented as a major foreign policy victory for President Trump. However, even this narrative is heavily loaded with propaganda and, in some segments, seriously distorts the truth.

“We have completely and totally destroyed Iran’s nuclear program,” declared Trump right after the strikes. But early reports from the Pentagon, U.S. intelligence services, and now European agencies suggest otherwise: Iran appears to have managed to relocate and thus save 400 kg of uranium enriched to 60%. If this reserve is further enriched to 90%, it would be enough to produce around 10 nuclear warheads.

Experts say the Iranian nuclear program has not been “completely and totally destroyed”—only delayed by about five months. Meanwhile, some political analysts warn that the American strikes may push Iran’s nuclear activity deeper underground, beyond the oversight of international experts, as has been the case until now. If this proves true, the strikes may have caused more harm than good.

Trump’s hyperbolic exaggeration of the bombing’s success is meant to partially compensate for broken campaign promises—to end the war in Ukraine in a single day, to bring peace to the Middle East, and so on. Naturally, the image of a spectacular victory also serves to divert American public attention from concerns that the ongoing trade war could end up hitting their own pockets.

If you take the statements of Khamenei, Netanyahu, and Trump at face value, it seems the 12-day war had only winners. But this mirage-like image recalls the words of the ancient Greek who said: the first casualty of every war is the truth.

Iran–Israel War: Victory narratives and the peacock

U.S. isn’t at war with Iran, ‘we’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program,

siggy47

>Only a Yale law graduate can seriously think this bullshit is persuasive.

When I read the title of your post, I clicked, intending to say the same thing because I thought you agreed with him. Then, I saw your statement, and I thought, 'Yes, Siggy can't agree with such idiotic arguments.'   

AskSN

Hey, stackers, are you scared about the American attack against Iran? 

Do you see this as the prelude to WW3? Or will diplomacy prevail again, and some peace be restored in the world? 

Personally, I'm a bit scared and disappointed by today's global leaders. We are lacking wise leaders with moral and personal integrity. 

How about you? 

Are you optimistic that life will eventually triumph again over death and destruction? 

Life vs death-destruction

Photography

![](https://m.stacker.news/96314)

This iconic 1957 photograph was taken in Rimini, one of Italy’s most popular coastal cities, and captures a moment that today seems almost unbelievable: a police officer issuing a fine to a woman for wearing a bikini on a public beach.

In the 1950s, although the bikini had been officially introduced in 1946 by French designer Louis Réard, wearing one was often considered scandalous or inappropriate by authorities, especially in places where social norms were still rooted in more conservative values.

1950s Italy was still a society in transition after World War II, where the influence of the Catholic Church and traditional moral standards remained strong.

The bikini was seen as a threat to public order, and in some seaside towns, there were regulations prohibiting excessive exposure of the body.

In such cases, police officers were authorized to issue warnings or even fines for attire deemed “indecent.”

Incidents like this also occurred in other European countries, and even in the United States, until the late 1950s.

The time when women were fined for wearing bikinis

Stacker Saloon

saloon

> Who the fuck steals water?

Someone that was desperately thirsty... 😁😁

BooksAndArticles

Some time ago, I followed the controversy sparked by the Dutch translation of the poem *The Hill We Climb*, written by Amanda Gorman, likely at the request of Joe Biden.  

A patriotic poem with Whitmanesque tones, it also includes references to the Bible. The Dutch publisher Meulenhoff assigned the translation to Marieke Lucas Rijneveld, a highly talented young writer. However, journalist Janice Deul, who, like Amanda Gorman (the poem’s author), is African American, protested (before the translation was even published), questioning why a white person should translate a Black poet. According to Deul, Gorman was raised by a single mother and faced many difficulties in her childhood, which inevitably shaped her identity and creativity—something a white translator could never fully understand.  

The controversy spread widely, but I’d like to focus on the response of André Markowicz, a self-described "secular Jew" of Russian origin, and undoubtedly, in my view, one of the most brilliant translators of our time. I recall his translations of Dostoevsky’s complete works, for which he argued that previous translations were flawed. According to Markowicz, Dostoevsky despised elegance, especially the French kind. Dostoevsky, he claimed, wrote insistently, disregarding syntax and frequent repetitions. Markowicz preserved this very aspect, and his work has been highly praised by experts.  

In his *Tribune* article, Markowicz appears somewhat tense. He remarks that Janice Deul’s arguments remind him of a Russian critic’s comment that his Dostoevsky translations were questionable because he was not Orthodox. The underlying argument was that a Jew, even if Russian, could never grasp the "Russian soul."  

He asserts that dividing translation rights based on skin color is the absolute antithesis of what translation represents.  

"No one has the right to tell me whom I can or cannot translate. On the contrary, everyone has the right to judge my work—if they have the competence to do so. The real question is whether, through my work, my voice, and my craft, I have succeeded in conveying the voice of another without reducing it to the nature of my own voice."  

He also harshly criticizes the Dutch publisher for withdrawing the translation and issuing an apology to conform to contemporary identity-based demands.  

Finally, I observe the heated debates and criticisms on social media, which, unfortunately, often take on racist overtones. But I’d like to highlight one particularly striking comment:  

"So, what now? Do you have to be a gay, asthmatic Jew to have the right to translate Proust?"

Who has the right to translate?

Europe, meaning the EU, is arming itself. They say this is being done to fill the gap that a potential U.S. withdrawal might leave.

But there’s another perspective. Economists at Goldman Sachs predict that higher defense spending could increase the EU’s GDP by 0.5% over the next two years.

What’s going on?

What’s going on with EU?

Some insane lights tonight

denlillaapan

Waw! All this is just natural phenomenon!? It’s amazing. 🙃

ideasfromtheedge

There are certain discoveries that have irreversibly shaped modern and contemporary human society, creating new visions of humanity and society—sometimes with fortunate consequences, other times with unfortunate ones.

The first is the discovery of the thinking "I" by Descartes, followed by Kant, German idealism, and French existentialism—excluding Heideggerian existentialism.

The second is the discovery of homo oeconomicus by Marx, where philosophy and knowledge in general lose their abstract nature and take on a transformative role in society. Philosophy becomes action.

The third discovery is the Freudian unconscious. After this, neither art, literature, nor anthropology could ever avoid engaging with it on any page or in any line.

The fourth discovery is the general theory of relativity by Einstein, which, along with quantum physics, brought a radical shift in hypotheses about the origin of the universe—and beyond. It also redefined humanity’s place in the cosmos.

Any thoughts? 

Discoveries that shaped the society we live in

Don’t be sad, you have me!

Yes, it seemed like a possible answer, but I sensed a subtle discord, a feeling that something more complex was at play. It seemed that these were just a part of the problem she had. I don't know. 

As I was drinking my morning coffee in one of my favourite cafés, with my laptop open to continue translating the book I had started a long time ago — a translation that was progressing very slowly — I overheard a conversation between two elderly people. At first, I thought they were a married couple, but then I realized they were just friends (or maybe something more than friends!?).

The short dialogue I managed to hear went like this:

- My husband has passed away, - said the old lady. - My children have left me alone. Why did God punish me so hard?
- He hasn’t punished you, no. Don’t be sad, you have me.
- But how can I not be sad, my dear? I’m just human.
- God is great. Don’t be sad.
- But I’m human, my dear.
- It’s not your fault. This is life! You cannot do anything about it.
- What a damned life.
- There’s nothing you can do. That’s just how it is.
- But I have no one, my dear. What kind of life is this?
- Don’t you get along with your daughters?
- No, I don’t. Don’t I have the right not to?
- You do, but there’s nothing you can do. It’s not your fault.
- I must be tiring you. Have you finished your coffee?
- Forget the coffee. I just want to sit here with you and take away some of your sadness.
- Thank you.
- God is great! God is great! I don’t know what He can do! I don’t know what to say to you, I don’t know what answer to give because I’m afraid I might say something wrong. I am here for you. You know what I am to you. What am I to you?
- A friend.
- Now you ask me what you are to me.
- What am I to you? – asked the old lady.
- You are my love! - replied the old man, and he reached out his hand and wiped away a tear that had rolled down her cheek

At some point, the old lady turned her head and noticed that I was sitting nearby, just a table away. She lowered her voice. Probably, she was afraid that I might overhear their conversation. I saw her being a bit embarrassed about the fact that I could have heard their conversations. They continued their conversation in hushed tones. The poor lady had tears in her eyes the entire time.

I couldn’t understand what had happened to her or why she was so deeply sad. I never found out why she felt that "God had punished her so harshly." However, the gentleman remained by her side, never taking his eyes off her for a moment.

The scene left an indelible impression on me, one that has stayed in my mind for a long time! At that moment, I had an overwhelming urge to get up and hug them both. But I didn’t do that. I simply continued watching them in silence, with my eyes filled with tears.

food_and_drinks

Why Is the American Diet So Deadly?

![](https://m.stacker.news/80701)

Sculpture by the Danish artist JENS GALSCHIOT.

An obese, lazy, and parasitic justice oppressing emaciated, battered, and desperate people.

No image has ever managed to depict the global judicial system so faithfully. 

Global judicial system

>In recent years, dozens of studies have linked ultra-processed fare to health problems such as high blood pressure and heart attacks, and also to some problems that one might not expect: cancer, anxiety, dementia, early death. One analysis found that women who ate the most ultra-processed food were fifty per cent more likely to become depressed than those who ate the least; another found that men who consumed more had substantially higher rates of colon cancer. (Most of these studies controlled for confounding factors such as income, physical activity, and other medical conditions.)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/01/13/why-is-the-american-diet-so-deadly?fbclid=IwY2xjawI1TdNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHUt3oLIMB05qjW_ww3IZ4Car5Vl-FzSnPmigrbeh4KezmMe6Kx5iUi4dYw_aem_e3NaM-osEipq_-kqjPmEdw



There came a time when, after many years, I finally managed to respect my own "No's."  

Having been a guilt-ridden, polite, and "good child" from infancy, I would instinctively give in to others' requests. Complaints would make me melt and surrender.  

Then came an age when my psyche, suffocating under countless "yeses," hit the red zone and got seriously angry with me.  

A long-overdue rebellion began with the smallest things. No, I won’t force myself to finish a book I have started if I don't like it! If I don’t like it, I’ll give it up to 60 pages. If it doesn’t grab me, I’ll leave it. No, I won’t be a prisoner to incoming phone calls. After years of therapy, I’ve exhausted myself listening, absorbing other people’s anxiety. I get overwhelmed easily. 

No, I won’t run to invitations just to avoid upsetting someone by declining. I can’t even spend too much time with friends because my battered musculoskeletal system protests, and I’m in pain. I don’t go out at night for dinners and gatherings. I don’t attend funerals because mourning certain people hurts too much, and I want to grieve alone, without an audience. 

I still deeply love the friends I’ve loved, I think of them often, I wish them well, I write to them, but I can’t spend hours with them like I used to. I know some are upset with me for this, but if their love isn’t also my freedom, I don’t want it. I was excessively social, but I’ve finally grown tired.  

People change their daily lives with time, with problems, with new events. Let’s focus on the essence of our relationships, dear friends—the core! If someone tries to guilt me with complaints, I get angry. Guilt used to drive my life, and I paid the price.  

We grow older, and no, age is not just a number.

The Freedom of saying No

In the latest U.S. presidential elections, as expected, Trump won by a landslide. His victory was acknowledged even by the Democratic candidate, Kamala, the very next day. Trump openly declared his goals: to restore the greatness and authority of the U.S., which had hit its lowest levels during the Obama and Biden presidencies. Under Biden, the world was on the brink of WWIII.

In the Trump-Kamala duel, I never even considered rooting for Kamala; however, I must say that no politician, no matter who, makes me go crazy for them. Not even Trump. Simply put, between the two candidates, Trump was the better choice for me. I hoped his election would have a positive impact on the world and my country.

Many anti-Trumpists haven’t stopped spewing venom against him; according to them, everything he says and does is wrong. They disagree with Trump’s stance on Zelensky, Ukraine, and Russia. In reality, the Russia-Ukraine conflict began much earlier, not in February 2022: the Azov Battalion’s crimes against the Russian-speaking population in Donetsk, the referendum where those regions voted to join Russia, etc. That conflict was further provoked by the Biden administration and Europe, and it escalated when they pushed for Ukraine to join NATO—an act that was practically a declaration of war against Russia and the beginning of WWIII. The result: one and a half million dead Ukrainians and Russians, Ukraine in ruins, war industry tycoons got richer, and American and European taxpayers paid, as they say, over 350 billion euros—out of which roughly 100 billion are unaccounted for. Where did they go? Into the pockets of U.S. officials or Zelensky? Sooner or later, this issue will be unraveled.

Oh, did you hear the latest news? Apparently, Trump is a secret Russian agent, recruited by the KGB in 1987 under the codename Krasnov.

I have nothing more to say. Fairy tales… See you around.

Is Trump a secret Russian agent?

Steak of the day!

Shugard

I don't like all meets, but I'm not a vegetarian. I love eating fish. 

Not religious at all. Just don't like it. Weird, right?

It looks nice. 

Probably, I’m the only one here that doesn’t eat steak or meat in general. 🤦🏼‍♂️ But I love eggs. 