this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2025
29 points (100.0% liked)

Main, home of the dope ass bear.

15966 readers
7 users here now

THE MAIN RULE: ALL TEXT POSTS MUST CONTAIN "MAIN" OR BE ENTIRELY IMAGES (INLINE OR EMOJI)

(Temporary moratorium on main rule to encourage more posting on main. We reserve the right to arbitrarily enforce it whenever we wish and the right to strike this line and enforce mainposting with zero notification to the users because its funny)

A hexbear.net commainity. Main sure to subscribe to other communities as well. Your feed will become the Lion's Main!

Good comrades mainly sort posts by hot and comments by new!


gun-unity State-by-state guide on maintaining firearm ownership

guaido Domain guide on mutual aid and foodbank resources

smoker-on-the-balcony Tips for looking at financials of non-profits (How to donate amainly)

frothingfash Community-sourced megapost on the main media sources to radicalize libs and chuds with

just-a-theory An Amainzing Organizing Story

feminism Main Source for Feminism for Babies

data-revolutionary Maintaining OpSec / Data Spring Cleaning guide


ussr-cry Remain up to date on what time is it in Moscow

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the recent Iran–Israel ceasefire situation, both sides publicly declared agreement on a truce. Hours later, Israel claimed Iran had launched missiles, violating the deal. Iran, in turn, denied any such launch ever took place.

What strikes me is how dramatically their statements diverge — and yet neither has offered any solid proof. No satellite imagery, no intercepted communications, no verified video footage. This makes me wonder: when the technical means to confirm or disprove such claims exist (e.g. radar logs, satellite evidence), why would either side risk an outright lie that could be exposed?

Who’s lying — and more importantly, why? Is the goal simply to shape narrative momentum before facts can catch up? Are these statements made for internal audiences rather than international credibility?

I’m curious how others interpret such deliberate ambiguity. Can both sides be bluffing, or are we missing crucial pieces from third-party observers?

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] XxFemboy_Stalin_420_69xX@hexbear.net 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Who’s lying

it's the white people. always. the perfidious cracker can't help but lie, it's in his nature

[–] Crucible@hexbear.net 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

saul-your-honor as an unscrupulous honkey I have to tell you we're actually very truthful!

[–] NephewAlphaBravo@hexbear.net 9 points 6 days ago

See, we can't help it!

[–] PKMKII@hexbear.net 10 points 6 days ago

The begged question here is, what are the consequences of lying? As others have pointed out, Israel has been lying since day one in the larger conflict; if lying about mass SA and Hamas being in every hospital they bomb hasn’t had any negative fallout, why would they care now? Conversely, the West will spin Iran as being a terrorist state regardless of what it does so it’s not like honesty will earn them any credit.

And on the matter of begged questions, this is really an Iran-Israel-America ceasefire situation. I think, for once, Trump was being honest when he tweeted “Now is the time for peace.” The Trump administration has no love for Iran, but I also think there’s some discontent at feeling like it’s Netanyahu taking the lead on things here instead of Trump. So they really thought a few missile strikes would cow Iran into backing down. Which means the U.S. is putting pressure on Israel to make it look like there’s been a ceasefire deal even if there really isn’t one.

[–] m532@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Neither side is lying in this paricular case (I think). I heard iran fired missiles a minute before the ceasefire was supposed to start, they must have landed in pissrael after the start, predictably riling up the nazis and making them strike back.

So iran has:

  1. Accepted the ceasefire pissrael wanted

  2. Not violated the ceasefire

  3. Gotten pissrael to break the ceasefire

  4. While firing their missile barrages almost uninterrupted

[–] ewls21@hexbear.net 1 points 6 days ago

Ah, so according to you, Iran did launch missiles after all, regardless of the circumstances under which it did so.

[–] infuziSporg@hexbear.net 1 points 6 days ago

You can go a long way by asking the questions of what the power balances are, what the incentives/payoffs for lying are, whom the orthodox narrative is centered around, and what the interests of the parties are.

[–] ButtBidet@hexbear.net 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

One side consistently blatantly lies. This isn't particle physics. One doesn't need to over think it.

Like if one's partner has cheated on then 40 times, it's a Saturday and they're not picking up their phone. You need to look at the whole history of the person (or country) when finding an answer.

[–] ewls21@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago (7 children)

How can someone lie so consistently? Lying is usually a tool for achieving short-term goals — a means to an end. But when a person or a side lies shamelessly, and their lies are so transparent that anyone can see through them with minimal effort, it raises a deeper question: what purpose does it serve to lie so openly, so repeatedly? Or is it a sign that truth no longer matters in the game they're playing?

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 1 points 3 days ago

Sorry for necro posting on a 4 day old thread, but I wanted to add my 2 cents. The point of lying consistently isn't for anyone to believe what they're saying (as you point out, truth just doesn't matter anymore, see Saddam's WMDs). The point of lying is that hegemonic power is capable of constructing social reality unilaterally and wielding the ability to construct reality to achieve political goals. A huge amount of things that are incredibly relevant to geopolitics, despite being falsifiable and objectively observable, are also possible to simulate through a performance. No bomb has to be planted in a stadium to evacuate the stadium if a bomb threat is called in, and all it takes to make a bomb threat is a phone; imagine what you can do with imperial hegemony!

This phenomenon is seen pervasively in times of crisis: the state will go out and defy reality, which performatively makes reality change in turn (see Biden declaring COVID over, Trump executive order defining trans people out of existence).

So, from a postmodernist perspective, even those who try to reject the reality that is being imposed, must still abide by it. That's what power is: it's not a single, centralized institution; it's actually a strategic situation where some powerful people construct a scenario where the powerless people have to accept their condition, because they understand be worse off if they resisted, at least as individuals.

[–] BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Or is it a sign that truth no longer matters in the game they're playing?

Probably that one. The West has settled on the position that Iran is evil and must be destroyed, so when a Trusted Source (our friendly and reliable ally Israel) says they did a Perfidious Thing, the press will happily pick it up and run it uncritically and the public will believe it without seeking further verification, and then the destruction can continue

[–] Belly_Beanis@hexbear.net 6 points 6 days ago

They say the wrong things on purpose. They know everyone else knows they're lying. They do it to demonstrate power. It's bullying conducted on a large, systematic scale. By the time a person proves their lies are wrong, they've moved onto the next lie.

Why do this? Why the need to demonstrate this kind of power? They're making excuses for stealing and murdering. They're going to kill your family, then say they deserved it for whatever reason. It tells the out-groups they are powerless, they don't even have control over the truth. It tells the rest of their in-group they can act with impunity and feel no guilt or remorse for the atrocities they commit.

It's White Man's Burden, Manifest Destiny, thousand-year Reich, Lebensraum, Crusades, etc. etc. repackaged for the needs of Isreal and zionists.

[–] prole@hexbear.net 3 points 6 days ago

anyone can see through them with minimal effort

This is where some of the problem is. Most people aren't even going to try to think about it, they're just going to believe what they already believe regardless of what happens. Conservatives are especially like this, but really just about anyone who isn't actively tearing down their own indoctrination is just nodding and smiling at everything around them like they've been trained to do their entire lives.

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 1 points 6 days ago

The Zionist entity is completely founded on lies, literally founded by a bunch of atheist Jews who claimed the Jewish God they don't even believe in promised the land to them. It always has contempt for the truth. The compulsion towards lying is ideological at this point. They lied about a God they don't actually believe in promising a land, so what's a small lie like lying about a ceasefire in comparison?

[–] ButtBidet@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago

I think that other people and societies can care about doing the right thing more or less. Israel is a settler state, and wants to genocide its neighbors. They consistently have proven that they don't give a fuck about international law or their prestige.

[–] mathemachristian@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago

"kicking the can down the road" is the basis for belief in a capitalist society. It can go on a pretty long time if you keep lying brazenly enough to an audience that only gets their news from you.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

how can iran provide proof of not firing missiles?

[–] ewls21@hexbear.net 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Fair point. But Iran could still support its claim by inviting third-party verification (e.g. UN observers), sharing radar logs or telemetry from its own systems, or requesting satellite data from neutral countries. Even if indirect, such gestures can strengthen credibility.

[–] SnakeEyes@hexbear.net 0 points 4 days ago

Ask Saddam about third party verification