A Chinese company’s publication of AI-enhanced satellite images of US bases in the Middle East is helping Iranian forces identify targets, US intelligence believes.
The ABC has been briefed on the intelligence by a source inside US defence, who says the images are endangering lives.
Chinese geospatial artificial intelligence and software company MizarVision, which the Chinese government has a small ownership stake in, has been publishing detailed satellite images with tagging data of multiple US military sites in the lead-up to, and during, the Iran war.
The imagery showcases an AI tool that identifies and tags military forces across vast areas, a capability that once required the resources of a national intelligence agency.
Yes, I agree with your logic. However, Iran is a fundamentalist regime. They appear rational next to trump. That doesn’t make them rational. Otherwise there would have been an end to sanctions years ago. And an end to murdering dissidents and protestors.
I hate to defend Iran, but the Iranian regime is in fact very rational. This is easily apparent when you strip away the religious aspect and look at what they actually do. In all direct confrontations with Israel or the US (at least during Khamenei’s rule, I’m not so sure about Khomeini), Iran has responded with measured actions aimed at de-escalation while saving face domestically and internationally and discouraging further aggression. Your image of Iran seems to be built on Western propaganda more than reality (again, I am not saying this to defend the Iranian regime).
Uh… the sanctions are for daring to control their resources contrary to Western capitalist interests. Iran could be the most secular, most democratic country in the world and Western countries would still find a reason to sanction it. Besides, remember JCPOA? It was the US (and by extension the West) that reneged on that deal. Hell, remember the reason the Islamic Republic exists in the first place? Iran, quite rationally, wants to be an independent regional power not subordinate to anybody’s interests (and, again quite rationally, especially not Western interests). This directly contradicts the Western (especially US) demand that all Middle Eastern states be subordinate to their interests and pro-Israel. There can be no reconciliation between these positions (yet Iran tried anyway, see: JCPOA), so securing its position by force is the only realistic prospect, and frankly you can’t argue with results.
Here you seem to be conflating rationality with morality. The Iranian regime is evil as fuck, but it’s rationally evil. Murdering challengers to one’s power is very rational from the perspective of a regime primarily concerned with its own survival. See also: the CCP.
You’re looking at only the last few weeks. Historicallu, not so much. They have rejected monitoring. Rejected negotiating. Rejected reasonable terms that led to sanctions at multiple points.
Silencing dissent is logical but not creating martyrs in a culture that idolises them.
Clamping down on women for wearing what they choose with violence is not logical. It’s consistent with their ideology, which is my point. The ideology supersedes logic.
In the case of ideology overriding logic, that could lead to use against Israel. Or even the suggestion could cause Israel to strike first as happened this time.
Their support of multiple factions in multiple neighbouring countries targeting than working constructively is also illogical and inflammatory
What? Have you never heard of JCPOA?
Authoritarianism is a balancing act between not creating martyrs and making dissent dangerous. You can’t do one without the other, so while the Iranian regime might (or might not) be acting suboptimally the concern is still its own survival.
It gets points with their base of support, but also every regime anywhere does irrational things. The question is how much, so even if this was irrational (which again isn’t guaranteed) it doesn’t contradict with the wider point.
[Citation needed]. Everything we have from the regime, both statements and actions, states otherwise. Iran can clearly deal significant damage to Israel using its missiles and drones, yet it only does so when threatened. Why would nukes be any different?
Iran is in direct competition with its Arab neighbors and Israel for regional supremacy; conflict between these camps is basically inevitable, especially with the Arab side being pro-America and Israel. Besides, their neighbors won’t trade with them with Western sanctions in place, making this a moot point. Their support for these militias improves their image domestically and regionally (factions like Hamas and the Houthis are very popular in the Middle East), gives them regional power (Iraq and Lebanon being obvious examples, but also Syria when Assad was around), makes local US presence costly and allows them to open up new fronts against Israel basically on demand. Tf you mean illogical, it’s downright genius (and very often evil, but that’s not what we’re talking about). Your position seems to hinge on the assumption that conflict is illogical, but there is such a thing as rational conflict. It’s not like Iran hasn’t tried to improve relations with its neighbors; it just does so on its own terms rather than America’s. TL;DR: Your point is analogous to asking why Ukraine doesn’t pursue better relations with Belarus.
no one is more fundamentalist than western regimes, they all will burn in hell for their crimes