№ 01 — Lead · International

The West's Surprise at Iran Doing What it Promised!

2 March 20265 min readInternationalB2· Upper intermediate

View original post

§ 01

Word Matching

2 pairs

Words to their Contextual Definitions

Tap a word, then tap another to swap positions. Confirm a position by tapping the word again.

0/4 checked

Words

Definitions

Words to their Contextual Synonyms

Tap a word, then tap another to swap positions. Confirm a position by tapping the word again.

0/4 checked

Words

Definitions

§ 02

Comprehension Quiz

5 questions

Comprehension Quiz

5 questions · Multiple choice

0/5

According to the post, how did Western powers react to Iran's response?

What event triggered Iran's response according to the post?

How does the author characterize Iran's attacks?

What analogy does the author use to describe Western hegemony?

Which option best summarizes the main argument of this post?

Please answer all questions to see your score

§ 03

Real-time Discussion

4 questions

Discussion Questions

How real-time discussion works

Share your thoughts and get personalised feedback on your English
Real-time feedback helps improve your grammar, vocabulary, and critical thinking
You can have back-and-forth conversations on each question
Real-time requests are limited per hour to ensure fair usage

The author asks us to consider "what did the US/Israel expect?" when they assassinated Iran's leader. What do you think they expected Iran's response would be, and why might they have been surprised?

The post uses a controversial analogy comparing Western hegemony to "rapists and abusers." Do you think such strong language is effective in making a political argument, or does it undermine the message? Why?

How do you think international conflicts should be resolved when one nation's leader is assassinated? Is military retaliation ever justified, or should countries always seek diplomatic solutions?

The concept of "proportionate response" is mentioned in the post. In international relations, how can we determine what constitutes a proportionate versus disproportionate response to an attack or assassination?

Words to their Contextual Definitions

Words

Definitions

Words to their Contextual Synonyms

Words

Definitions

Comprehension Quiz

According to the post, how did Western powers react to Iran's response?

What event triggered Iran's response according to the post?

How does the author characterize Iran's attacks?

What analogy does the author use to describe Western hegemony?

Which option best summarizes the main argument of this post?

Discussion Questions

The author asks us to consider "what did the US/Israel expect?" when they assassinated Iran's leader. What do you think they expected Iran's response would be, and why might they have been surprised?

The post uses a controversial analogy comparing Western hegemony to "rapists and abusers." Do you think such strong language is effective in making a political argument, or does it undermine the message? Why?

How do you think international conflicts should be resolved when one nation's leader is assassinated? Is military retaliation ever justified, or should countries always seek diplomatic solutions?

The concept of "proportionate response" is mentioned in the post. In international relations, how can we determine what constitutes a proportionate versus disproportionate response to an attack or assassination?

Words to their Contextual Definitions

Words

Definitions

Words to their Contextual Synonyms

Words

Definitions

Comprehension Quiz

According to the post, how did Western powers react to Iran's response?

What event triggered Iran's response according to the post?

How does the author characterize Iran's attacks?

What analogy does the author use to describe Western hegemony?

Which option best summarizes the main argument of this post?

Discussion Questions

The author asks us to consider "what did the US/Israel expect?" when they assassinated Iran's leader. What do you think they expected Iran's response would be, and why might they have been surprised?

The post uses a controversial analogy comparing Western hegemony to "rapists and abusers." Do you think such strong language is effective in making a political argument, or does it undermine the message? Why?

How do you think international conflicts should be resolved when one nation's leader is assassinated? Is military retaliation ever justified, or should countries always seek diplomatic solutions?

The concept of "proportionate response" is mentioned in the post. In international relations, how can we determine what constitutes a proportionate versus disproportionate response to an attack or assassination?

Personal Notes