Iran

[JustFunnN'Orange]

You have an interesting definition for “unprovoked.”



(By “interesting” I mean (you're an idiot)

FYP

 

[KB5252]

I don't think the notion that it makes sense they hate us because we keep wrecking the Middle East, and destroying it further is not a good way to deescalate, is particularly naive. IMO it's pretty naive to think they are about to drop nukes on us just because that's the propaganda we're force-fed 1,000 times a day

You are missing the real threat though........... Maybe they drop that nuke, maybe they don't. Maybe they give it to terrorists groups to keep the heat at arms length...... Maybe they don't.........

But the one thing that is 100% without a doubt assured to happen is a nuclear arms race in that region............. Groups with decades..... centuries old grudges against each other......... That's the real threat!

 

[Jackcrevol]

Reassuring...

Back then we had dumb Presidents.

And those dumb presidents, call this one an idiot and a blowhard. That says a LOT.
****ing idiocy. dumb and dumber.

 

[kiddiedoc]

So history is dumb to you. Everything I posted is historically justified. Before the Shah was put in place by the United States and Britain, Iran had a secular democracy where women were free to wear miniskirts and bikinis in public. The Islamic Revolution was in response to the toppling of this democratically elected government and the imposition of the brutal dictatorship of the Shah (who we supported).

If the United States never deposed the secular Iranian government it's likely the Islamic Revolution never happens and we have friendly relations with Iran like almost every other secular democracy. Whether you like it or not we created the Iran of today.

Have you read the Quran, and do you understand the tenets of Islamic extremism?

 

[JustFunnN'Orange]

You are missing the real threat though........... Maybe they drop that nuke, maybe they don't. Maybe they give it to terrorists groups to keep the heat at arms length...... Maybe they don't.........

But the one thing that is 100% without a doubt assured to happen is a nuclear arms race in that region............. Groups with decades..... centuries old grudges against each other......... That's the real threat!

Won't be anytime soon now!

 

[KB5252]

Won't be anytime soon now!

I'm not convinced of that yet. We will see.

 

[Enki_Amenra]

Back then we had dumb Presidents.

And those dumb presidents, call this one an idiot and a blowhard. That says a LOT.View attachment 750507
****ing idiocy.

Just proves those presidents really are dumb.

 

[C-south]

This may be the dumbest post I've read in the PF. And that's saying a lot.

Surely you haven’t missed his historical view of ancient Egypt.

 

[NashVol11]

You are missing the real threat though........... Maybe they drop that nuke, maybe they don't. Maybe they give it to terrorists groups to keep the heat at arms length...... Maybe they don't.........

But the one thing that is 100% without a doubt assured to happen is a nuclear arms race in that region............. Groups with decades..... centuries old grudges against each other......... That's the real threat!

Well that arms race started with Israel and continued with Pakistan, so if that is the real threat then the responsibility for it seems misplaced

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

10 days ago. Facts really haven't changed since then, just more propaganda and now look at this thread

View attachment 750504

Republican voters are so easy to manipulate it's hilarious. Next week Trump could have a deal with Iran and the same people calling them religious fanatics who need to be taken out will be hailing him for finally bringing peace to the Middle East.

You guys can never keep the same energy. It's whatever the supreme leader Trump says.

 

[Smokey123]

So history is dumb to you. Everything I posted is historically justified. Before the Shah was put in place by the United States and Britain, Iran had a secular democracy where women were free to wear miniskirts and bikinis in public. The Islamic Revolution was in response to the toppling of this democratically elected government and the imposition of the brutal dictatorship of the Shah (who we supported).

If the United States never deposed the secular Iranian government it's likely the Islamic Revolution never happens and we have friendly relations with Iran like almost every other secular democracy. Whether you like it or not we created the Iran of today.

You’re over simplifying and misrepresenting what actually happened. Which is either because you simply don’t know what you’re talking about or you’re intentionally doing it

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Bad foreign policy brought us this regime. That is fact. Using that as a justification of why we shouldn't act against their nuclear weapons ambitions makes zero sense.

We played a part in creating this mess........ So we shouldn't act against them and allow them to start an arms race in the region......... That is about the dumbest possible argument that could be made.

Thank you for acknowledging we created this mess. But why would doing the same thing all over again be the solution? We created the fanatical Iranian regime by meddling. Why meddle again? The more we attack the Islamic regime the more support they get from both the rest of the Muslim world as well as the Iranian people themselves.

If we want an Iran that is a good player on the world stage we need to stop trying to engineer regime change and let the Iranian people get the full taste of the Islamic regime. Even before our recent attack the people of Iran have been pushing back against the Islamic fundamentalism. Women have been protesting against the hijab laws. What the right doesn't realize is when we attack these Middle Eastern countries we let the tyrannical regimes off the hook as the average Muslim blames us for their problems rather than the tyrannical regimes.

If you want to topple the Islamic government in Iran start saying we support them. That's the quickest way of turning that population against them. Fighting the Iranian regime only makes the average Muslim support them and hate us.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Iran has been openly hostile for decades.

Because we started the beef by deposing their secular democratically elected government. You can't pick a fight with someone then get mad when they defend themselves. Iran didn't have animosity for us until we decided to mess with them.

Stop messing with them and we can have good relationships with them like Russia and China. Two non-Islamic countries who don't seem to have any issues with Iran.

It turns out Islam isn't why Iran hates us but our actions when we attacked them first.

 

[CagleMtnVol]

No country has ever used a nuclear bomb unprovoked except us in the 80 or so years nukes have been in existence. Why would Iran suddenly buck the trend? Nations get nukes for defensive posture. It's to deter others from attacking you with nukes.

What evidence do you have Iran would use a nuclear bomb unprovoked outside of your bigotry towards them?

Maybe because Iran is led by a religious nut that has repeatedly attacked Israel and has called for them and the US to be destroyed every time he has stepped in front of a microphone for the past 40 years?

 

[MemphisVol77]

The Christian majority country of Uganda. Who by the way were heavily influenced by evangelical Americans when creating their new law imposing capital punishment for homosexuality. So it's actually our Christian right that influenced the only non-Islamic country that has the death penalty for homosexuality.

Uganda's government is evil for allowing that. Just like Iran's government is evil for allowing that.

Do you believe the death penalty for homosexuality is acceptable without religious influence?
("just because a country has the death penalty for homosexuality doesn't mean it's evil. It just means they're highly conservative and follow the laws of their religion")
By your previous statement, I'm of the impression you find it acceptable if not moral.

Could you clarify your position?

 

[KB5252]

Well that arms race started with Israel and continued with Pakistan, so if that is the real threat then the responsibility for it seems misplaced

But it didn't. There has been no arms race in the area......... But it has been stated by Iran's neighbors that if they get a nuclear weapon they will feel compelled to do the same for security purposes.

You can't say Israel and Pakistan started the race when that isn't what happened.

Until now there has been an uneasy nuclear peace in that region, this is the tipping point for Iran's neighbors. And to ignore it is perhaps the most naive thing imaginable.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

If, in your hypothetical universe (wherever that may be), Ukraine was essentially a fortified island chain and was the primary aggressor...yes. In the world the rest of us live in, the same circumstances (ability to defend land borders, logistics, etc) are not apples to apples. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified because they ended the war more cleanly and with likely fewer lives lost than a conventional land invasion. Stick to your barbershop history about "hair culture".

So would we be justified in dropping a nuke on Iran instead of a lengthy ground war because of how fortified their nation is because of all the mountains?

You can try and twist yourself into a pretzel to justify the fact we dropped 2 nuclear bombs but in no other context would such an action be justified today. The only reason we did it back then is because we could get away with it cause nobody else had nukes. Not because it was somehow morally justified.

Nobody is dropping nukes today regardless of how costly a ground war would be against a fortified aggressor because other countries have nukes and might launch theirs in retaliation. It's mutually assured destruction that keeps us from using nukes today. Not because somehow it was magically justified in the 1940s and no other time afterwards. Best believe if Japan had nukes back then we wouldn't have dropped anything for fear of retaliation. We only did it cause we could get away with it as the first mover.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

You are missing the real threat though........... Maybe they drop that nuke, maybe they don't. Maybe they give it to terrorists groups to keep the heat at arms length...... Maybe they don't.........

But the one thing that is 100% without a doubt assured to happen is a nuclear arms race in that region............. Groups with decades..... centuries old grudges against each other......... That's the real threat!

Israel already has nukes and they're the most hated country in the region and that didn't kick off some nuclear arms race. So why would Iran whose Muslim in a majority Muslim region?

 

[KB5252]

Thank you for acknowledging we created this mess. But why would doing the same thing all over again be the solution? We created the fanatical Iranian regime by meddling. Why meddle again? The more we attack the Islamic regime the more support they get from both the rest of the Muslim world as well as the Iranian people themselves.

If we want an Iran that is a good player on the world stage we need to stop trying to engineer regime change and let the Iranian people get the full taste of the Islamic regime. Even before our recent attack the people of Iran have been pushing back against the Islamic fundamentalism. Women have been protesting against the hijab laws. What the right doesn't realize is when we attack these Middle Eastern countries we let the tyrannical regimes off the hook as the average Muslim blames us for their problems rather than the tyrannical regimes.

If you want to topple the Islamic government in Iran start saying we support them. That's the quickest way of turning that population against them. Fighting the Iranian regime only makes the average Muslim support them and hate us.

I'm not calling for regime change. That is up to the people of Iran. If that is their will so be it.

the last sentence just isn't true. It's not that simple. But we do need to start out of politics in other regions. We can agree there. But that isn't what this is about. It's about nuclear weapons to a terrorist sponsor that targets any and everyone and preventing an arms race in the ME

 

[MontyPython]

The dumb in this thread has reached new and unprecedented levels.

Agreed.

I think the MAGA diehards will continue to struggle given Trump's longtime anti-intervention / anti-war stance versus the fact that we just bombed a sovereign country and entered a war that we didn't have to.

 

[EasternVol]

But will happily live under that same blanket of freedom provided.

All this has absolutely no direct bearing on our freedom.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Have you read the Quran, and do you understand the tenets of Islamic extremism?

Yes. Have you read the Talmud and do you understand the tenets of Jewish extremism? See how easy that is.

Last I checked Russia and China aren't Muslim. Why is it they don't have a problem with Iran if Islam is the problem?

I feel sorry for how easily so many in the right fall for bigotry to justify our aggression toward other nations. There are nearly 2 billion Muslims on the planet. If their religion is what we're fighting then we're in trouble.

 

[KB5252]

Israel already has nukes and they're the most hated country in the region and that didn't kick off some nuclear arms race. So why would Iran whose Muslim in a majority Muslim region?

Because they disrupt the business of their neighbors and threaten their livelihood. Their neighbors don't trust them......... At all. It's been stated publicly by their neighbors they do not wish to see a nuclear Iran, that if they do science nuclear capabilities they will feel they need to add well.

It's why there's been assistance from their neighbors to defend Israel and under the table support for Israeli attacks on Iran. But as I've stated that support is delicate and the longer this goes on the weaker it gets.

 

[EasternVol]

I don't blame you for thinking that, but the iran/iraq war killed 500,000 people. Based on that, total casualties must have been a couple million. Everybody else in this is a toddler.

Iraq started that war.

 

[MemphisVol77]

We deposed their secular democratically elected government and installed a brutal dictatorship so British Petroleum could have access to their oil. This is well established history.

The brutal dictatorship of the Shah was the direct catalyst that led to the Islamic revolution in Iran that has ruled for the last 40+ years.

Are you suggesting they didn't have a constitution from 1906 to 1978 that only got amended 4 times? When did British Petroleum get involved? Did they not sign a 60 year lease or contract?

Did they not have a Shah before and after we intervened? Did they not welcome our involvement multiple times before 1978? They wanted to remain occupied by the Soviet Union under Stalin's yoke before we intervened?

How did the format and function of their government change from the years immediately preceding our involvement to the years immediately after our involvement? Did they do away with Parliament? By immediate I mean 1-5 years, not 25 years later.

You post so disingenuously it's ridiculous.