US goes to war with Iran

[Madison320]

We're actually only 3 out of 7 on that count.

Well if you count bombing as invading that should take care of those other 4 countries. Either way it negates your claim of "I don't see how anyone can make the claim that Iran could feel existentially threated by not having nukes."

I heard the other day that we've regime changed something like 70 countries and none of them had nukes. Some of your other arguments may have some merit but you need to let this one go.

 

[nikcers]

Well if you count bombing as invading that should take care of those other 4 countries. Either way it negates your claim of "I don't see how anyone can make the claim that Iran could feel existentially threated by not having nukes."

I heard the other day that we've regime changed something like 70 countries and none of them had nukes. Some of your other arguments may have some merit but you need to let this one go.

We did regime change in the Soviet Union and they had nukes.

 

[TheTexan]

Well if you count bombing as invading that should take care of those other 4 countries.

Nah I was actually already pretty generous with counting 3 as "invaded". These are Iran's direct neighbors.

Country	Has US Bombed?	Has US Invaded?
Afghanistan	Yes	Yes
Pakistan	Yes (drones/strikes)	No (but ground raids)
Turkmenistan	No	No
Azerbaijan	No	No
Armenia	No	No
Turkey	No	No
Iraq	Yes	Yes

Either way it negates your claim of "I don't see how anyone can make the claim that Iran could feel existentially threated by not having nukes."

I heard the other day that we've regime changed something like 70 countries and none of them had nukes. Some of your other arguments may have some merit but you need to let this one go.

Does azerbaijan feel existentially threatened by not having nukes? Does armenia, turkey, or turkmenistan?

I would also add that we have bombed/invaded pakistan - and they have nukes. So....

 

[nikcers]

If a government loses their mandate of heaven what reason is there for them to be in power?

 

[acptulsa]

We should be scaling down, not scaling up.

Shoulda coulda woulda. What we are doing is telling countries to get nukes or get invaded so the Rothschilds can set up a central bank where they are. You don't turn the momentum of decades of that around quickly or easily. And you certainly don't turn it around by force, even if you do lie about whether people have been complying with your demands.

 

[nikcers]

Shoulda coulda woulda. What we are doing is telling countries to get nukes or get invaded so the Rothschilds can set up a central bank where they are. You don't turn the momentum of decades of that around quickly or easily. And you certainly don't turn it around by force, even if you do lie about whether people have been complying with your demands.

Iran's compliance with demands ended when they went to Russia and interfered in Syria and armed Syrians to go to war against us.

 

[TheTexan]

Shoulda coulda woulda. What we are doing is telling countries to get nukes or get invaded so the Rothschilds can set up a central bank where they are. You don't turn the momentum of decades of that around quickly or easily. And you certainly don't turn it around by force, even if you do lie about whether people have been complying with your demands.

There's at least 200 countries probably that we haven't invaded yet.

It'll take us centuries to invade them all.

Unless we step up our game.

The point is, it's an overblown risk that if you don't have a nuclear weapon you automatically get invaded.

You do automatically get invaded if you pursue nuclear weapons, or do something to irritate Israel. Those are the rules of the world we live in.

Just don't do those two things and you'll probably be fine.

 

[nikcers]

The USA made it clear in 2002 what persuing Weapons of mass destruction would look like.

Whether or not that was the reason for that war that was the message we sent.

 

[unknown]

What you're suggesting would invariably and inevitably lead to the global destruction of mankind.

We're already at severe risk of nuclear global annihilation. We should be scaling down, not scaling up.

There are no ethical uses for a nuclear weapon, even as a deterrent. A deterrent implies you intend to use it in retaliation, which is itself unethical considering the nature of the weapon and the unlimited potential for collateral damage.

But the State isn't disarming.

They're simply stripping others of their right to self defense.

And then they're attacking.

 

[nikcers]

But the State isn't disarming.

They're simply stripping others of their right to self defense.

They don't have a right to nuclear weapons.

We have a right to self defense to stop them from nuking us.

 

[TheTexan]

But the State isn't disarming.

Yes and that's exactly the point they should be raising.

If they united together in that message they could probably make a difference in getting the nuclear nations to disarm.

We put sanctions on countries for pursuing nukes, but it should be the other way around. They should put sanctions on us for having nukes.

 

[unknown]

I read that one of the stipulations that Iran made during the "negotiations", was that Izrael, who has not signed the NPT, be disarmed of their 400+ nukes...

 

[TheTexan]

I read that one of the stipulations that Iran made during the "negotiations", was that Izrael, who has not signed the NPT, be disarmed of their 400+ nukes...

If I were President of America, I'd tell Israel to take that deal or I'd bomb the shit out of them

 

[nikcers]

I read that one of the stipulations that Iran made during the "negotiations", was that Izrael, who has not signed the NPT, be disarmed of their 400+ nukes...

Israel is unofficially part of western civilization's mutually assured destruction pact.

Thats a non starter.

 

[nikcers]

If I were President of America, I'd tell Israel to take that deal or I'd bomb the shit out of them

Well im glad you aren't president.

We need more good guys with a gun.

 

[TheTexan]

Israel is unofficially part of western civilization's mutually assured destruction pact.

Thats a non starter.

Yea but they don't have to be. Israel isn't geographically large enough for MAD.

And we probably know where all their nuclear subs are.

Of course the US would never actually do it. But we could.

 

[TheTexan]

Well im glad you aren't president.

We need more good guys with a gun.

Good guys huh? Is it "good" that the people in Gaza are not being allowed to leave, and are forced to starve and be trapped in a warzone?

 

[nikcers]

Yea but they don't have to be. Israel isn't geographically large enough for MAD.

And we probably know where all their nuclear subs are.

Of course the US would never actually do it. But we could.

No if you look weak the knives come out.

Looking weak so we dont hurt people's feelings isn't smart.

I dont care if their feelings are hurt.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

They don't have a right to nuclear weapons.

We have a right to self defense to stop them from nuking us.

Delusional, psychotic paranoia is not a good thing for individuals, even worse for political cults who can manipulate and co-opt militaries.

 

[TheTexan]

No if you look weak the knives come out.

Looking weak so we dont hurt people's feelings isn't smart.

I dont care if their feelings are hurt.

Yea, I don't follow your point. How does eradicating Israel from map make us look weak