US Politics

[silvertop]

I think he miscalculated.

To get this done he has to install a puppet, which means troops on the ground.

Any other choice just leads to even his own side regarding it as a terrible decision.

If he bombs and then leaves it, he's just spent a load of money for nothing and installed a more radical leader.....who no doubt will regard a nuke as existential.

If they want to avoid that they have to install a puppet and maintain it.

Bad, bad decision.

I know It sounds fantastical but looking forward I can see Israel nuking Iran.

One of the reasons Hussein was such a tyrant was because Iraq was never a happy cohesive whole. He had to rule with an iron fist to keep it together. Of course, he went far too far, but you get the point.

As others have pointed out, Iran also has tribal issues. One autocracy replaced another in 1979; and they have since also held that nation together through awful, despotic means.

Replace the current leader with a Western puppet without local mandate and I predict a destructive unraveling that will have far-reaching implications in addition to the appalling cost of achieving it.

 

[silvertop]

So your solution to containing Iran is to periodically attack it's nuclear development forever?
And let's not forget that with no action, they would most certainly develop the bomb.

I think you are clutching at straws. No one sensible wants war, but if history has taught us anything, it is that playing the pacifist will not save you from those who aren't sensible.

Pretty much. A bad option, but the best of the bad options.

And regular bombing or other precision attacks is not pacifism. No-one is holding in their hand a piece of paper.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Pretty much. A bad option, but the best of the bad options.

And regular bombing or other precision attacks is not pacifism. No-one is holding in their hand a piece of paper.

A very bad option. It won't succeed forever.

If it has to be dealt with, I'd go for the f*** them up completely option.

 

[silvertop]

A very bad option. It won't succeed forever.

If it has to be dealt with, I'd go for the f*** them up completely option.

Why not? And an option that won't bite us back e.g. through massive migration from Iran to nations with a large existing Persian population like, ooh, I dunno...

Given the fact that almost all your posts relate to illicit immigration, I am surprised that we are arguing this point from different sides.

 

[A22 Eagle]

And you won the dumbest post award for the second time. Well done you’re on a roll.

So your classmate says that ‘apples don’t strap suicide bombs to themselves’. I call it out as dumb post and you verbally attack me for calling it out. Priceless. You two must be very ‘close’ at school.

 

[Stirlingsays]

One of the reasons Hussein was such a tyrant was because Iraq was never a happy cohesive whole. He had to rule with an iron fist to keep it together. Of course, he went far too far, but you get the point.

As others have pointed out, Iran also has tribal issues. One autocracy replaced another in 1979; and they have since also held that nation together through awful, despotic means.

Replace the current leader with a Western puppet without local mandate and I predict a destructive unraveling that will have far-reaching implications in addition to the appalling cost of achieving it.

Yep, but it's probably the least worst option for Trump and Iran......If they could get Saudi or some group to do it.....but you'd need big numbers with supported air-power.

Otherwise Israel will probably nuke them as I can't see Iran not going for a nuke now.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Pretty much. A bad option, but the best of the bad options.

And regular bombing or other precision attacks is not pacifism. No-one is holding in their hand a piece of paper.

Persia is a big population with an educated base.....America/Israel have plenty of enemies.

Iran would be given tech and continually attacking them is too expensive and would worsen everything, strengthening hardliners, creating migration.....something that a puppet government on reasonable terms with US/Israel would reverse.

Persia has to chart a new path otherwise it looks very bad. I agree that this is wrong and not what should have happened.....but we are where we are.

Trump has worsened everything with this and now he has to pick from a list of bad options.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Why not? And an option that won't bite us back e.g. through massive migration from Iran to nations with a large existing Persian population like, ooh, I dunno...

Given the fact that almost all your posts relate to illicit immigration, I am surprised that we are arguing this point from different sides.

You can't risk Armageddon just to avoid getting more migrants. That is absurd logic.
Migrants can be dealt with by a government willing to do it.

This is just the typical sort of argument you get from leftists tyring to create a reason for doing what they do best which is nothing at all.

 

[Cucking Funt]

I'm struggling to keep up with events. Did Iran ever build a nuclear device? If they did, when, under what circumstances and where would they be likely to use it? Delivery might be an issue as they obviously can't bung it on a plane or the end of a missile but perhaps a strategically placed car bomb somewhere?

Please enlighten me.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I'm struggling to keep up with events. Did Iran ever build a nuclear device? If they did, when, under what circumstances and where would they be likely to use it? Delivery might be an issue as they obviously can't bung it on a plane or the end of a missile but perhaps a strategically placed car bomb somewhere?

Please enlighten me.

😀

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

I'm struggling to keep up with events. Did Iran ever build a nuclear device? If they did, when, under what circumstances and where would they be likely to use it? Delivery might be an issue as they obviously can't bung it on a plane or the end of a missile but perhaps a strategically placed car bomb somewhere?

Please enlighten me.

You think that Iran wouldn't attempt to get a nuclear device and to means to deliver it? They only have to get one to Israel.

I doubt that any of this would be happening had American and or Israeli intelligence not concluded that they were trying to develop nuclear capability.

 

[Stirlingsays]

You think that Iran wouldn't attempt to get a nuclear device and to means to deliver it? They only have to get one to Israel.

I doubt that any of this would be happening had American and or Israeli intelligence not concluded that they were trying to develop nuclear capability.

Yeah, just the good guys...

Not for me....This is one nation controlling another.
This is great for Israel and bad for America.

Watching Ben Shapiro on the Daily Wire when this started....it looked like he nearly had an on screen orgasm when this war started.

 

[Cucking Funt]

You think that Iran wouldn't attempt to get a nuclear device and to means to deliver it? They only have to get one to Israel.

I doubt that any of this would be happening had American and or Israeli intelligence not concluded that they were trying to develop nuclear capability.

Yet again, you haven't read my post properly. I don't think anything: I'm merely asking if anyone knows if they assembled a device. I never said they wouldn't attempt to get one.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Yet again, you haven't read my post properly. I don't think anything: I'm merely asking if anyone knows if they assembled a device. I never said they wouldn't attempt to get one.

I assume that surveillance had lead to the conclusion that they were attempting to reach that point.

It would be a bit late if we waited until they actually had a working nuclear missile.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Trump has to topple this regime now......Every other option is worse for him, because if he leaves them in place a nuclear bomb is a certainly. The sense that Iran have been wronged by many of America's enemies means that it would happen.

Personally I'm hoping that Trump can convince the Kurds, with US airpower, to fight the regime and take over the country.....but I don't know if they have the strength.....US troops on the ground....probably to some supporting capacity.

It's a sh1t show.

That said, do the US have the munitions enough to support them long enough to overthrow them.....they gave a lot of stuff to both Ukraine and Israel.

 

[silvertop]

You can't risk Armageddon just to avoid getting more migrants. That is absurd logic.
Migrants can be dealt with by a government willing to do it.

This is just the typical sort of argument you get from leftists tyring to create a reason for doing what they do best which is nothing at all.

I have not said do nothing. And the "risk" of Armageddon has existed since the 1980s; but they are no nearer to crawling towards an independent nuclear option. Whenever they create anything, we blow it up. If they actually had anything, our intelligence would know it. They are as likely to achieve the Bomb as the Solomon Islands.

This is about the defence of Israel and removing the greatest thorn in their side. Given that, a limited but surgical bombing campaign will do. Why risk a vast migrant crisis over an issue essentially fabricated by Israel to defend itself?

 

[Common Sense Club]

Yet again, you haven't read my post properly. I don't think anything: I'm merely asking if anyone knows if they assembled a device. I never said they wouldn't attempt to get one.

I am not sure that they need to have assembled a complete bomb; they just need to have reached a point where the uranium is enriched to a level where dirty bombs could be achieved by conventional means. Something I assume the US and Israel authorities believe. Iran does have ballistic missiles that would easily reach adversaries.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I assume that surveillance had lead to the conclusion that they were attempting to reach that point.

It would be a bit late if we waited until they actually had a working nuclear missile.

Israel have been saying that since the 90s.

If Iran had wanted a nuke, they would have had one in the early 2000s.

They wanted a bargaining chip.....but obviously they won't be wanting that now.

However, hopefully they get overthrown......But there are sh1t consequences from this for everybody except Israel.

 

[silvertop]

Yeah, just the good guys...

Not for me....This is one nation controlling another.
This is great for Israel and bad for America.

Watching Ben Shapiro on the Daily Wire when this started....it looked like he nearly had an on screen orgasm when this war started.

Yup, you've got it.

Trump has a blind spot over Israel who have anally "taken" him.

Good for them. But I worry about the consequence for us.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Yeah, just the good guys...

Not for me....This is one nation controlling another.
This is great for Israel and bad for America.

Watching Ben Shapiro on the Daily Wire when this started....it looked like he nearly had an on screen orgasm when this war started.

I understand your desire to avoid war, but I doubt the Iranians share your outlook.

It's obvious why Israel are creaming themselves over the destruction of their number one enemy and the American 'industrial military complex' are gagging to try out their new kit. Even so. Sometimes sitting on your hands will only make things worse.

History will judge if this was the right decision. Although, history will vary depending on the politics of the observer of course.