Iran Catch-All | IRAN WAR

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 5K
  • Views: 139K
  • Politics 
CFordUNC said:
I understand that assassinating the supreme religious leader of a foreign country without having a viable plan for installing your preferred replacement is moronic. I understand that executing foreign heads of state who have not attacked us first and who are at the negotiating table with us sets an extraordinarily dangerous precedent that tremendously jeopardizes our ability to ever bring foreign states to the negotiating table ever again.

I understand that committing war crimes by bombing a city of 10 million indiscriminately, bombing an elementary school full of children, and sinking an unarmed ship and leaving its sailors to drown are all grotesque violation of human rights that further erodes American hegemony and goodwill around the world and only serves to further radicalize current and future generations in the Middle East against us.

I understand that our impending decision to commit ground forces to Iran, a nation of 90 million people with some of the most treacherous and unforgiving terrain in the world, is a near guarantee of disaster and bloodshed and loss of untold American lives.

I understand that we have already spilled American blood and already expended god knows how much American treasure initiating a conflict that the overwhelm vast majority of Americans- left, right, and center- vehemently oppose. I understand that this is a conflict that nobody wants except for Bibi and Trump. I understand that by conducting ourselves in the manner in which we are, we are making America and Americans all over the world targets of retaliation.

I also understand that you are a miserable, angry, callous piece of shit who might be the singular most intellectually and emotionally retarded person on this entire board, who takes all of his anger and frustration about his empty and pathetic life on those of us who dare to hold a differing opinion on this conflict. I understand that you try to mask your crippling insecurity and inferiority toward those of us who are smarter and more successful than you by lashing out at us, insulting us, and ridiculing us for displaying compassion and empathy. I understand that not many people in your life have ever shown you any respect, because you’ve never earned it judging by the way you insult, belittle, and demean the humanity of those with whom you disagree. I understand that however many times you got your ass kicked growing up, it was not enough. Lastly, I understand that I love residing rent-free in that great big empty head of yours!
Click to expand...
Get It GIF
 
Callatoroy said:
why does iran need nukes as a deterrent? no other country in the ME has nukes except israel (pretty obvious why). has israel expressed a desire to wipe iran off the map? north korea isn't remotely comparable to iran. north korea hasn't publicly stated their sole purpose is to wipe another country off the map and death to america. north korea didn't attack israel 2 years ago. north korea isn't sitting in the middle of the one thing on earth that drives the world's economy. this board seems oblivious to what would happen if iran actually used a nuke and the impact to our economy and the lives that would be affected by those most vulnerable to a bad economy. to think iran wouldn't use a nuke on israel is pretty naive in my opinion. we just disagree.
Click to expand...
I think the current state of events shows why exactly Iran thinks they need a nuclear deterrent. Do you think we would be launching airstrikes against them if they had a secure second strike nuclear capability? Looks at the history of Iran since the revolution. Invaded by Iraq (leading to the bloody 8 year Iran-Iraq war - half a million casualties, Iraq was heavily supported by the US), airstrikes by Israel and the US in the 1980s (we also shot down an Iranian passenger flight killing 290), US and Israeli airstrikes in the late 2010s, early 2020s.

I am not saying that Iran doesn't do some awful stuff - they are a state sponsor of terrorism and a horribly repressive government. But it is perfectly rational for them to pursue nuclear capability for their national self interest. If Iran did use nuclear weapons, the impact would be horrific. No one is oblivious to that. But their leadership is rational and the logic of deterrence has a way of transcending ideology. Do you think that they don't know that they would get nuked until they glow if they launched a nuclear attack against the US or Israel?

As to Iran's rhetoric about destroying Israel - you don't see any parallels between how they talk about Israel and how Donald Trump talks about anything? You tend to be awfully quick to explain away anything particularly awful Trump says by saying "Well he doesn't really mean that, you have to know what he really means." Much of Iran's rhetoric is the same. They are certainly hostile to Israel, the US and pretty much the rest of the West, but you are taking the rhetoric at face value. For a country that has been saying "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" for so many years, they haven't really done that much to actualize those threats. Those statements are much more geared to developing internal national cohesion against an external enemy than communicating their intentions with the rest of the world

As to North Korea, I think you need to pay attention to the last 70 years of North Korean rhetoric against South Korea and the tensions between the two countries if you think that there is no parallel to Israel/Iran. North Korea most certainly has threatened to annihilate South Korea many times over the years. If you take Iran's threats at face value, you certainly have to take North Korean threats the same way. Yes, they aren't located near critical natural resources that the world economy relies on. But they are also a pretty horrible country who has done some pretty horrible things. But the US will likely never take action against them because they are nuclear-armed. This has not gone unnoticed by other countries in the world.
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
There are so many reasons to take military action against Iran. Nukes. Rebuilding their nuke facility after we bombed it. Funding terrorism around the world. Slaughtering tens of thousands of protesters.

Iran is weak right now. If there's a good time to take action, this is it.
Click to expand...
The main reason not to take military action is the effect on Iran's leadership after this conflict.

Best case scenario: Iran transitions to a liberal democracy. I would truly love to see this. My understanding of history leads me to believe that there is very little chance of this outcome.

Worst case scenario - Iran's new rulers are significantly more hardline, radicalized and anti-Western and less likely to approach foreign policy with a rational lens. (See, the difference between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority). One possible outcome is an Iran that is temporarily set back in its ability to support proxy terrorists, but one that is also much more likely to push for more violent and deadly actions.
 
War should only ever be fought as a last result when there is quite literally no other alternative to maintain peace and security. This was vey much NOT one of those instances: we had a nuclear disarmament agreement with Iran that was working in until we shredded it. Furthermore, they were quite literally at the negotiating table and had agreed to virtually every single one of our demands when we launched a decapitation strike to assassinate their religious and supreme leader.

Iran is not a meaningful threat to the United States. Its military forces cannot invade our territory. Its missiles cannot reach our shores. Nuclear weapons do not have offensive utility in a world of “Mutually Assured Destruction” as doctrine. The hypothetical Iranian possession of a nuclear weapon doesn't matter any more than North Korea, Russia, or China having them.

Our bases in the Middle East are liabilities. It is not the job of the American taxpayer to keep sea shipping lanes open and Middle Eastern oil flowing. That is the responsibility of the oil companies and the regional governments in the Middle East to figure out. We have oil right here in America.

We would be wealthier, safer, and happier if the American government were to completely disengage from the Middle East. We wouldn’t have lost 6 bright young service members with families who loved them, and hopes and dreams that will never be realized. We wouldn’t lose untold numbers more in an impending ground invasion that is exclusively an exercise in saving face as opposed to having any clear, actionable objective.

Are we planning to capture Tehran? Then what? Are we going to occupy Iran? Why? For how long? For what purpose? Most importantly, how? It’s some of the most challenging terrain in the entire world, and we’d be greeted as the true Great Satan that Iranians have been brainwashed about for decades.

That’s why this conflict is catastrophic. We accomplish nothing and lose everything. We lose American lives, we lose American treasure, we lose whatever remaining shred of American hegemony and goodwill that still exists, and most of all, we lose yet another war.
 
dukeman92 said:
Click to expand...

The dude just straight up admitted that there may be terrorist attacks here at home and that people here may die because of his (and Petie Hegseth) war against Iran, and his tone also made it clear that he doesn't give a shit if Americans die here at home. After all, the attacks will probably happen in big blue-voting cities like NYC or DC, and he's already made clear that he doesn't care about those people and MAGA believes they're not Real Americans anyway.
 
roostra said:
I think the current state of events shows why exactly Iran thinks they need a nuclear deterrent. Do you think we would be launching airstrikes against them if they had a secure second strike nuclear capability? Looks at the history of Iran since the revolution. Invaded by Iraq (leading to the bloody 8 year Iran-Iraq war - half a million casualties, Iraq was heavily supported by the US), airstrikes by Israel and the US in the 1980s (we also shot down an Iranian passenger flight killing 290), US and Israeli airstrikes in the late 2010s, early 2020s.

I am not saying that Iran doesn't do some awful stuff - they are a state sponsor of terrorism and a horribly repressive government. But it is perfectly rational for them to pursue nuclear capability for their national self interest. If Iran did use nuclear weapons, the impact would be horrific. No one is oblivious to that. But their leadership is rational and the logic of deterrence has a way of transcending ideology. Do you think that they don't know that they would get nuked until they glow if they launched a nuclear attack against the US or Israel?

As to Iran's rhetoric about destroying Israel - you don't see any parallels between how they talk about Israel and how Donald Trump talks about anything? You tend to be awfully quick to explain away anything particularly awful Trump says by saying "Well he doesn't really mean that, you have to know what he really means." Much of Iran's rhetoric is the same. They are certainly hostile to Israel, the US and pretty much the rest of the West, but you are taking the rhetoric at face value. For a country that has been saying "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" for so many years, they haven't really done that much to actualize those threats. Those statements are much more geared to developing internal national cohesion against an external enemy than communicating their intentions with the rest of the world

As to North Korea, I think you need to pay attention to the last 70 years of North Korean rhetoric against South Korea and the tensions between the two countries if you think that there is no parallel to Israel/Iran. North Korea most certainly has threatened to annihilate South Korea many times over the years. Yes, they aren't located near critical natural resources that the world economy relies on. But they are also a pretty horrible country who has done some pretty horrible things. But the US will likely never take action against them because they are nuclear-armed. This has not gone unnoticed by other countries in the world.
Click to expand...
I understand why iran thinks iran needs nukes. I understand they think it is rational. That doesn't make them right

"some awful stuff"? I'm assuming you have read the level of brutality that was purposefully and intentionally inflicted on the israli civilians to maximize the terror? They convince their people to strap bombs to themselves and run into crowds to kill as many people as possible. There is nothing remotely rational about iran's leaders by the west's definition of rational. They have no respect for human life so they don't care about retaliation strikes.

They haven't really done that much? October 7, the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism. How much more do they have to do? I think you seriously understate the atrocities of Oct 7.

nk has demonstrated they just want to be left alone. Unless they were to attack sk, the US has no need to attack them as they pose no threat to our national security. kim is sane compared to the religious zealots in iran. he isn't driven by some religious mandate that promises virgins. As you said, nk isn't sitting atop the most important natural resource on the planet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top