Iran Catch-All | Protester Massacre? CBS reports 12,000+ killed

  • Thread starter Thread starter theel4life
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 3K
  • Views: 72K
  • Politics 
No question that eliminating Iran’s ability to make nukes is of utmost, paramount importance. It’s definitely an issue that both republican and democratic administrations have tried to solve. I’m not opposed to the use of force to do so- I’m just not sure I understand why it was the United States using the force to do so, and not Israel, since it’s not our fight currently.
 
CFordUNC said:
No question that eliminating Iran’s ability to make nukes is of utmost, paramount importance. It’s definitely an issue that both republican and democratic administrations have tried to solve. I’m not opposed to the use of force to do so- I’m just not sure I understand why it was the United States using the force to do so, and not Israel, since it’s not our fight currently.
Click to expand...
There are valid arguments for a strategic strike against Iran's nuclear capabilities. The concern is that our current administration isn't very strategic and this could very well pull the USA into a broader conflict.
 
CFordUNC said:
No question that eliminating Iran’s ability to make nukes is of utmost, paramount importance. It’s definitely an issue that both republican and democratic administrations have tried to solve. I’m not opposed to the use of force to do so- I’m just not sure I understand why it was the United States using the force to do so, and not Israel, since it’s not our fight currently.
Click to expand...

Increasingly seems that many politicians view serving Israel’s interests as an equal if not greater priority than serving the US.
 
CFordUNC said:
No question that eliminating Iran’s ability to make nukes is of utmost, paramount importance. It’s definitely an issue that both republican and democratic administrations have tried to solve. I’m not opposed to the use of force to do so- I’m just not sure I understand why it was the United States using the force to do so, and not Israel, since it’s not our fight currently.
Click to expand...
As to why the USA? It's the fact that B-2's and 30,000 lbs bunker bombs (GBU-57) were needed, and only the US possesses them, is my understanding.
 
Last edited:
p5mmr9 said:
There are valid arguments for a strategic strike against Iran's nuclear capabilities. The concern is that our current administration isn't very strategic and this could very well pull the USA into a broader conflict.
Click to expand...
Agreed. My concern is that it’s very easy to start a war, very difficult to end one, as we found out the hard way in Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s unlikely that this is the end and very likely this is only the beginning, as Iran is almost certain to most likely through their proxies. I’m glad that, presumably, their nuclear weapons capabilities have been destroyed or crippled. What I’m not glad about is the very real possibility that this escalates into a wide scale war.
 
CFordUNC said:
No question that eliminating Iran’s ability to make nukes is of utmost, paramount importance. It’s definitely an issue that both republican and democratic administrations have tried to solve. I’m not opposed to the use of force to do so- I’m just not sure I understand why it was the United States using the force to do so, and not Israel, since it’s not our fight currently.
Click to expand...

President's are hired (elected) to do a job. Job number 1 is to handle wayward countries like Iran so we don't have to do the dirty work. So he failed.
 
Magnificent Handbone said:
Pussy.
Click to expand...
Hey buddy, look. I don’t know you and I don’t know what’s going on in your life. It looks like you are having a really rough time. All I can say is I hope it gets better and that I hope you find the help you need. This will be my last time responding to you, as I’d like to discuss this important topic with the big boys and girls. Hope you have a great evening!
 
Last edited:
Bobfripp said:
As to why the USA? It's the fact that B-2's and 30,000 lbs bunker bombs were needed, and that only the US possesses, is my understanding.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you’re probably right, and I figured that might be the case, but I also figured that perhaps we’d give Israel the MOAB and the ability to deliver it. Of course, perhaps it’s not that simple. That’s why I’m asking all these questions, just trying to learn and understand!
 
CFordUNC said:
Agreed. My concern is that it’s very easy to start a war, very difficult to end one, as we found out the hard way in Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s unlikely that this is the end and very likely this is only the beginning, as Iran is almost certain to most likely through their proxies. I’m glad that, presumably, their nuclear weapons capabilities have been destroyed or crippled. What I’m not glad about is the very real possibility that this escalates into a wide scale war.
Click to expand...
Iran also has robust cyber capabilities. I suspect conflict will escalate on that front as well.
 
Alright, forgive what is likely a dumb question but it’s been a little while since I took Civics. Does the president have Constitutional authority to unilaterally launch military strikes against other countries without Congressional approval?
 
p5mmr9 said:
There are valid arguments for a strategic strike against Iran's nuclear capabilities. The concern is that our current administration isn't very strategic and this could very well pull the USA into a broader conflict.
Click to expand...
Well, that and the fact that we have zero confirmation from anyone other than Bibi/Israel that Iran has any major nuclear capabilities.
 
I obviously do not like Donald Trump but in trying to remove my partisanship from the equation for a moment, and trying to look at this objectively, perhaps the calculus was that Iran is currently as weak as it has been in sometime and therefore now was a great time to exploit their weakness and deal their nuclear capabilities a crippling blow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top