hunter2012 said:

---

From what I've seen from the Shah's reign, Iran was very westernized before regime change. I hope they are hungry and willing to reach for freedom again.

---

They were back in the 1970s. Those people are in their mid 40s and older now.


But their kids and grand kids are the current youth. Let's hope they're telling them stories of freedom

Kinda like we tell our kids stories of "outside"

Possibly. A lot of unknowns still.

jamey said:

---

hunter2012 said:

---

From what I've seen from the Shah's reign, Iran was very westernized before regime change. I hope they are hungry and willing to reach for freedom again.

---

They were back in the 1970s. Those people are in their mid 40s and older now.


But their kids and grand kids are the current youth. Let's hope they're telling them stories of freedom

Kinda like we tell our kids stories of "outside"

---

They weren't really "free". They weren't a theocracy, but the Shah's regime was incredibly oppressive and violent.

Iran is definitely gonna need something better than that to sustain whatever comes after the Ayatollahs

It's amazing to me how many folks on this board watched the complete and utter disaster the last 20 years were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and have the gall to come on here and call the "anti-war crowd" nothing but Marxists. I assure you that I am ultra Maga and highly conservative, both fiscally and socially, and I am also definitely "anti-war."

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

There are very few sure things in geopolitics, but it is pretty uncanny how poorly history looks back on literally all widespread western isolationist movements.

Not a very good bet to make

---

Yeah everyone hates Switzerland

---

War neutrality =/ isolationism

---

Okay then, we can be as absolutely interventional as Switzerland doc.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Time for everybody to go read One Second After (again).

EMP certainly still a threat. However, I get some hope from the US AID and other NGO money drying up. Could be coincidence, but bad actors seem under funded these days.

---

They'd need an ICBM for an EMP I'd think. If they got that, might as well hit a major city directly by their religious beliefs

The best part of assisting Israel is the gratitude they always show in return https://t.co/hfhV6ZOyLY

— HowlingMutant (@Howlingmutant0) June 22, 2025

jamey said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Time for everybody to go read One Second After (again).

EMP certainly still a threat. However, I get some hope from the US AID and other NGO money drying up. Could be coincidence, but bad actors seem under funded these days.

---

They'd need an ICBM for an EMP I'd think. If they got that, might as well hit a major city directly by their religious beliefs

---

Correct, to generate a large scale EMP, you need to be able to get the nuke to a high altitude.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jamey said:

---

hunter2012 said:

---

From what I've seen from the Shah's reign, Iran was very westernized before regime change. I hope they are hungry and willing to reach for freedom again.

---

They were back in the 1970s. Those people are in their mid 40s and older now.


But their kids and grand kids are the current youth. Let's hope they're telling them stories of freedom

Kinda like we tell our kids stories of "outside"

---

They weren't really "free". They weren't a theocracy, but the Shah's regime was incredibly oppressive and violent.

Iran is definitely gonna need something better than that to sustain whatever comes after the Ayatollahs

---

Yeah, not totally free like we are but a long ways from where they are now


I think an increment improvement would be a positive

Societies that want freedom and prosperity need to have the willingness to get there at the cultural level. I think that's the big difference between Germany/Japan and the nation building we've done since, both societies had a willingness to change because they were so thoroughly destroyed that it was either change or cease to exist as a modern society. Everything since have been dysfunctional and backwards societies that love biting our ankles from the ashes of their own country.

They definitely have potential, it's a high IQ society with a huge population, a ton of resources and incredible natural defensive barriers.

hunter2012 said:

---

jamey said:

---

I dont understand how the anti war crowd can think allowing a nuclear armed Iran is anti war?


A nuclear armed Iran drags us into a much bigger, far more serious war

What's the thinking here?

---

I'll give an honest response, I'm a fiscal conservative so getting into costly wars both in money and blood should be avoided if possible.

The big question here is whether Iran was really on the cusp of the bomb or if Israel and the US war hawks decided since Hamas and Hezbollah were on the ropes, then now was the time for regime change.

After Bush/Chaney's Iraq, forgive those of us that are skeptical of both domestic and foreign intelligence agencies. I hope my skepticism is proven false, but Americans have been dragged into wars under similar pretenses before. I especially don't want to be picking up Israel's slack if they're just out of missiles.

---

This is me. I don't trust Israel on their intel. Everything seems too convenient.

I am much more concerned about us being drawn into a larger conflict.

909Ag2006 said:

---

It's amazing to me how many folks on this board watched the complete and utter disaster the last 20 years were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and have the gall to come on here and call the "anti-war crowd nothing but Marxists. I assure you that I am ultra Maga and highly conservative, both fiscally and Socially, and I am also definitely "anti-war."

---

Very few people want war, but it is sometimes necessary

Teslag said:

---

909Ag2006 said:

---

It's amazing to me how many folks on this board watched the complete and utter disaster the last 20 years were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and have the gall to come on here and call the "anti-war crowd nothing but Marxists. I assure you that I am ultra Maga and highly conservative, both fiscally and Socially, and I am also definitely "anti-war."

---

Very few people want war, but it is sometimes necessary

---

Sometimes? How many years have we not been at war out of the last 50?

909Ag2006 said:

---

It's amazing to me how many folks on this board watched the complete and utter disaster the last 20 years were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and have the gall to come on here and call the "anti-war crowd nothing but Marxists. I assure you that I am ultra Maga and highly conservative, both fiscally and Socially, and I am also definitely "anti-war."

---

I agree, being anti-war does not make you a commie. I'm very anti-war but also happy we did what we did today.

909Ag2006 said:

---

It's amazing to me how many folks on this board watched the complete and utter disaster the last 20 years were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and have the gall to come on here and call the "anti-war crowd nothing but Marxists. I assure you that I am ultra Maga and highly conservative, both fiscally and Socially, and I am also definitely "anti-war."

---

Then you should trust Trump and give him benefit of the doubt now because nothing in his history as president or his comments as a private citizen has indicated he'll go for an Iraq Afghanistan quagmire nation building type move. Could that happen? Yes, it's possible but I don't think it's probable with Trump.

AOC has spoken. Impeachment

People that think this is war have never been to war.

jamey said:

---

I dont understand how the anti war crowd can think allowing a nuclear armed Iran is anti war?


A nuclear armed Iran drags us into a much bigger, far more serious war

What's the thinking here?

---

There is none. Its just reaction on the part of the left and their alt right Jew hating pals

BartInLA said:

---

AOC has spoken. Impeachment

---

AOC has spoken- ohwww who the hell cares. Which is your point. I just made it a little less polite.

ttu_85 said:

---

jamey said:

---

I dont understand how the anti war crowd can think allowing a nuclear armed Iran is anti war?


A nuclear armed Iran drags us into a much bigger, far more serious war

What's the thinking here?

---

There is none. Its just reaction on the part of the left and their alt right Jew hating pals

---

But it's not all the left, it's some portion of the right too, like whatever Tucker Carlson is

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Teslag said:

---

909Ag2006 said:

---

It's amazing to me how many folks on this board watched the complete and utter disaster the last 20 years were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and have the gall to come on here and call the "anti-war crowd nothing but Marxists. I assure you that I am ultra Maga and highly conservative, both fiscally and Socially, and I am also definitely "anti-war."

---

Very few people want war, but it is sometimes necessary

---

Sometimes? How many years have we not been at war out of the last 50?

---

Quite a few. Some is those necessary some of them not.

Wabs said:

---

People that think this is war have never been to war.

---

Iran has been "close" to a nuke for 3-4 decades. It does appear they were actually closing in. Not against the action tonight but I'd guess it has less to do with the nuke development and more to do with kicking Iran while they were already down after Israel did their bit.

I'm very skeptical of any action in the ME post Iraq and Afghanistan. It is simply a world we do not understand. And we try to push a Western ideology on a culture that is not ready or accepting of it.

I hope this is a short-term action that will not be met with significant blowback of boots on the ground.

1. Why do you trust Israel's intelligence? (when they have a history and vested interest in lying)
2. Why do you trust US intelligence? (when they have a history of bad war decisions and also lying, especially in the ME)
3. Like 1 & 2 above, they've lied about ME countries having WMD before and we've gone to war over fake WMDs in the past...
4. We're broke
5. Very concerning that the people taking the most money from AIPAC happen to be the ones with special knowledge about how we really really need to do this
6. Anyone quoting Genesis about the need to obey Israel is actually clinically insane...

Just off the top of my head...

Furious said:

---

1. Why do you trust Israel's intelligence? (when they have a history and vested interest in lying)
2. Why do you trust US intelligence? (when they have a history of bad war decisions and also lying, especially in the ME)
3. Like 1 & 2 above, they've lied about ME countries having WMD before and we've gone to war over fake WMDs in the past...
4. We're broke
5. Very concerning that the people taking the most money from AIPAC happen to be the ones with special knowledge about how we really really need to do this
6. Anyone quoting Genesis about the need to obey Israel is actually clinically insane...

Just off the top of my head...

---

This wasn't just based on us and Israeli intelligence. The IAEA busted Iran enriching uranium to 60% and the Iranians admitted it.

Biz Ag said:

---

Donald Trump could cure cancer and the left would complain that he destroyed the livelihoods of oncologists worldwide.

---

What the hell is going on? What does this have to do with the topic in the slightest way?

You know, once never voted dem and doubt I ever will. But the way this board reads sometimes it's just like the other side of the coin from Reddit, Dem Underground, etc that you all constantly make fun of (rightfully so).

I should add I'm not really against dropping 6 bombs... just mostly against all the fools salivating about going to war in the ME again. This is a likely scenario following this most recent action. What are the odds it stops here?

Say Iran now has 0 nuclear capacity left but is able to launch drones and missiles into Israel. What should the US response be?

Does anyone on this thread want Iran to have a nuke?

2000AgPhD said:

---

Does anyone on this thread want Iran to have a nuke?

---

Yes, there is.

It's not me.

Furious said:

---

I should add I'm not really against dropping 6 bombs... just mostly against all the fools salivating about going to war in the ME again. This is a likely scenario following this most recent action. What are the odds it stops here?

Say Iran now has 0 nuclear capacity left but is able to launch drones and missiles into Israel. What should the US response be?

---

Very few people are salivating at a protected war in the Middle East. There probably are a few, but there are always war pimps who get off on it.

Actually haven't seen anyone say they want us to launch an invasion of Iran. The closest comments I've seen about "boots on the ground" were about special forces hitting specific targets if necessary.

Teslag said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Teslag said:

---

909Ag2006 said:

---

It's amazing to me how many folks on this board watched the complete and utter disaster the last 20 years were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and have the gall to come on here and call the "anti-war crowd nothing but Marxists. I assure you that I am ultra Maga and highly conservative, both fiscally and Socially, and I am also definitely "anti-war."

---

Very few people want war, but it is sometimes necessary

---

Sometimes? How many years have we not been at war out of the last 50?

---

Quite a few. Some is those necessary some of them not.

---

Grok says 9, but I'm sure it's counting some police actions or air strikes that don't really count. Either way, it seems like war is the rule and not the exception.

2000AgPhD said:

---

Does anyone on this thread want Iran to have a nuke?

---

No. But that has nothing to do with this strike, other than getting blind support from Koolaid drinking sheep.

This is retaliation for Oct 7 and all the other terror sponsorship by Iran, and to prevent it going forward. Its a simple regime change. The nuke alarmism is just how they get widespread support and also justify future expenditure/debt. After all, there is no cost too big to prevent a nuclear holocaust.

Trump just proved this in his speech. He literally said, "I decided a long time ago not to let the killing continue". This wasnt much different than the rationale to kill Soleimani...other than the imminent nuke narrative.

You just mentioned all of the terrorism they are responsible for, yet you want to gamble with this same country when it comes to nukes which they absolutely were trying to develop. Very naive and foolish.

hunter2012 said:

---

jamey said:

---

I dont understand how the anti war crowd can think allowing a nuclear armed Iran is anti war?


A nuclear armed Iran drags us into a much bigger, far more serious war

What's the thinking here?

---

I'll give an honest response, I'm a fiscal conservative so getting into costly wars both in money and blood should be avoided if possible.

The big question here is whether Iran was really on the cusp of the bomb or if Israel and the US war hawks decided since Hamas and Hezbollah were on the ropes, then now was the time for regime change.

After Bush/Chaney's Iraq, forgive those of us that are skeptical of both domestic and foreign intelligence agencies. I hope my skepticism is proven false, but Americans have been dragged into wars under similar pretenses before. I especially don't want to be picking up Israel's slack if they're just out of missiles.

---