Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

---

They have been weeks and/or months away from a nuke for more than 25 years according the Netanyahu.

It's the same playbook from the "WMD's" in Iraq except this time not as many people are buying it which is making certain people absolutely furious.

This war was a mistake from the beginning and can only get worse the longer it lasts. Trump refuses to admit defeat so unfortunately, things will get worse.

---

They've chosen to sacrifice basically their entire military leadership and infrastructure in order to continue pursuing a nuclear weapon. Common sense would dictate the only thing stopping them from getting there has been Israel and now us.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

They've chosen to sacrifice basically their entire military leadership and infrastructure in order to continue pursuing a nuclear weapon. Common sense would dictate the only thing stopping them from getting there has been Israel and now us.

---

Excellent post, additional blue star.

Though common sense is oft fleeting, people really need to read the above again and again.

See what Iran has sacrificed to not give up their nuclear ambitions and to be a "good neighbor".

Anytime they get agitated about something, they attack folks violently. Their choice of weapons and effectiveness have only increased over time... until DJT stepped up.

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft

---

Riddle me this if there army , navy and aircraft have all been wiped out

Why aren't we putting boots on the ground ? I am sure the citizens would greet us as liberators given the military dictatorship has been wiped out

nortex97 said:

---

Confrontation during an interview with the Iranian crown prince:
German journalist asks Pahlavi: Are you an Israeli agent?

Prince Reza Pahlavi: NO, but my grandfather gave refuge to Jews when you burned them in the ovens. pic.twitter.com/P9Km98fOkV

— Adi (@Adi13) August 16, 2026

Love it.

---

Damn straight.

Sq 17 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft

---

Riddle me this if there army , navy and aircraft have all been wiped out

Why aren't we putting boots on the ground ? I am sure the citizens would greet us as liberators given the military dictatorship has been wiped out

---

This silly rhetorical question is always asked for some odd reason.

I don't believe they were at 60% for decades. Also, note that anything north of let's say 20% give or take has no civilian or scientific purpose.

If I recall, we hacked their centrifuges at one point and set them back. There have been other overt and covert attacks on their nuclear program.

Per the JCPOA, they were capped at 3.67% and they super duper pinky sweared to the IAEA and UN inspectors that they were in totes compliance.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

---

They have been weeks and/or months away from a nuke for more than 25 years according the Netanyahu.

It's the same playbook from the "WMD's" in Iraq except this time not as many people are buying it which is making certain people absolutely furious.

This war was a mistake from the beginning and can only get worse the longer it lasts. Trump refuses to admit defeat so unfortunately, things will get worse.

---

They've chosen to sacrifice basically their entire military leadership and infrastructure in order to continue pursuing a nuclear weapon. Common sense would dictate the only thing stopping them from getting there has been Israel and now us.

---

So why for decades did they decide to stay at only 60% or less enrichment instead of increasing to the required 90% to build a weapons program?

---

Who knows. Probably some blend of incompetence and ours and Israel's sabotage attempts. But the fact that they are currently pursuing them today isn't really debatable. Because if they weren't, they'd have just given up their materials instead of volunteering to get bombed repeatedly. Should we just let them become another country with nukes and hold the world hostage?

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

We did pretty much all of that in the first two weeks of the conflict. We should have declared mission accomplished then, when we had identifiable goals that had been accomplished, and before the Strait became the focal point.

It's everything since that's been a downhill slide into the quagmire.

DTP02 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

We did pretty much all of that in the first two weeks of the conflict. We should have declared mission accomplished then, before the Strait became the focal point.

It's everything since that's been a downhill slide into the quagmire.

---

The SOH was always going to be a focal point. Iran was building an arsenal to keep the world from bombing then when they took it over.

Would have to go back to look up specifics but ~2010 they had over 2,000 kg of uranium up to 5% that they had started enriching up to 20%. Stuxnet knocked out about half of their centrifuges ~1,000 of 2,000.

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

---

we're already there, and no nuke was needed. trump saw to that.

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

---

we're already there, and no nuke was needed. trump saw to that.

---

The nuke was needed as a threat to protect themselves from getting hammered.

You can hammer them now. Can't hammer them with a nuke and enough long ranges missiles. That's why we bombed the **** out of them.

DTP02 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

We did pretty much all of that in the first two weeks of the conflict. We should have declared mission accomplished then, when we had identifiable goals that had been accomplished, and before the Strait became the focal point.

It's everything since that's been a downhill slide into the quagmire.

---

Iran mined the Strait of Hormuz the day we started bombing. And with that action commercial shippers did not risk passing through the strait.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

---

we're already there, and no nuke was needed. trump saw to that.

---

The nuke was needed as a threat to protect themselves from getting hammered.

You can hammer them now. Can't hammer them with a nuke and enough long ranges missiles. That's why we bombed the **** out of them.

---

And that's also why they are undoubtedly going to pursue getting a nuke so they can't be ****ed with anymore (see North Korea)

Would probably actually add the stability to the region[ that our lying leaders and Israel claim they are seeking

---

I'm not a fan of our current strategy but that's quite the take. You really think an Iran with nuclear weapons would make the region they've already destabilized almost solely by themselves for decades while not having nukes.....more stable?

So Iran getting nukes would suddenly mean they no longer fund multiple terrorist proxy groups all over the M.E. and they would just focus on making Iran better and leave all of their neighbors alone? They would leave Lebanon and let the Lebanese run their own country? They would leave Yemen and let them run their own country?

Does an off ramp even exist for Trump any longer ? He seems to have positioned himself where he's given Iran the ability to restrict any reasonable exit.

AGHouston11 said:

---

Does an off ramp even exist for Trump any longer ? He seems to have positioned himself where he's given Iran the ability to restrict any reasonable exit.

---

When, "Iran cannot ever have nukes!" is the reason for the season, how could there be?

It's the perfect wording to ensure that even the worst eff up can be fully justified.

This is no different than the war on "we're fighting then over there so they don't come over here" terror.

The only way to ensure Iran doesn't ever have nukes is to do so much more than we've done, and that's what makes it harder and harder to see this end any time soon.

A nuclear Iran being a stabilizing force is quite the hot take.

Quote:

---

I'm not a fan of our current strategy but that's quite the take. You really think an Iran with nuclear weapons would make the region they've already destabilized almost solely by themselves for decades while not having nukes.....more stable?

So Iran getting nukes would suddenly mean they no longer fund multiple terrorist proxy groups all over the M.E. and they would just focus on making Iran better and leave all of their neighbors alone? They would leave Lebanon and let the Lebanese run their own country? They would leave Yemen and let them run their own country?

---

These people think that Israel is the destabilizing force in the area, and so in their minds, yes, a nuclear Iran would stabilize the region. Take out Israel, take out the problem.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

---

They have been weeks and/or months away from a nuke for more than 25 years according the Netanyahu.

It's the same playbook from the "WMD's" in Iraq except this time not as many people are buying it which is making certain people absolutely furious.

This war was a mistake from the beginning and can only get worse the longer it lasts. Trump refuses to admit defeat so unfortunately, things will get worse.

---

They've chosen to sacrifice basically their entire military leadership and infrastructure in order to continue pursuing a nuclear weapon. Common sense would dictate the only thing stopping them from getting there has been Israel and now us.

---

The have been doing the same things they did the last 20 years. If Oct 7th doesn't happen we never get to this point. They saw what happened to Kadafi under Obama and what happened to Saddam under Bush. These people aren't dumb. They knew where in the nuclear process they needed to be and stayed in it. Our redline changed. But after initial attack we have played right into Iran's hands. They have the strait something they didn't have before plus they have Trump on the ropes begging to give them money. They have more vessels in the gulf daily then they did when the war started. As we steady pump misinformation they know we can't win. They could have mined the whole gulf by now our naval assets are not in the Persian gulf we are south in the Gulf of Oman. They have free reign to do whatever we have already ceded the Persian to them.

Coachlandryhat said:

---

But after initial attack we have played right into Iran's hands. They have the strait something they didn't have before plus they have Trump on the ropes begging to give them money. They have more vessels in the gulf daily then they did when the war started. As we steady pump misinformation they know we can't win. They could have mined the whole gulf by now our naval assets are not in the Persian gulf we are south in the Gulf of Oman. They have free reign to do whatever we have already ceded the Persian to them.

---

They must really be weak if they have such a free hand but have done very little with it. While the contemptible Jimmy Carter did cede persia to the mullahs, I'm not sure what the rest of your post is really meant to convey. The Iranian navy has more vessels in the gulf than pre-war? Wut?

Europe is unprepared for a US victory in Iran.

Quote:

---

Pursuing victory will have its costs. Dramatic escalation designed to win the war will surely lead to higher oil prices as Iran launches its remaining missiles and drones to inflict as much damage as possible on US allies. It also will put the European and Asian allies in a political bind, as domestic audiences will ask why they stand by an ally so unfettered by international law. Things could be even more difficult depending on how China, Russia or North Korea respond to the prospect of losing their Middle Eastern ally.

Winning the war might cause European leaders trouble too. Trump would surely be emboldened by a victory and look to other places he believes need to be brought to heel. Greenland is an obvious candidate for that, but US public opinion even MAGA Republicans don't think we should invade the Danish territory means Cuba might be a tastier meal.

How will European leaders react if victory in Iran is followed up by an ultimatum against Cuba's teetering Communists? Or if he decides that the only way to stop the drug cartels is to send the US military into Mexico to fight them there? Would European electorates want to rely on the US for their defence? Would their leaders even try to persuade them?

Then there's the prospect of what might happen in the Middle East if Trump wins. The riskiest but surest way to defeat Iran is to seize its oil terminal on Kharg Island Iran sends about 90 per cent of its oil exports through it and the economy could not survive its loss and hold it until Iran fully denuclearises. Trump threatened to do exactly that on June 11, saying US forces would take Kharg Island and other oil infrastructure points, before calling off the strikes hours later. It's not at all clear that Trump would want to give it back even then, as keeping US troops there even after Iranian compliance would be a safeguard against Iranian backsliding.

Trump is already effectively trying to take de facto control over Venezuela's oil reserves. Keeping Kharg would put him in control of Iran's as well and send a clear signal to the rest of the Gulf states to sing to a US tune, or else.

---

Long piece, pretty accurate imho.

Great piece and thanks for posting.

Folks need to understand that the resistance against Trump from Europe is purely in their own interests and not in our interests or in the interests of longer term peace / stability in the world.

They have sold out to the lowest bidder for decades, whether it be via immigration, energy, goods, services, etc.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

Approaching September now and what happened to the total economic collapse of Iran than was going to happen within days that we were told about months ago?

Trump now has new maga arguing over what maga actually is and isn't.

He still can't find an off ramp in the total disaster he has started.

---

all of this just to stop a nuke that didn't exist and open a strait that wasn't closed

---

And to wipe out their army
And to wipe out their navy
And to destroy their aircraft
And to severely hinder their long range missile capability
And to blow up their ability to manufacture long range missiles.
And to take out the leadership of the terrorists
And to severely limit their ability to find terrorism.

Should I continue?

---

and handed them control of the strait of hormuz, which to iran is worth all of those combined and then some

---

LMAO. They were waiting for their nuke to take control. They there would be no stopping them.

I mean, some things are just not that hard.

---

we're already there, and no nuke was needed. trump saw to that.

---

The nuke was needed as a threat to protect themselves from getting hammered.

You can hammer them now. Can't hammer them with a nuke and enough long ranges missiles. That's why we bombed the **** out of them.

---

And that's also why they are undoubtedly going to pursue getting a nuke so they can't be ****ed with anymore (see North Korea)

Would probably actually add the stability to the region that our lying leaders and Israel claim they are seeking

---

Our "No **** On North Korea" policy has a lot less to do with nukes and much more about the fact they no **** on us… certainly not the way Iran has done so for 47 years.

If they change strategy, then they will be dealt with nukes or not.

Nuclear powers have been known to fight each other without popping the big ones. See India v Pakistan.

flown-the-coop said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

The nuke was needed as a threat to protect themselves from getting hammered.

You can hammer them now. Can't hammer them with a nuke and enough long ranges missiles. That's why we bombed the **** out of them.

---

And that's also why they are undoubtedly going to pursue getting a nuke so they can't be ****ed with anymore (see North Korea)

Would probably actually add the stability to the region that our lying leaders and Israel claim they are seeking

---

Our "No **** On North Korea" policy has a lot less to do with nukes and much more about the fact they no **** on us… certainly not the way Iran has done so for 47 years.

If they change strategy, then they will be dealt with nukes or not.

Nuclear powers have been known to fight each other without popping the big ones. See India v Pakistan.

---

The irony is that it was Jimmy Carter who also facilitated a nuclear north korea, to the consternation of the Clinton administration, just as he screwed over the Iranian people. 'Near traitorous.' Indeed. Human suffering, war and death followed wherever Jimmy Carter ever went. If he were still somehow alive, he'd be working to engineer some sort of way to get his mullah pals a nuke, no doubt.

I may go dig him up to make sure he is indeed dead. Regardless, the peanut fraud from Georgia haunts this Country in perpetuity it seems.

I had forgot about his Clinton era dealings in NK. He'll, Rodman was much more effective!

AGHouston11 said:

---

Does an off ramp even exist for Trump any longer ? He seems to have positioned himself where he's given Iran the ability to restrict any reasonable exit.

---

Theoretically, yes. Realistically- its gonna be tough

Phatbob said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not a fan of our current strategy but that's quite the take. You really think an Iran with nuclear weapons would make the region they've already destabilized almost solely by themselves for decades while not having nukes.....more stable?

So Iran getting nukes would suddenly mean they no longer fund multiple terrorist proxy groups all over the M.E. and they would just focus on making Iran better and leave all of their neighbors alone? They would leave Lebanon and let the Lebanese run their own country? They would leave Yemen and let them run their own country?

---

These people think that Israel is the destabilizing force in the area, and so in their minds, yes, a nuclear Iran would stabilize the region. Take out Israel, take out the problem.

---

History shows that since Israel was founded in 1948, basically every country in the region has been at war with them at various/multiple times. Sometimes many of them at once. Lebanon notably has been at war with them since the beginning.

Keyno said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not a fan of our current strategy but that's quite the take. You really think an Iran with nuclear weapons would make the region they've already destabilized almost solely by themselves for decades while not having nukes.....more stable?

So Iran getting nukes would suddenly mean they no longer fund multiple terrorist proxy groups all over the M.E. and they would just focus on making Iran better and leave all of their neighbors alone? They would leave Lebanon and let the Lebanese run their own country? They would leave Yemen and let them run their own country?

---

These people think that Israel is the destabilizing force in the area, and so in their minds, yes, a nuclear Iran would stabilize the region. Take out Israel, take out the problem.

---

History shows that since Israel was founded in 1948, basically every country in the region has been at war with them at various/multiple times. Sometimes many of them at once. Lebanon notably has been at war with them since the beginning.

---

Not the fault of the Jews or Israel. The murderous death cults are to blame.

bobbranco said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not a fan of our current strategy but that's quite the take. You really think an Iran with nuclear weapons would make the region they've already destabilized almost solely by themselves for decades while not having nukes.....more stable?

So Iran getting nukes would suddenly mean they no longer fund multiple terrorist proxy groups all over the M.E. and they would just focus on making Iran better and leave all of their neighbors alone? They would leave Lebanon and let the Lebanese run their own country? They would leave Yemen and let them run their own country?

---

These people think that Israel is the destabilizing force in the area, and so in their minds, yes, a nuclear Iran would stabilize the region. Take out Israel, take out the problem.

---

History shows that since Israel was founded in 1948, basically every country in the region has been at war with them at various/multiple times. Sometimes many of them at once. Lebanon notably has been at war with them since the beginning.

---

Not the fault of the Jews or Israel. The murderous death cults are to blame.

---

I was not assigning fault. I was addressing comments about "destabilizing force"

Keyno said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not a fan of our current strategy but that's quite the take. You really think an Iran with nuclear weapons would make the region they've already destabilized almost solely by themselves for decades while not having nukes.....more stable?

So Iran getting nukes would suddenly mean they no longer fund multiple terrorist proxy groups all over the M.E. and they would just focus on making Iran better and leave all of their neighbors alone? They would leave Lebanon and let the Lebanese run their own country? They would leave Yemen and let them run their own country?

---

These people think that Israel is the destabilizing force in the area, and so in their minds, yes, a nuclear Iran would stabilize the region. Take out Israel, take out the problem.

---

History shows that since Israel was founded in 1948, basically every country in the region has been at war with them at various/multiple times. Sometimes many of them at once. Lebanon notably has been at war with them since the beginning.

---

Not the fault of the Jews or Israel. The murderous death cults are to blame.

---

I was not assigning fault. I was addressing comments about "destabilizing force"

---

They exist. They are not a force.

bobbranco said:

---

Keyno said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not a fan of our current strategy but that's quite the take. You really think an Iran with nuclear weapons would make the region they've already destabilized almost solely by themselves for decades while not having nukes.....more stable?

So Iran getting nukes would suddenly mean they no longer fund multiple terrorist proxy groups all over the M.E. and they would just focus on making Iran better and leave all of their neighbors alone? They would leave Lebanon and let the Lebanese run their own country? They would leave Yemen and let them run their own country?

---

These people think that Israel is the destabilizing force in the area, and so in their minds, yes, a nuclear Iran would stabilize the region. Take out Israel, take out the problem.

---

History shows that since Israel was founded in 1948, basically every country in the region has been at war with them at various/multiple times. Sometimes many of them at once. Lebanon notably has been at war with them since the beginning.

---

Not the fault of the Jews or Israel. The murderous death cults are to blame.

---

I was not assigning fault. I was addressing comments about "destabilizing force"

---

They exist. They are not a force.

---

They exist. With nuclear weapons. The only country in the ME with nukes. Not a force? Are we feeling stabilized?