| > And what is your evidence? Here: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/15/us/politics/iran-israel-m... What is your evidence that given all we know about Iran, and the fact that they have 60%-enriched uranium, they are not building a bomb? Why do they need 60%-enriched uranium? > Is that your claim? No. My claim is that from a geopolitical point of view containment of China is the goal, and the war in Iran is just one step. Politics never about telling the truth -- it's about achieving goals. You may not like the reality of it, but it is what it is. > You know there are Shia Arabs, right? Do you think all Shia are Persian? What does it have to do with anything? Can you form a coherent argument? > I mean, really? Let's just rattle off a few that anyone with basic information literacy over the last few years would be able to come up with: <...> > Little to no evidence of recent civic institutions or culture of responsible governance. Iran has no civic institutions and no culture of responsible governance? > Sizable minorities who even if aligned against the common dictator, will inevitably disagree with each other on the direction of the state. The sectarian dynamics in Iraq, Syria and Lybia do not exist in Iran. Yeah, "reports" about CIA are real. Sure. > Great track record of intervention here. There is no intervention though. > Where did you pull Greece from? The Iranians can barely hit anything next door. Have you seen the map? Open it, and then see where Cyprus is located. Barely hit next door. Yeah. > you don't think it's a gamble? Of course it is. Like any other decision. You make the calculus and decide if the reward is worth the risk. I am not sure any answer of mine you will find satisfiable. In your view, only 100% result justifies the risk. The reality is that you will never have 100% guarantee. For you inaction regardless of the consequences is the answer, for me it's better to act with uncertainty. Finally, you assume (without evidence) that Iranian Regime is a rational actor. Once you change this assumption, the calculus will change. |
You aren't answering my questions at all. You are evading them. The argument is clear. This war is not worth the potential cost. Iran was not closer to getting a weapon. Americans are at more risk today than they were yesterday.
Your walk back has now reached its peak.
> There is no intervention though
I mean what to even say to this?
The rest of it is more or less the same. But I want to highlight how you ended, as really that takes the cake. It's a talking point that comes up a lot so I want to call it out.
"The Iranian Regime is not a rational actor". I saw that coming from a mile away. Thanks for finally putting your cards on the table. So now you can inflate the boogeyman to be as big as you wish. Iran isn't rational, they crazy. Time to bomb!
This the refuge of unserious people. It was a rational actor, as terrible a regime as it is/was. The evidence of that is clear. They were a regime/nation-state that negotiated, declared war, sold oil, prioritized their own existence and acted to preserve their own power. Why aren't they rational? Because the Supreme leader wears a fundamentalist outfit? Because his religious fundamentalism comes from a religion that isn't yours? Because they make threats (which they for the most part never carry out)? You know that many times in the past they warn their neighbors (including Israel) of their so-called reprisal attacks ahead of time so they don't cause a booboo miscalculation and accidentally get annihilated? Like how they are getting annihilated now? If they are so irrational why didn't they send off all these weapons at any time before this? Why did they wait to get attacked? How does Israel penetrate so deeply into their command structure if its such an irrational regime? You would think any attempt at infiltration would be confused by the totally crazy irrational society they have. I mean what a nutcase regime. Jeez what a crazy irrational country attacking the countries that attacked them and bombed out their entire leadership or tacitly supported it.
Totally nuts man.
Disappointing. This just means you don't want to have a serious argument. What is clear is the projection, and that there is nothing more to be gained from this exchange. I have tried to argue in good faith this whole time. Have a good day.