[bigyabai]

> Many cannot accept its dangerous world.

The ballistic missiles are the danger, and Iran already has those. There is no missile or reentry vehicle in Iran's possession that can credibly threaten the United States with a nuclear weapon.

> US & USSR alone has several near-miss detonations/launches.

According to Seymour Hersh, Israel was close to using their nuclear weapon as well. Why not focus on their disarmament first to deter Iranian retaliation?

> Some are paid to criticize on influential online forums and HN makes no effort to moderate or police such activity.

Please reread HN's guidelines if you don't want to be permabanned: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

   Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like.

[_DeadFred_]

Yesterday the Iranian embassy in the UK called for attacks in the UK. Today there were stabbings. Iran likes to demonstrate that they can reach out a touch someone.

[bigyabai]

Case in point. Clearly neither of those are nuclear-level threats, the IRGC and Mossad have both fomented public violence for decades at this point.

Their Tom & Jerry reenactment is not casus belli for the US or Europe. You'll note that no Article 4 has been invoked over Iran because it's not a legitimate security concern for any of NATO's members.

[_DeadFred_]

They are a demonstarted threat that Iran is willing/happy to call for terrorism around the world, and that their threat is real and will be carried out.

That the Islamic Republic of Iran's words such as 'conduct terror attacks in the UK right now' and 'death to America' have the actual threat of death behind them and aren't just 'rhetoric' as HN claims.

One that HN won't care about, but that Iran targets and kills jews, not just Israeli jews, but all jews, anywhere in the world, as their political agenda.

[bigyabai]

> as HN claims.

> One that HN won't care about

It's not HN. Most of the world doesn't care about it. You can't cry foul over threats to civilian populations amid the annexation of Lebanon. America doesn't get to operate from a position of moral authority after it's overthrown a democracy it didn't like and threatened to wipe a civilization off the map. NATO service members aren't excited to fight on behalf of the nation that invented the Hannibal Directive. HN is just a sample of this overwhelming majority, many of whom are American taxpayers with an opinion they'd like to voice.

I'm sorry that you struggle to find empathy for your minority political opinions. Don't blame it on HN.

[_DeadFred_]

40+ years of 'death to America' from supreme religious leaders met with silence. The double standards/hypocrisy just keep piling up. I guess you have lower standards for shia holy leaders than you do from Trump. You must REALLY hold Shia mullahs in low regard.

How much blatant terrorism started via Iranian Ambassadors in the UK becomes a level the UK should respond to? You obviously don't think knifing a few jews is worth consideration.

The pro-Iranian side don't actually care about terror attacks by one country carried out in another. The pro-Iranians don't actually care about targeting specific ethnicities for murder simply because of their ethnicity.

Wait the hannible directive is about Iranian embassy staff instigating ethnic killings in the UK? Seems like your just injecting a random unrelated propaganda point. The fact is the Isalmic Republic of Iran's actual policy is to carry out attacks to kill random jews around the world (like the attack they attempted today in the UK).

[bigyabai]

The UK and America destroyed Iranian democracy and installed a police state in it's place. There is no "death to Europe" or "death to jews" anywhere in their slogans, because they specifically want to destroy their neocolonial occupiers. As an American myself, I empathize with individuals that fight for the freedom of their people. The founding fathers of America extolled the values of self-determination, and I agree with their reasoning more than I see the logic in Trump's expensive, taxpayer-funded war.

Look at your argument from the European or Indopacific perspective - why does a nation like China or India need to participate in a joint blockade? What is the value in attacking Iran for a nation like Pakistan or Egypt? The American goal of "stop them from making a nuke" is clearly not possible from an air campaign, and nobody but Israel is in Iran's crosshairs. The Gulf states all have fragile economies that won't survive the type of asymmetrical conflict that America is equipped to wage. Even rebel groups like the Kurds don't see any promise in attacking Iran, and have told American diplomats that they're on their own. They all know that the promises are empty, and a broken or Balkanized Iran would be the end of their regional stability.

Interventionism is not a helpful policy for Iran's people. Arabs know it, Europeans know it and most of the Americans and Israelis know it too. The status-quo is only confusing if you assume that the Arab and European states are run by morons that want to destroy the Middle East.