| > Do you really believe this? Anytime someone or some country does something, it only indicates that the specific action is taking place? > Here's one then: China has no intention of attacking Taiwan - it's just practicing its ability to blockade small island nations in case it comes under attack. By this logic the US war with Canada happened how many centuries after stockpiles of weapons were near the border? The direct conflict with the Warsaw Pact happened exactly which decade, given all the stockpiles of arms the US had on those border? China has had stockpiles of weapons ready to invade Taiwan for decades, when exactly did they do it? My point is - Most weapons stockpiles do not indicate imminent threat, and the do not require conflict. There needs to be evidence beyond "there's a stockpile of weapons". I have been asking for that evidence, for something that indicates that this is a situation different than the others. I really don't understand why you're so upset that I want actual evidence, not vague assertions like: > But I think you're taking an extremely charitable position which stands in stark contrast to Iran's actual activities and actions in the region. What activities are you fucking talking about. Show your work and bring receipts. I don't play "just trust me bro" on this shit. I saw enough of my generation come back dead, maimed and broken from the last time a conservative moron said "just trust me bro, they gonna do bad stuff". In fact - you clearly beleive this so much, go get on the front lines and catch bullets for it. Better you than someone who didn't sign up for this and actualy deserves to live. > This doesn't hold water since Iran has been working on these programs and projects since before 2025. October 7th, for example, which was a de facto attack by Iran on a US ally obviously occurred prior to 2025. Um... project 2025 is a plan for the repulican party, the goal of which was to begin action in 2025. The plan was named for (at the time of its writing) a future date. All this to say project 2025 plan was first publisht in early 2023. Simple facts are useful... see how i back up my statements with them. You should try one day, its nice. October 7 was not a direct attack by Iran. I promise you... the palestinians who are being genocided did the attack. Iran may have had a part funding and planning it, but they didn't use any of their stockpile of weapons to do that attack. I really don't see how this is evidence that Iran will be using a stockpile of weapons for a direct attack... particularly given that Iran generally does things via proxy. > It's not wild speculation though. You can look for yourself at Iran's activities. Why is it that only Iran has these problems? Why does Iran always need special treatment like the JCPOA? Why does Iran fund terrorist groups as recognized by the United States and European Union who launch missiles and blow people up, and kill and maim others? Do you just not care or pay attention to that stuff? Do you excuse it all away? It's truly something I find bewildering. The basic premise - that Iran is special in any of these regards, is fundamentally wrong. The US has funded plenty of terrorist organizations (recognized as such by the US and EU). The US launches plenty of missles that kill and maim children, etc. I do pay attention when Iran does it, and when the US does it, and when others do it too. I find all of it abhorrent. None of it justifies even more of the same though. It's even less of a justification for a full scale, poorly planned and excuted war that isn't accomplishing any one of it's stated goals. > But there is evidence haha. The drone and missile stockpiles and attacks, nuclear enrichment programs, providing Russia with drones to kill Ukrainians, funding terrorist groups, chanting death to America, killing 30,000 of their own peacefully protesting people. None of this is enough to justify intervention elsewhere, so its not evidence that justifies invading Iran. Whats the actual reason for going after Iran? Why didn't Bush use these arguments to go after North Korea before they had the bomb? > Do you want Iran to have a nuclear bomb? Do you think that's a good thing? I don't care if they have a nuclear bomb. Im don't drink the kool-aid that tells me that "scary brown people will use the bomb because they are stupid enough to beleive they will accomplish their mission magically after the retalliation leaves all their people dead". I think it's a rational choice for any nation without nuclear weapons to seek them in order to prevent random attacks from other nations. > Oh I don't think they're stupid at all. Incompetent or crazy at times, absolutely. Your characterization about cartoon level villainy is incorrect as it applies to me or any comments I've said. You literally are making more assertions of cartoon villany in the very post I'm replying to. It's tiring to deal with illogical zealots, take your kids, go to the front line, fight the war you want so my neighbors don't have to go off and die for your absurd and illogical stance. |