US & Israel attack Iran

We've got Guardiola said:
The policy of the previous Iranian regime was that they needed a nuclear programme for peaceful purposes such as power generation.

That is the basis of all negotiations with the rest of the world in relation to relieving sanctions, peace, etc etc. It is also the basis for IAEA monitoring because if Iran is actually making a nuclear bomb then what are they monitoring?

Should we trust a regime that lies and denies making a nuclear bomb whilst doing everything to make a nuclear bomb?
Click to expand...
Which government doesn’t lie?
 
Trump is open to backing armed anti-regime groups inside Iran, including Kurdish factions. No final decision yet on weapons or intelligence support, - WSJ

What's the worst that could happen.
 
Palerider said:
Probably but you can equally call out other life style choices. Political parties? Remember the Hippies, Moonies those American sects where they usually all decide to die together? The North Korean devotion to their supreme leader is another example of political rather than religious control.

For me, a lapsed Catholic, I am totally against abortion, capital punishment and early death intervention (so pro life). Now I don't know whether that is because I have been pre programmed to believe that (which I was) or is it because I truly believe it (which I'd argue I do). i.e. Has my pre programming on the subject at an early age, even now, affected my ability to think straight on the subject? Don't they say show me the child at 7 and I will show you the man?
Click to expand...
I think your post somewhat demonstrates my point
 
Pedestrian said:
Which government doesn’t lie?
Click to expand...
That's not the question though is it. The answer is obvious so at what point does it justify action? It's too late to stop nuclear weapons when they're in play.

I don't like Israel and I don't like the Israeli government. They were completely wrong on Gaza/Palestine but I'd say that there is a case against Iran. This is basically Iraq except the WMD's do actually exist this time.
 
Palerider said:
I don't get what you are saying. In Manchester, the death of one man on a bike gets more coverage than 100 people dying in a crash in Delhi. In Delhi, the death of one man on a bike gets more coverage than 100 people dying in a crash in Manchester.

Apparently 175,000 die every single day. Most of us mourn the death of our pet rabbit more than the deaths of 175,000 people we did not even know existed. Harsh but true.
Click to expand...
Certainly was the case with Liam Payne....
 
We've got Guardiola said:
That's not the question though is it. The answer is obvious so at what point does it justify action?

I don't like Israel and I don't like the Israeli government. They were completely wrong on Gaza/Palestine but I'd say that there is a case against Iran. This is basically Iraq except the WMD's exist this time.
Click to expand...
Absolutely no way at all there is any justification for this conflict to happen at this time other then trump. He is the only reason this is happening.
 
We've got Guardiola said:
It's a completely ridiculous statement unless it's founded only in black and white evidence versus practical reality.

Iran possesses 440kg of 60% enriched U-235, and nobody knows where it is, not even the IAEA, that's enough for 10 nuclear bombs if they enrich it further. And going from 5% to 60% is harder than going from 60% to the 90% needed. U-235 is not enriched beyond 5% for powerplant uses.

They may not have a nuclear bomb now but what else did they plan to do with highly enriched U-235?

A second point is to look at the Fordow processing facility on a satellite map. This was a place with multiple layers of security and air defences. The Iranians worked hard to protect and move whatever was inside before the Americans wiped it out. So what was it used for?
Click to expand...
I would to know just how long it would take to go from 60% to 90%. What infrastructure would it require? What timeframe? Do they have the technology/science capacity.

There are so many mixed messages. "Nuclear weapons in a week". "We've obliterated their entire program".

USA and Israel should be in front of the UN justifying why this action is necessary and why its necessary now. If they can justify that then the UN and other countries should support them.

Iran for their part should explain why they need their stockpile and what they plan to do with it. If they can do that, then they should be allowed to carry on without interference from other countries (subject to continued inspections etc).
 
Earlyriser said:
That's what religion is... control and suppression
Click to expand...

Yep religion is a form of "mind control"

For example
if you break the law.. you go to jail.
If you break gods laws.. you go to hell!

Just a form of mind control.

Sad thing is.. more people have been killed on this planet in the name of god than probably everything else combined.

We live in a age of Truth Denial and just for saying this truth we're labelled as evil according to religious fundamentalists
 
Last edited:
Scottyboi said:
Trump is open to backing armed anti-regime groups inside Iran, including Kurdish factions. No final decision yet on weapons or intelligence support, - WSJ

What's the worst that could happen.
Click to expand...

Those fears that there was no plan look well founded.
 
Scottyboi said:
Trump is open to backing armed anti-regime groups inside Iran, including Kurdish factions. No final decision yet on weapons or intelligence support, - WSJ

What's the worst that could happen.
Click to expand...

One constant in the various middle east disaster interventions seems to be that the Kurds get their hopes up and are then promptly shafted.
 
moomba said:
I would to know just how long it would take to go from 60% to 90%. What infrastructure would it require? What timeframe? Do they have the technology/science capacity.

There are so many mixed messages. "Nuclear weapons in a week". "We've obliterated their entire program".

USA and Israel should be in front of the UN justifying why this action is necessary and why its necessary now. If they can justify that then the UN and other countries should support them.

Iran for their part should explain why they need their stockpile and what they plan to do with it. If they can do that, then they should be allowed to carry on without interference from other countries (subject to continued inspections etc).
Click to expand...
Have you ever seen footage of Russia in the UN about Ukraine, or any of the other countless atrocities and wrongdoings by countries covered? That’s beyond optimistic what you’ve written there.

Iran would just tell them to fuck off, as Russia did. You wouldn’t even get them to turn up. And likewise with the US and Israel, they’d just tell the UN to do one.
 
Last edited:
moomba said:
I would to know just how long it would take to go from 60% to 90%. What infrastructure would it require? What timeframe? Do they have the technology/science capacity.

There are so many mixed messages. "Nuclear weapons in a week". "We've obliterated their entire program".

USA and Israel should be in front of the UN justifying why this action is necessary and why its necessary now. If they can justify that then the UN and other countries should support them.

Iran for their part should explain why they need their stockpile and what they plan to do with it. If they can do that, then they should be allowed to carry on without interference from other countries (subject to continued inspections etc).
Click to expand...
I stopped reading at "UN", it's a completely useless body on things like this, simply because of how the voting works.

The only people any discussion on "nuclear" should be in front of is the IAEA, but they need to see everything, and the regime in Iran wouldn't let that happen (if they were trying to build a bomb), it might claim they've given full access, but how does anyone actually know/trust them ?
 
cleavers said:
I stopped reading at "UN", it's a completely useless body on things like this, simply because of how the voting works.

The only people any discussion on "nuclear" should be in front of is the IAEA, but they need to see everything, and the regime in Iran wouldn't let that happen (if they were trying to build a bomb), it might claim they've given full access, but how does anyone actually know/trust them ?
Click to expand...
Have the IAEA seen Israels nuclear weopens?
 
Let's just compare stats for a minute...

Casualties of the Gaza war - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

2026 Iran massacres - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

That's a minimum of 36,000 Iranians that were eliminated by their own government in a time frame of 1 month vs 76,000 minimum in 29 months (to date).

Both are appalling figures.
The difference?

Some on here only seem to think the first is a crime Against humanity...
 
There is a vast middle ground here and sadly, barely anyone on this thread lives in it.

Trump and co cunts.
Netanyahu and co cunts.
Iranian Islamic regime cunts.
Hamas cunts.
Hezbollah cunts.
Muslims hating Jews just because cunts.
Jews hating Muslims just because cunts.
Posters hating others because they don’t agree cunts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top