4 ms·
The article seems to be lacking some context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-spo
by humanrebar 8y ago
The article seems to be lacking some context:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terro...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran
- nunodonato 8y agoI think you are missing a big point here: US is the biggest terrorist state, world wide.
- boomboomsubban 8y agoSorry, but how the hell does that justify allowing children with cancer to suffer and die?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- parshua 8y agoIf you compare Iran's victims to US's, Iran will come out as an untarnished Angel. Just in the last 20 years in the middle-east, we have Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and by proxy Syria and Yemen. Put together, even if one is generous, that's more than a million people, minimum, died in wars of conquest, claimed to be `Freedom Operations` or at worst `Police Actions`. Spare us with the propaganda. The world has caught up and can see through it.
- AsyncAwait 8y agoRegarding you first link, it does not justify the civilian suffering. There are many instances of the U.S. sponsoring unsaviory groups, but I don't think anyone would argue the citizens should suffer as a result. The second link is not relevant, the international community is confident Iran is sticking to the agreement, so pointing to a non-existent issue as some kind of a gotcha, especially as the biggest complainer about this in the region themselves have undeclared stockpiles, is not really relevant.