6 ms·

I agree in the sense that it comes down to a decision the US has to make on whether to invade Iran or not. Just like with Iraq; wmd’s, weapons inspectors etc.

I agree in the sense that it comes down to a decision the US has to make on whether to invade Iran or not. Just like with Iraq; wmd’s, weapons inspectors etc. are ultimately just a side show.

recuter 4y ago
Nope, unlike Iraq and wmd's you have confirmation from multiple third parties and countries. IAEA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Energy_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Energy_Ag...), France, Germany, UK, all are sounding the alarm.
- unmole 4y ago
  > confirmation from multiple third parties and countries So, exactly the same as Iraq?
  - recuter 4y ago
    Nope, not remotely the same as Iraq. I like how some whataboutists here are arguing that Iran was treated poorly and therefore "deserves a nuclear weapon" and at the same time that it is all a conspiracy and they aren't developing one - despite overwhelming evidence from none US sources.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
psychphysic 4y ago
Crazy that many of the same people condemning Russia invading Ukraine for "security". Would want to invade countries on the other side of the globe for "security". Super powers gonna super power and the rest of have to pretend to care.
- neoromantique 4y ago
  There is a difference between unprovoked act of aggression against non-nuclear country for the sole crime of not wanting to associate with you and a literal theist dictatorship working on nuclear weapons who are open how exactly they plan to utilise them.
  - throwaway4good 4y ago
    Or maybe if you looked at it again, you would find it was actually the same …
    - chii 4y ago
      Only if you use a modernist, relativist truth instead of the objective truth.
  - FpUser 4y ago
    >"who are open how exactly they plan to utilise them" Any sources on how? Have they declared that they will attack another country with nuclear weapons? Or it is simply them suddenly becoming immune from invasions / attacks?
  - jockokralj 4y ago
    It's not "not wanting to associate with you", it's more like: Wanting to join an aggressive unfriendly nuclear-powered military alliance that's been expanding and approaching your borders for the past couple of decades.
    - chii 4y ago
      And look what happens if you don't join that alliance?
    - Tuna-Fish 4y ago
      That's not what caused the war. Interest in NATO membership came later, before 2014 there was basically no support for it in Ukraine. What resulted in all this was that Ukraine was negotiating a very favorable trade deal with the EU. They had a presidential election, which was won by a guy who promised to be friendly with Russia, but also push through the trade deal. Only, when the trade deal was almost done, Putin called him, they talked for several hours, and at the end he declared that he was shutting down the deal, and would make one with Russia instead. This was extraordinarily unpopular, because the terms of the EU deal allowed for Ukrainians to work as guest workers in EU. Doing that, you could earn more in three months doing unskilled labor than you could expect to earn in Ukraine with a degree in a year. Russia had nothing similar to offer. Because of this, there were massive protests. Then the president ordered troops to fire on the protests, and the protests escalated enough that the president fled. After that, Russia invaded Crimea and Donbass. Two thirds of Ukrainians opposed NATO membership in 2013. Support only became a thing when there already were Russian troops in Ukraine.

I agree in the sense that it comes down to a decision the US has to make on whether to invade Iran or not. Just like with Iraq; wmd’s, weapons inspectors etc. are ultimately just a side show.

recuter 4y ago

Nope, unlike Iraq and wmd's you have confirmation from multiple third parties and countries. IAEA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Energy_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Energy_Ag...), France, Germany, UK, all are sounding the alarm.

unmole 4y ago
> confirmation from multiple third parties and countries So, exactly the same as Iraq?
- recuter 4y ago
  Nope, not remotely the same as Iraq. I like how some whataboutists here are arguing that Iran was treated poorly and therefore "deserves a nuclear weapon" and at the same time that it is all a conspiracy and they aren't developing one - despite overwhelming evidence from none US sources.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

psychphysic 4y ago

Crazy that many of the same people condemning Russia invading Ukraine for "security". Would want to invade countries on the other side of the globe for "security". Super powers gonna super power and the rest of have to pretend to care.

neoromantique 4y ago
There is a difference between unprovoked act of aggression against non-nuclear country for the sole crime of not wanting to associate with you and a literal theist dictatorship working on nuclear weapons who are open how exactly they plan to utilise them.
- throwaway4good 4y ago
  Or maybe if you looked at it again, you would find it was actually the same …
  - chii 4y ago
    Only if you use a modernist, relativist truth instead of the objective truth.
- FpUser 4y ago
  >"who are open how exactly they plan to utilise them" Any sources on how? Have they declared that they will attack another country with nuclear weapons? Or it is simply them suddenly becoming immune from invasions / attacks?
- jockokralj 4y ago
  It's not "not wanting to associate with you", it's more like: Wanting to join an aggressive unfriendly nuclear-powered military alliance that's been expanding and approaching your borders for the past couple of decades.
  - chii 4y ago
    And look what happens if you don't join that alliance?
  - Tuna-Fish 4y ago
    That's not what caused the war. Interest in NATO membership came later, before 2014 there was basically no support for it in Ukraine. What resulted in all this was that Ukraine was negotiating a very favorable trade deal with the EU. They had a presidential election, which was won by a guy who promised to be friendly with Russia, but also push through the trade deal. Only, when the trade deal was almost done, Putin called him, they talked for several hours, and at the end he declared that he was shutting down the deal, and would make one with Russia instead. This was extraordinarily unpopular, because the terms of the EU deal allowed for Ukrainians to work as guest workers in EU. Doing that, you could earn more in three months doing unskilled labor than you could expect to earn in Ukraine with a degree in a year. Russia had nothing similar to offer. Because of this, there were massive protests. Then the president ordered troops to fire on the protests, and the protests escalated enough that the president fled. After that, Russia invaded Crimea and Donbass. Two thirds of Ukrainians opposed NATO membership in 2013. Support only became a thing when there already were Russian troops in Ukraine.