8 ms·

Because Iran needs the bomb to protect themselves from... well, Israel and US. Look at other coutries around around them, most of them were either attacked, bo

Because Iran needs the bomb to protect themselves from... well, Israel and US. Look at other coutries around around them, most of them were either attacked, bombed, are now being attacked or bombed, or are already occupied and have military bases built by other nuclear-having countries. Some of them have to even travel across half a planet to build bases there.

throwaway678892 3y ago
[dead]
TheLoafOfBread 3y ago
Ukraine is especially curious example. They used have nukes, but gave them up for a piece of paper, where one of the signatory attacked them and the other took months to start acting. Iran would need to be insane to give up their nuclear program and we could actually see Eastern European countries coming together to build their own nukes if USA will continue to be unreliable ally. Sanctions be damned.
- paulmd 3y ago
  Change in political control is a possibility in any democracy. AfD could hypothetically take power in Germany at some point - at least enough to stall things out “until the situation is clear”/“until Ukraine handles their Nazi problem” etc, and then they’re suddenly “not a reliable ally” either. Like I understand what you’re saying, but you’re also asking for basically a dictatorship in practice. Political winds can always change, and that’s something that cannot and should not be entirely forestalled. (Although for example drug laws kinda do this - the us is beholden to international law on scheduling etc - we just don’t do that for military situations to the same extent as we use it for jailing minorities. But nato-style alliances with trigger conditions etc are a rarity, and ultimately still subject to the parties having to actually take action. If a nato trigger event has taken place, and everyone simply ignores it… what then? If trump says Slovenia are low-energy losers who incited the conflict themselves, therefore nato doesn’t apply (which is iirc more or less his stance on Ukraine during this conflict)… what do you propose doing about it? Code is not law, ethereum smart contracts can’t drop bombs.) The rise of Russian-aligned parties and neofascist groups within western culture is the problem. And while there’s some root causes, like letting party-controlled media sources spread actual libel and falsehoods, once the neofascist party is getting 30%, or once trump takes the presidency, it’s too late, now they get the color of state power and state legitimacy, even as they dismantle the next election etc. The real problem is that Russia and china are using western liberal values against us. Only westerners are concerned about protecting the speech of Nazis, or the right of Fox News to broadcast lies that the election was stolen, etc. China and Russia don’t have to care. And the fact that we have to work our politics within this framework that coddles vicious and violent movements and rhetoric is an angle that they can exploit to disrupt us. Like yes, if you allow china to have their fair say in media, and allow them to purchase a major media outlet to spread that perspective, you’re going to get china-backed media causing disruption to domestic US politics. It’s just more controversial to say it with political parties than with tiktok, but, Fox News and newsmax really ought to go too, for all the same reasons. And as long as you can come up with a veneer of American control the problem will remain.
  - Log_out_ 3y ago
    Did you really just imagine Neonazis taking over and then complaining about Neonazis in another country. Bizarre dissonance..
    - paulmd 3y ago
      Yes, “appealing to the public” is a thing. Like surely even trump would have had at least an excuse on paper for choosing to favor Russia over Ukraine - and azov battalion is a good one, because hey, there really are Nazis. Absolutely “but what about azov” would have been a thing and you’d have to be uninformed to think otherwise. The bizarre part here is you imagining Nazi logic has to make sense, when it notably does not, ever, have to make sense. Otherwise all the internal contradictions would fall apart - the only true tenent is strength and dominance. > Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. Like… never heard of “the night of the long knives” I guess. Fascists are only buddies up until they’re not. In short: no, I don’t think a Russian-aligned fascist group would care in the least about stepping on a Ukrainian fascist group on the way to the top in their conquest of Ukraine.
bsaul 3y ago
hm.. i don't think iran destabilized syria, iraq, yemen, and most of all lebanon, to "protect themselves" from anybody. They're just looking for maximum regional influence, financing every local militia they can. Blaming israel or the US for that is just extremely short sighted.
- C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 3y ago
  > hm.. i don't think iran destabilized syria, iraq, yemen, and most of all lebanon, to "protect themselves" from anybody If you read even the basic Wikipedia historical last-few-decades overviews of those countries you mentioned, you will not read that Iran invaded and destroyed governments of those countries. You know who had a major part in destroying those countries? The "good guys". Iran is absolutely helping the Shia elements in those countries for its own geopolitical gain, but to claim that Iran has destabilized those countries after the western powers and arab gulf states ravaged them so thouroughly that they are all now considered failed states, is some absolute next level propaganda that I could not ignore.
  - bsaul 3y ago
    look at what hezbollah has done to lebanon...Also I didn't say iran invaded those countries. They just used proxy, like in the good old days (and keep doing it). Calling what they're doing "help" is a pretty .. let's say special ? way of looking at it. Hope you won't regret your pov once iranians are free again, hopefully not too far in the future.
    - C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 3y ago
      > look at what hezbollah has done to lebanon It played a major role in ending the occupation of the southern half of Lebanon by Israel [0], has since repelled another invasion [1], and now serves as a strong deterrent to any further invasions. Sounds like an extremely successful project, given that Israel is currently occupying parts of lands of multiple surrounding countries and has no intentions of ever giving those lands back [2], in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions. Hezbollah prevented the same fate in Lebanon. Yes, I understand that in the eyes of Israel it is the devil, for it has blocked Israel's ambitions of regional expansion, but that is irrelevant to everyone else. > Calling what they're doing "help" is a pretty .. let's say special ? way of looking at it Your reading comprehension is special. I said helping the Shia elements, not the countries themselves necessarily. The exact quote: "Iran is absolutely helping the Shia elements in those countries for its own geopolitical gain [...]" Anyway, given the above about ending the Israeli occupation of Lebanon, it seems that Iran has absolutely helped Lebanon at least. That Iran also gained regional influence through that act, and thus did it primarily for its own benefit, does not take away from that fact. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Lebanon_conflict_(1985%E2%80%932000)#2000_Israeli_withdrawal_and_collapse_of_South_Lebanon_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Lebanon_conflict_(1985%E... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War#Ground_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War#Ground_war [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories
Log_out_ 3y ago
Boolshit. It's just another nasty exempire that wants a bite with nothing biting back. The sort of practice the free world order was to put to an end and then that moral oder was destroyed by George w Bush. Putin loved him for going natural. Send them to the hague.

throwaway678892 3y ago

[dead]

TheLoafOfBread 3y ago

Ukraine is especially curious example. They used have nukes, but gave them up for a piece of paper, where one of the signatory attacked them and the other took months to start acting. Iran would need to be insane to give up their nuclear program and we could actually see Eastern European countries coming together to build their own nukes if USA will continue to be unreliable ally. Sanctions be damned.

paulmd 3y ago
Change in political control is a possibility in any democracy. AfD could hypothetically take power in Germany at some point - at least enough to stall things out “until the situation is clear”/“until Ukraine handles their Nazi problem” etc, and then they’re suddenly “not a reliable ally” either. Like I understand what you’re saying, but you’re also asking for basically a dictatorship in practice. Political winds can always change, and that’s something that cannot and should not be entirely forestalled. (Although for example drug laws kinda do this - the us is beholden to international law on scheduling etc - we just don’t do that for military situations to the same extent as we use it for jailing minorities. But nato-style alliances with trigger conditions etc are a rarity, and ultimately still subject to the parties having to actually take action. If a nato trigger event has taken place, and everyone simply ignores it… what then? If trump says Slovenia are low-energy losers who incited the conflict themselves, therefore nato doesn’t apply (which is iirc more or less his stance on Ukraine during this conflict)… what do you propose doing about it? Code is not law, ethereum smart contracts can’t drop bombs.) The rise of Russian-aligned parties and neofascist groups within western culture is the problem. And while there’s some root causes, like letting party-controlled media sources spread actual libel and falsehoods, once the neofascist party is getting 30%, or once trump takes the presidency, it’s too late, now they get the color of state power and state legitimacy, even as they dismantle the next election etc. The real problem is that Russia and china are using western liberal values against us. Only westerners are concerned about protecting the speech of Nazis, or the right of Fox News to broadcast lies that the election was stolen, etc. China and Russia don’t have to care. And the fact that we have to work our politics within this framework that coddles vicious and violent movements and rhetoric is an angle that they can exploit to disrupt us. Like yes, if you allow china to have their fair say in media, and allow them to purchase a major media outlet to spread that perspective, you’re going to get china-backed media causing disruption to domestic US politics. It’s just more controversial to say it with political parties than with tiktok, but, Fox News and newsmax really ought to go too, for all the same reasons. And as long as you can come up with a veneer of American control the problem will remain.
- Log_out_ 3y ago
  Did you really just imagine Neonazis taking over and then complaining about Neonazis in another country. Bizarre dissonance..
  - paulmd 3y ago
    Yes, “appealing to the public” is a thing. Like surely even trump would have had at least an excuse on paper for choosing to favor Russia over Ukraine - and azov battalion is a good one, because hey, there really are Nazis. Absolutely “but what about azov” would have been a thing and you’d have to be uninformed to think otherwise. The bizarre part here is you imagining Nazi logic has to make sense, when it notably does not, ever, have to make sense. Otherwise all the internal contradictions would fall apart - the only true tenent is strength and dominance. > Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. Like… never heard of “the night of the long knives” I guess. Fascists are only buddies up until they’re not. In short: no, I don’t think a Russian-aligned fascist group would care in the least about stepping on a Ukrainian fascist group on the way to the top in their conquest of Ukraine.

bsaul 3y ago

hm.. i don't think iran destabilized syria, iraq, yemen, and most of all lebanon, to "protect themselves" from anybody. They're just looking for maximum regional influence, financing every local militia they can. Blaming israel or the US for that is just extremely short sighted.

C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 3y ago
> hm.. i don't think iran destabilized syria, iraq, yemen, and most of all lebanon, to "protect themselves" from anybody If you read even the basic Wikipedia historical last-few-decades overviews of those countries you mentioned, you will not read that Iran invaded and destroyed governments of those countries. You know who had a major part in destroying those countries? The "good guys". Iran is absolutely helping the Shia elements in those countries for its own geopolitical gain, but to claim that Iran has destabilized those countries after the western powers and arab gulf states ravaged them so thouroughly that they are all now considered failed states, is some absolute next level propaganda that I could not ignore.
- bsaul 3y ago
  look at what hezbollah has done to lebanon...Also I didn't say iran invaded those countries. They just used proxy, like in the good old days (and keep doing it). Calling what they're doing "help" is a pretty .. let's say special ? way of looking at it. Hope you won't regret your pov once iranians are free again, hopefully not too far in the future.
  - C6JEsQeQa5fCjE 3y ago
    > look at what hezbollah has done to lebanon It played a major role in ending the occupation of the southern half of Lebanon by Israel [0], has since repelled another invasion [1], and now serves as a strong deterrent to any further invasions. Sounds like an extremely successful project, given that Israel is currently occupying parts of lands of multiple surrounding countries and has no intentions of ever giving those lands back [2], in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions. Hezbollah prevented the same fate in Lebanon. Yes, I understand that in the eyes of Israel it is the devil, for it has blocked Israel's ambitions of regional expansion, but that is irrelevant to everyone else. > Calling what they're doing "help" is a pretty .. let's say special ? way of looking at it Your reading comprehension is special. I said helping the Shia elements, not the countries themselves necessarily. The exact quote: "Iran is absolutely helping the Shia elements in those countries for its own geopolitical gain [...]" Anyway, given the above about ending the Israeli occupation of Lebanon, it seems that Iran has absolutely helped Lebanon at least. That Iran also gained regional influence through that act, and thus did it primarily for its own benefit, does not take away from that fact. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Lebanon_conflict_(1985%E2%80%932000)#2000_Israeli_withdrawal_and_collapse_of_South_Lebanon_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Lebanon_conflict_(1985%E... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War#Ground_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War#Ground_war [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

Log_out_ 3y ago

Boolshit. It's just another nasty exempire that wants a bite with nothing biting back. The sort of practice the free world order was to put to an end and then that moral oder was destroyed by George w Bush. Putin loved him for going natural. Send them to the hague.