4 ms·

it's not fair game if you're working for a nation that openly calls for the destruction of your own. The name for it is treason.

by chii 2y ago

adrianN 2y ago
Maybe the commenter you’re replying to is from Iran.
jmprspret 2y ago
Maybe I'm from Iran. Maybe not. Maybe I'm from a country that Iran doesn't call for the destruction of. It's hypothetical. Let's say hypothetically, I'm not committing treason, I'm just building missiles for Iran - helping to guarantee peace by stockpiling weapons! It's for peace, after all.
- anon291 2y ago
  If you're from Iran, and support the current regime, and want peace in Iran and the status quo, then getting nuclear weapons is basically a guarantee of that.
boffinAudio 2y ago
There are literally zero nations currently involved in hostilities which don't want to destroy each other. You may not like it, but the USA has called for Irans' destruction a hundred times. Its treasonous to the human race to continue to call for the destruction of sovereign nations who don't align 100% with the purposes of ones own nation...
- anon291 2y ago
  The United States has called for an end to the theocracy, but we love the Iranian people and culture. More realistically, we probably would be happy to tolerate the theocracy if they simply normalized relations and deferred to America. America's a very easy nation to get along with. You do what we say and you will be made very rich and have peace. It's a pretty straightforwards bargain.
  - text0404 2y ago
    if i come to your house and hold a gun to your head and your option is death or slavery, is that really a "bargain"?
  - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
    It seems that Iran is an exception to such US conviviality. See, the US under the Obama administration, the EU Russia, China and others signed a deal with Iran to alleviate sanctions in return for an end to Iran's nuclear program. The Iran nuclear deal framework was a preliminary framework agreement reached in 2015 between the Islamic Republic of Iran and a group of world powers: the P5+1 (the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China—plus Germany) and the European Union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework Then the US, under the Trump administration, withdrew from the deal: The United States withdrew from the pact in 2018 and new sanctions were imposed under the policy of "maximum pressure". The sanctions applied to all countries and companies doing trade or business with Iran and cut it off from the international financial system, rendering the nuclear deal's economic provisions null.[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Ac...
  - boffinAudio 2y ago
    >we love the Iranian people and culture. Total nonsense. The USA's criminal sanctions regime has only hurt the Iranian people, not its theocracy.
- tiahura 2y ago
  but the USA has called for Irans' destruction a hundred times Cite?
  - text0404 2y ago
    here's some intro material: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/politics/bolton-iran-pentagon.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/politics/bolton-iran-p... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta... here's a fun one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris - "McCain Sings "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" also check out the proxy wars being fought in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen between the US and Iran in lieu of all-out ground war. i was going to start adding links from Trump's presidency but there's just so many...
    - tiahura 2y ago
      None of those contain the US calling for the destruction of Iran. Any others?
    - HFguy 2y ago
      Those are particular people. Not the US government's actual policy.
      - boffinAudio 2y ago
        Sanctions are a crime against humanity, intended to degrade the state by degrading its people: https://www.state.gov/iran-sanctions/ https://www.state.gov/iran-sanctions/
markovs_gun 2y ago
I believe what he is saying is that if a large stockpile of weapons is the best guarantor of peace, then it shouldn't matter who has it. It's an attempt to paint the argument as absurd by showing an extreme case.
- jmprspret 2y ago
  Thank you! However I do disagree with one point you've made here; I do not consider my case an "extreme" case. It's just antithetical to the US' vision. Which is kind of my point. Iran could say the exact same thing about why they would be stockpiling weapons. And we (west) call bullshit. I'm calling bullshit on both.
archagon 2y ago
Call me crazy, but I consider it treason against humanity to develop any weapons of death.
- HFguy 2y ago
  But how practical is this? If the next village over is planning on attacking your village. Is creating a weapon for defense still "treason against humanity"?

it's not fair game if you're working for a nation that openly calls for the destruction of your own. The name for it is treason.

by chii 2y ago

it's not fair game if you're working for a nation that openly calls for the destruction of your own. The name for it is treason.

adrianN 2y ago

Maybe the commenter you’re replying to is from Iran.

jmprspret 2y ago

Maybe I'm from Iran. Maybe not. Maybe I'm from a country that Iran doesn't call for the destruction of. It's hypothetical. Let's say hypothetically, I'm not committing treason, I'm just building missiles for Iran - helping to guarantee peace by stockpiling weapons! It's for peace, after all.

anon291 2y ago
If you're from Iran, and support the current regime, and want peace in Iran and the status quo, then getting nuclear weapons is basically a guarantee of that.

boffinAudio 2y ago

There are literally zero nations currently involved in hostilities which don't want to destroy each other. You may not like it, but the USA has called for Irans' destruction a hundred times. Its treasonous to the human race to continue to call for the destruction of sovereign nations who don't align 100% with the purposes of ones own nation...

anon291 2y ago
The United States has called for an end to the theocracy, but we love the Iranian people and culture. More realistically, we probably would be happy to tolerate the theocracy if they simply normalized relations and deferred to America. America's a very easy nation to get along with. You do what we say and you will be made very rich and have peace. It's a pretty straightforwards bargain.
- text0404 2y ago
  if i come to your house and hold a gun to your head and your option is death or slavery, is that really a "bargain"?
- YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
  It seems that Iran is an exception to such US conviviality. See, the US under the Obama administration, the EU Russia, China and others signed a deal with Iran to alleviate sanctions in return for an end to Iran's nuclear program. The Iran nuclear deal framework was a preliminary framework agreement reached in 2015 between the Islamic Republic of Iran and a group of world powers: the P5+1 (the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China—plus Germany) and the European Union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework Then the US, under the Trump administration, withdrew from the deal: The United States withdrew from the pact in 2018 and new sanctions were imposed under the policy of "maximum pressure". The sanctions applied to all countries and companies doing trade or business with Iran and cut it off from the international financial system, rendering the nuclear deal's economic provisions null.[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Ac...
- boffinAudio 2y ago
  >we love the Iranian people and culture. Total nonsense. The USA's criminal sanctions regime has only hurt the Iranian people, not its theocracy.
tiahura 2y ago
but the USA has called for Irans' destruction a hundred times Cite?
- text0404 2y ago
  here's some intro material: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/politics/bolton-iran-pentagon.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/politics/bolton-iran-p... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta... here's a fun one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris - "McCain Sings "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" also check out the proxy wars being fought in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen between the US and Iran in lieu of all-out ground war. i was going to start adding links from Trump's presidency but there's just so many...
  - tiahura 2y ago
    None of those contain the US calling for the destruction of Iran. Any others?
  - HFguy 2y ago
    Those are particular people. Not the US government's actual policy.
    - boffinAudio 2y ago
      Sanctions are a crime against humanity, intended to degrade the state by degrading its people: https://www.state.gov/iran-sanctions/ https://www.state.gov/iran-sanctions/

markovs_gun 2y ago

I believe what he is saying is that if a large stockpile of weapons is the best guarantor of peace, then it shouldn't matter who has it. It's an attempt to paint the argument as absurd by showing an extreme case.

jmprspret 2y ago
Thank you! However I do disagree with one point you've made here; I do not consider my case an "extreme" case. It's just antithetical to the US' vision. Which is kind of my point. Iran could say the exact same thing about why they would be stockpiling weapons. And we (west) call bullshit. I'm calling bullshit on both.

archagon 2y ago

Call me crazy, but I consider it treason against humanity to develop any weapons of death.

HFguy 2y ago
But how practical is this? If the next village over is planning on attacking your village. Is creating a weapon for defense still "treason against humanity"?