3 ms·

But it wishes it already. Israel however has nukes and is backed by the US. Iran wouldn't last 10 minutes.

ein0p 2y ago
Not only does Iran not wish to destroy Israel, it is also unwilling to allow Hezbollah to successfully do so either. If it wanted to destroy Israel, Israel wouldn’t have any AD after the last strike.
- fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
  You are delusional. Iran lost most of its deterrence, its proxies have been decimated and its ICBM capabilities, although not nothing haven't really managed to cause any significant damage and have shown that they lack sufficient accuracy. Will the balance of power change a few decades from now? Maybe, who knows, but for now Iran is in a tough spot.
  - ein0p 2y ago
    Uh-uh. The country which has just tested a nuke a couple of weeks ago and easily defeated the Iron Dome with its cheaper rocket stock is “totally decimated”. Sure buddy.
    - fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
      What are you even talking about?
      - ein0p 2y ago
        Seek different news sources. That earthquake in Iran wasn’t an earthquake. It didn’t have aftershocks and USGS couldn’t determine the depth.
        fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
        Enjoy your speculative theories. Lots of minor earthquakes don't have aftershocks, not to mention that Iran is one of the most seismically active countries in the world. But please feel free to provide a trustworthy news source backing your claim.
        ein0p 2y ago
        What is a “trustworthy news source” these days. I saw the seismograph charts on Twitter. If you expect any “trustworthy” news in an environment where US MIC could get another trillion dollars in (borrowed) taxpayer money, I have a bridge I’d like to sell.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
        A news source that has confirmed with at least one seismology expert who has conducted a thorough (preferably peer reviewed) analysis showing that the charts are abnormal for an earthquake and are more inline with those of an explosion. It seems to me like it's should be extremely easy to distinguish the two, there's more than enough earthquake data - and that fact that there is no such report says it all. For starters i'd even take an amateur analysis, but just some dude on twitter saying "there was seismic activity - must be a nuclear test" - nah.

Not only does Iran not wish to destroy Israel, it is also unwilling to allow Hezbollah to successfully do so either. If it wanted to destroy Israel, Israel wouldn’t have any AD after the last strike.

fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
You are delusional. Iran lost most of its deterrence, its proxies have been decimated and its ICBM capabilities, although not nothing haven't really managed to cause any significant damage and have shown that they lack sufficient accuracy. Will the balance of power change a few decades from now? Maybe, who knows, but for now Iran is in a tough spot.
- ein0p 2y ago
  Uh-uh. The country which has just tested a nuke a couple of weeks ago and easily defeated the Iron Dome with its cheaper rocket stock is “totally decimated”. Sure buddy.
  - fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
    What are you even talking about?
    - ein0p 2y ago
      Seek different news sources. That earthquake in Iran wasn’t an earthquake. It didn’t have aftershocks and USGS couldn’t determine the depth.
      - fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
        Enjoy your speculative theories. Lots of minor earthquakes don't have aftershocks, not to mention that Iran is one of the most seismically active countries in the world. But please feel free to provide a trustworthy news source backing your claim.
        ein0p 2y ago
        What is a “trustworthy news source” these days. I saw the seismograph charts on Twitter. If you expect any “trustworthy” news in an environment where US MIC could get another trillion dollars in (borrowed) taxpayer money, I have a bridge I’d like to sell.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
        A news source that has confirmed with at least one seismology expert who has conducted a thorough (preferably peer reviewed) analysis showing that the charts are abnormal for an earthquake and are more inline with those of an explosion. It seems to me like it's should be extremely easy to distinguish the two, there's more than enough earthquake data - and that fact that there is no such report says it all. For starters i'd even take an amateur analysis, but just some dude on twitter saying "there was seismic activity - must be a nuclear test" - nah.