>Eliminating the government of Israel would require destroying the country of Israel, which would very obviously require killing vast numbers of Israeli citizen

>Eliminating the government of Israel would require destroying the country of Israel, which would very obviously require killing vast numbers of Israeli citizens. >Feel free to now explain how Iran would wipe out Israel's government, while not killing huge numbers of Israelis. Because no government in the entire history of the world has ever fallen without the extinction of its citizens. /s Perhaps if you read the Khomeini document you referenced you could answer your own question. >I don't regard any terrorism as small potatoes, no matter who does it. I think it's unfortunate you hold such a view. The "small potatoes" comment is one of comparison, not of acceptance. >What's my point? My point was obvious: I replied to a parent comment that claimed Iran was moderate. Iran is the exact opposite of moderate, they're an oppressive theocracy that supports terrorism globally. And they're regarded by pretty much every first world country as being a leading State sponsor of terrorism. The term "moderate" is a term of comparison. So despite your disingenuous claims of "logical separation", in order to make a judgement call of whether Iran is "moderate" it must be compared to other countries. Hence my "small potatoes" comment. If Iran's "terrorism" makes it the "exact opposite of moderate" then many of the first world countries you refer to must be off the spectrum.