Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Akin to RU invading UKR because they broke a treaty.
But I sure most of you who support Israel will never admit it.
Well, other than the fact that Ukraine has not repeatedly threatened to wipe Russia off the face of the Earth and has not aggressively pursued the means to do so, nor has Israel has ever invaded Iran nor asserted an historical claim to the territory of Iran, your analogy is right on point.
They have 33 F-35's, and have recently upgraded them to carry a large bomb internally, and be able to hit the nuclear facility without requiring mid-air refueling. And those two changes combined make it even possible.
World does seem to be coming apart, and we are looking at a possible world war. Lets hope we avoid nukes.
Iran should never be allowed nuclear weapons. Whatever it takes to stop them.
I disagree! If you had Sunni Saudi Arabia with Dictator MBS at the wheels, given how he attacked Yemen, wouldn't you want to try and protect your Shia country, and with Israel ready to pounce as well?
IMO, if there's 2 countries that should actually have them it's North Korea and Iran.
Remember what we did to North Korea, in the Korean War, we leveled 85% of their structure, and prior to that, there was the Japanese occupation. Kim Jong Un only wants nukes for its protection. Can't blame him at all or the leader of Iran.
I worry more about MBS attacking Iran than Israel!
I disagree! If you had Sunni Saudi Arabia with Dictator MBS at the wheels, given how he attacked Yemen, wouldn't you want to try and protect your Shia country, and with Israel ready to pounce as well?
!
"And with Israel ready to pounce"?
THIS is the only reason Israel WOULD pounce. Remove that, and what do they have to gain? There is no pounce.
Do you think Israel wants to take over Iran, or something? They wouldn't know what to do with it if they did take it over.
I disagree! If you had Sunni Saudi Arabia with Dictator MBS at the wheels, given how he attacked Yemen, wouldn't you want to try and protect your Shia country, and with Israel ready to pounce as well?
IMO, if there's 2 countries that should actually have them it's North Korea and Iran.
Remember what we did to North Korea, in the Korean War, we leveled 85% of their structure, and prior to that, there was the Japanese occupation. Kim Jong Un only wants nukes for its protection. Can't blame him at all or the leader of Iran.
I worry more about MBS attacking Iran than Israel!
You are twisting history. North Korea attacked South Korea. The US helped the South, while the Chinese helped the North.
Every dictator who wants to acquire nukes say they just want to protect their country with nukes. The truth is nukes would give them great leverage to blackmail the world. North Korea, China, and Russia have been using nukes to that effect. Every few months North Korea would announce new testings and the world would send in more aids to appease them. Putin is using nukes to scare NATO from helping Ukraine. China is using nukes to scare the US from protecting Taiwan.
If Iran has nukes, their neighbors would want nukes too. Imagine if Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, etc. all have nukes. The world would not be safer if more countries have nukes.
They have 33 F-35's, and have recently upgraded them to carry a large bomb internally, and be able to hit the nuclear facility without requiring mid-air refueling. And those two changes combined make it even possible.
World does seem to be coming apart, and we are looking at a possible world war. Lets hope we avoid nukes.
Rich, coming from someone who supports the US proxy war in Ukraine
There's a good reason why Top Gun 2 came out now and why the plot is what it is.
Getting the population ready to accept what's coming.
I think the new Top Gun 2 movie refers more to the past Israeli attack of the Iraqi Nuclear reactor in 1981 rather than a preparation for a future attack. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera
So you blame the country that is receiving the money, not the country that is giving it. Even though the country giving it is free to stop any time it wants, and any country being given money will gladly take it.
But you don’t blame the country that is shouting death to America.
Ok. That makes sense in some alternate universe somewhere.
Stop deflecting. When did I state America has no corruption? I may not have mention our own corrupt politicians here just yet but that does not mean I dont think they exist. Do you just want me to say it so you feel better?
Plus Israel and its supporters stateside have done plenty to corrupt America for their own gain ala Chuck (crocodile tears) Schumer. Actions speak louder than words. The enemy that has already infiltrated your ranks is more dangerous than any outsider.
Its like with hard narcotics. Of course is always best if people were strong enough to resist. Does that mean the drug dealers should be left alone, and not be made pariahs? Should we allow the dealers to linger around, and wait until people become weak comes along so they can harm these people in a weaken state?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitey
Well, other than the fact that Ukraine has not repeatedly threatened to wipe Russia off the face of the Earth and has not aggressively pursued the means to do so, nor has Israel has ever invaded Iran nor asserted an historical claim to the territory of Iran, your analogy is right on point.
Good call
They both broke an official agreement which involves national security.
Stop deflecting. When did I state America has no corruption? I may not have mention our own corrupt politicians here just yet but that does not mean I dont think they exist. Do you just want me to say it so you feel better?
Plus Israel and its supporters stateside have done plenty to corrupt America for their own gain ala Chuck (crocodile tears) Schumer. Actions speak louder than words. The enemy that has already infiltrated your ranks is more dangerous than any outsider.
Its like with hard narcotics. Of course is always best if people were strong enough to resist. Does that mean the drug dealers should be left alone, and not be made pariahs? Should we allow the dealers to linger around, and wait until people become weak comes along so they can harm these people in a weaken state?
They both broke an official agreement which involves national security.
Wait. What do you mean, "your ranks"?
You slipped up there. If you were American, you would have said the enemy that has infiltrated "OUR RANKS".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
