A sobering question regarding US bombing Iran nuke program

[rightwinger]

They will no longer have the ability if we do it right.

What is right to prevent retaliation?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Iran, so far. Trump was involved in those actions.

Iran is looking more and more like the wishful thinking around Epstein's Clients and the J6 Reichstag Fire being held to account

 

[Slade3200]

Iran, so far. Trump was involved in those actions.

Why did we need to bomb Iran?

 

[Mac-7]

'Rational lib" is obviously an oxymoron.
Name a single plank in their platform that is rational.
Abortion?
Transsexual insanity?
Grooming small children by homosexuals?
Race-baiting and treating blacks as helpless and hopeless without the guiding hands of liberals?
Socialism?
Welcoming illegals from everywhere, all the time?
Destruction of our education system?
Hating America as eternally "racist" and "capitalist"?

I admit libs are a little odd

But their mother loves them, else they would have been aborted

 

[JohnDB]

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What is right to prevent retaliation?

Total annihilation of all offensive weapons.

 

[rightwinger]

Total annihilation of all offensive weapons.

Hmmmm….you actually think that is possible?
How about terror attacks?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Hmmmm….you actually think that is possible?
How about terror attacks?

We are talking about two different things. Try again.

 

[Zavulon]

Sooooo.........

Iran didn't want a nuclear bomb. They were not building their urnaium enrichment to do things like......well not build bombs.

But......now they suddenly want a bomb? Hmmmmm.

Not sure I trust their first claim.

Why not go looking for enriched uranium to do things like.....well not build bombs.

It's quite simple. Irainians are not a horde of zombies lead by a mighty necromancer. They are human beings and, human beings can disagree with each other and actual policy of the state almost always is the fruit of compromise. I'm not an expert in Irainian inner policy, but it seems that "We don't need the bomb" was prevailing. And the final vector of Iranian policy was rather
"We don't need the bomb, we develop our nuclear program for civilian purposes only (but the way that if it is necessary we could weaponise it). International law and our network of soft power is good enough to protect us. Having bomb will decrease our safety, not increase it" (at least officially).

Now, when the USA one more time demonstrated that there is no international law for them and Iranian "soft power" network practically failed, Iran (as far as I understand) faces the choice - repeat the fate of Iraq, Lybia and Syria or came in totally uncharted for them waters of the nuclear deterrence and, if necessary, of a limited nuclear war.

I don't know what decision they will make. From mine point of view, the getting nuclear weapons is the only way to earn the real independence and provide peace. What do they think - I don't know. Some of Iranians, who don't want get nukes already suggesting Russia to give those weapons directly to Yemen (which is pretty unlikely).

LOL....I don't have to prove shit to you....You think because you type utter bullshit, that makes it fact...You are a moron.

This is the fact: there are civilian purposes for high enriched Uranium including naval reactors, research reactors, medical-isotope producing reactors. There is another fact: US intelligence community lacks any information about Iranian military nuclear program.
Ergo: you just destroyed a lot of property, killed some people, destroyed NPT based on some "unproven ideas" (not to say "voices in your head").

Buying nukes would put Iran in danger.

Not buying nukes will definitely put Iran in danger too.

Selling Iran nukes would put you in even more danger

Not selling them nukes will put us in danger too. The question what is the lesser evil. Russian decision-makers already gave the answer.

You are wrong as usual. Nuke 12 cities Iran is basically gone. The US has 3,700 or so. MAD is still present.
View attachment 1127539

You need more than 1 100 kt bomb to totally destroy such a city. And even if you have a building destroyed it not necessarily means that all its inhabitants are dead. Very roughly, total destruction of 12 largest Iranian cities will demand more than 120 100kt warheads and if Iran has tactical and strategic alert (and they are partly sheltered, partly evacuated) - it won't kill more than 5 mln Iranians (out of 92 mln of them). If they are backed by Russia and China (or at least have their neutrality) - they will continue to fight.

As I said before, if Russia gives nukes to Iran, they are still responsible for their misuse, especially if used against the US.

Seriously? As the USA are responsible for the Ukrainian attacks by US missiles? And what will you do? Declare more sanctions? Start a nuclear war against Russia?

What "countries" are ready? Russia?, China? NK?

Yep. And, may be, Pakistan.

How much of a topper would that be, if Iran uses the $37b cash Biden gave them to buy nukes from Russia

Dollars are dust. My guess is that 20% of all Iranian oil and gas might be a fair price. But it's just a guess.

 

[rightwinger]

Hmmmm….you actually think that is possible?
How about terror attacks?

Retaliation takes many forms

 

[M14 Shooter]

I support using US military bombing Iran nuke site
But what if the bunker buster bomb fails to dtop Iran from building atomic warheads and achieving nuclear capability?
Even if we destroy their nuclear reactor are they far enough along already to assemble one or more nuclear warheads?

We bombed their uranium enrichment site.
They cannot build a functional nuclear weapon w/o a sufficient amount of fully-enriched uranium.

 

[j-mac]

Retaliation takes many forms

Sounds like that came straight from the Ayatollah....

 

[Mac-7]

We bombed their uranium enrichment site.
They cannot build a functional nuclear weapon w/o a sufficient amount of fully-enriched uranium.

Never say never

The iranians are very clever people and may already have enough enriched uranium to build a few bombs

Despite what the Administration says, if its not looking for regime change it should be

 

[Moonglow]

You think this is a game on TV and trump is being penalized 5 yards for being off sides

So you totally ignore the consequences of allowing Iran to go nuclear

Fortinately people with your mindset are not in charge

And unfortunately, you flip-floppers are playing like Bush and his weapons of mass destruction in Iraq for the invasion....

 

[Moonglow]

Never say never

The iranians are very clever people and may already have enough enriched uranium to build a few bombs

Despite what the Administration says, if its not looking for regime change it should be

You do not get to dictate to other nations how to exist...

 

[j-mac]

And unfortunately, you flip-floppers are playing like Bush and his weapons of mass destruction in Iraq for the invasion....

Such simplistic thinking.

 

[j-mac]

You do not get to dictate to other nations how to exist...

No, but we can eliminate threats anywhere in the world.

 

[Moonglow]

Such simplistic thinking.

Yet that is exactly what is being played out, sucker.

 

[Moonglow]

No, but we can eliminate threats anywhere in the world.

There was no threat, just an injured ego from forty-five years ago.

 

[Mac-7]

You do not get to dictate to other nations how to exist...

I think we just did