America Doesn't Have The Moral Justification To Enter Into the Israel/Iran War!

[Kondor3]

The consensus being promulgated...

If it's a choice between

1. allowing the crazed militant Iranian Theocracy to possess nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles or...

2. foregoing the Moral High Ground and smashing their nuclear capabilities

I choose (2) every time, and twice on Sunday.

I'll answer to God for it later, perhaps, but at least my kids and grandkids will be safe.

 

[Hollie]

The Ayatollah said he had no intention of abiding by it. When you think about it, why would they. Iran is a sovereign nation.

The Iranian Mullocrats are a Shia Islamist Death Cult. Ignoring the lurid religious fantasies of endtimes ideologues can be a dangerous path. Consider a nuclear Iran, for example. Here you have believers in the Shiite Islamic eschatology mythos wherein a savior who will come to herald in the endtimes is referred to as the mahdi. The Iranian Mullocrats are people who believe that they're on a mission from allah and might not hesitate to make decisions that would implement their religious lunacy.

 

[Lisa558]

If it's a choice between

1. allowing the crazed militant Iranian Theocracy to possess nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles or...

2. foregoing the Moral High Ground and smashing their nuclear capabilities

I choose (2) every time, and twice on Sunday.

I'll answer to God for it later, perhaps, but at least my kids and grandkids will be safe.

I don’t consider saving millions of innocent people from an Islamic maniac building a nuclear bomb is an immoral choice.

 

[JoeB131]

That isn't what happened during the tanker wars of the eighties. It failed then and will fail now, all it will accomplish is cost Iran the remains of its navy.

We had a 600 ship navy back in the 1980s. Not so much now.

The thing was, the Tanker Wars were successful for Iran, because they goal was to cripple the Arab backers of Saddam. Saddam very quickly came to the negotiating table after that. Then he turned on his Arab backers.

 

[JoeB131]

I don’t consider saving millions of innocent people from an Islamic maniac building a nuclear bomb is an immoral choice.

So a Jewish Maniac starting World War III is okay by you.

The problem is, Russia or China might well intervene on Iran's side if the US joins in on Israel's attacks (which have largely failed to acheive their objectives).

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

For Joe, AZrailwhite, and Templar Kormac. Yes, the price of oil did experience significant fluctuations during the so-called "oil wars" of the 1980s, but the situation was complex and involved multiple geopolitical and economic factors.

Key Events and Their Impact on Oil Prices:​

1. Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988):
   
   • This conflict between two major oil producers disrupted oil production and exports, especially in the Persian Gulf.
   • Initially, this caused oil prices to rise due to fears of supply shortages.
   • However, both countries continued to export oil at reduced levels, and other OPEC members increased production to stabilize the market.
2. OPEC Price War and Saudi Strategy (Mid-1980s):
   
   • In the early 1980s, oil prices were relatively high due to the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the Iran-Iraq War.
   • By 1985–1986, Saudi Arabia, frustrated with other OPEC members not adhering to production quotas, dramatically increased its oil output.
   • This led to a sharp drop in oil prices—from around $30 per barrel in 1985 to below $10 in 1986.
3. Global Economic Factors:
   
   • The early 1980s also saw a global recession and increased energy efficiency in industrialized countries, reducing oil demand.
   • These factors contributed to a long-term decline in oil prices throughout the decade.

Summary:​

• Early 1980s: Oil prices rose due to geopolitical instability (Iran-Iraq War).
• Mid to Late 1980s: Prices fell sharply due to overproduction, especially by Saudi Arabia, and weakening global demand.

 

[tahuyaman]

The Iranian Mullocrats are a Shia Islamist Death Cult. Ignoring the lurid religious fantasies of endtimes ideologues can be a dangerous path. Consider a nuclear Iran, for example. Here you have believers in the Shiite Islamic eschatology mythos wherein a savior who will come to herald in the endtimes is referred to as the mahdi. The Iranian Mullocrats are people who believe that they're on a mission from allah and might not hesitate to make decisions that would implement their religious lunacy.

What’s your point? What does that have to do with refusing to abide by an agreement forced upon them?

 

[tahuyaman]

That is a small minority unlike the large majority of MAGA that hate the Jews.

Take it to Iran right now. Obliterate Fordow and Arak. Send any who support Iran and hate Israel to Iran tomorrow.

Then what?

 

[Hollie]

What’s your point? What does that have to do with refusing to abide by an agreement forced upon them?

The Iranian mullocrats agreed to the JCPOA. It was not forced on them.

 

[tahuyaman]

The Iranian mullocrats agreed to the JCPOA. It was not forced on them.

Their leader said that they had no intention of abiding by any agreement which restricted their goals. The JCPOA was pretty much irrelevant. It was just political window dressing

It’s still in existence. If it is effective, why is everyone so worried about Iran being close to developing a nuclear weapon capability?

 

[Lisa558]

Their leader said that they had no intention of abiding by any agreement which restricted their goals. The JCPOA was pretty much irrelevant. It was just political window dressing

It’s still in existence. If it is effective, why is everyone so worried about Iran being close to developing a nuclear weapon capability?

Are you kidding me? Why is everyone worried about an Islamic terrorist maniac who wants Israel destroyed and her 9 million Jews killed having a nuclear weapon to carry it out?

 

[Hollie]

Their leader said that they had no intention of abiding by any agreement which restricted their goals. The JCPOA was pretty much irrelevant. It was just political window dressing

It’s still in existence. If it is effective, why is everyone so worried about Iran being close to developing a nuclear weapon capability?

the fact is, the mullocrats agreed to the JCPOA but had no intention of abiding by the conditions. They used it as a means to sidestep sanctions.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

What’s your point? What does that have to do with refusing to abide by an agreement forced upon them?

What? If they get a nuke they will use it is all that matters.

 

[tahuyaman]

What? If they get a nuke they will use it is all that matters.

The JCPOA obviously isn’t working if Iran is this close to developing a nuclear weapon.

 

[tahuyaman]

the fact is, the mullocrats agreed to the JCPOA but had no intention of abiding by the conditions. They used it as a means to sidestep sanctions.

The Ayatollah publicly said that.

 

[sealybobo]

Why don't you compose your thoughts before posting?

1. Is it moral for the US to oppose Iran producing nuclear weapons?
2. If yes, how should the US go about doing this?
3. If negotiation fails, should the US take direct action against Iran?
4. If yes, what action should that include?

If you can't or won't answer these questions, your opinions on this subject are worthless.

Who says they are building nukes? Bibi? He's a ******* liar. Been saying this for 30 years. Just like Bush warned us about WMD's in Iraq.

Trump loves to say Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine if he was POTUS. Well, Israel wouldn't have bombed Iran if you weren't president either.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Who says they are building nukes? Bibi? He's a ******* liar. Been saying this for 30 years. Just like Bush warned us about WMD's in Iraq.

Trump loves to say Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine if he was POTUS. Well, Israel wouldn't have bombed Iran if you weren't president either.

You are in a minority here, sealy. Bomb Arak and Fodor hard.

 

[sealybobo]

You are in a minority here, sealy. Bomb Arak and Fodor hard.

No I'm not. Americans do not favor US military involvement in the conflict between Israel and Iran, according to a recent Economist/YouGov poll. A majority of Americans, 60%, oppose such involvement, while only 16% support it. This opposition to military intervention holds across party lines, including Democrats, independents, and Republicans.

 

[sealybobo]

You are in a minority here, sealy. Bomb Arak and Fodor hard.

33 years Bibi been saying they are close to having a nuclear weapon. He's lying just like Bush and his team lied to us about Iraq.

So you're ready to send troops back to the ME?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

• Perception of Threat:
  A Fox News poll shows that 73% of Americans believe Iran poses a serious national security threat, including majorities across all political affiliations
  
  
• Concern About Escalation:
  A large majority (82%) expressed concern about U.S. involvement in the conflict, with 39% saying they are "very concerned"