USA Goes to War Against Iran

Real proliferation isn’t about how many countries could build nukes, it’s about how many are actually willing to cross that line, and that number is still very small. That’s my point: the countries with the most immediate capability, like Japan, South Korea, Canada, and Germany, aren’t showing any real indication that they’re moving in that direction.

I’m not trying to dismiss what you’re saying--I share a lot of those concerns. I just think the sense of urgency comes more from the anxiety of living through rapid geopolitical, economic, and technological change than from actual proliferation driven by real threats.

And if a real nuclear threat ever materializes, the world would naturally divide along predictable lines: Allies versus the Axis. There’s virtually no chance a country like Canada would side with China over the U.S., and it wouldn’t be difficult to anticipate how the major military powers would align.

You’re a self-proclaimed tankie socialist. I consider this the trash taking itself out. Go suck on the ghost of Stalin’s dick please.

Cheerleading a regime that just intentionally killed somewhere between 30,000-90,000 protestors (they claim ~3,000, which I guess makes it ok) while being outraged at 2 protestors being killed in the US makes me question whether your criticism of state violence is coming from a place of 1st principle.

I will say Iran does seem to be freeing Palestinians .... from living.

As they generally dont have bomb shelters and the illegal cluster munitions Iran is firing at Israel can land anywhere.

Apparently the President of Iran tried to resign, but he couldn't find anyone to hand his resignation too, as everyone else involved in the govt is dead or in hiding. Seems there is no actual central govt anymore; just regional commanders randomly attacking anyone and everyone.

Is that supposed to be a good thing? Are you proud of this as someone who supports the war?

Well, IMO there currently being no effective central govt is a good thing IF it eventually leads towards a new govt that works for the Iranian people; as opposed to theocratic madmen who terrorize the Iranian people, and pretty much everyone else in the region, in the cause of bringing about end time prophecies.

You mean like forcing folks into mandatory compounds and stating that personal privacy are no longer allowed while hiring state enforcers to ensure that those national directives are carried out on a local level? Or stating that you value equality for all Americans while two posts further stating that you'd rather just have most of them kill themselves?

I'd prefer that someone just leads with "hey maybe we need a little state violence to take over the west" or maybe the IRCG has a solid long-term plan for itself' and roll with that.

It just keeps the conversation flowing and it really isn't a big deal to have that opinion to begin with. Its the fake **** that's annoying to read. Plus, that stance might be true so its worth arguing anyway.

You just put forward a trivial hypothetical once you stipulate that the results will be a government that works for the Iranian people.

Plus there’s no reason to think that Israel would want that to happen, because if the Iranian people did take over there’s the possibility of them just reverting in the future. It might be more strategic for them to continue to keep the Iranians mired in sectarian violence as a failed state. This is a confirmed practice that Netanyahu has openly supported.

See your problem is that you keep assuming Israelis are really good faith and only want peace and safety, when there are other regional interests that they have. That’s why Netanyahu advanced the strategy of uplifting Hamas over and against the PA/PLO, because a unified Palestine could be a threat to Israeli regional dominance.

That’s not to say all Israelis want that or even most of them, but you don’t need most people to agree in order to take out unpopular action (as we are seeing with this war).

Israel literally said it was their goal for this to happen. When a group says their goal is for a specific outcome, for clearly obvious reasons, it shows a lot of ignorance on your part to assert there is no reason they want it to happen.

All evidence indicates the majority of Iranians do not support The Regime, its ambitions, or its antagonism towards Israel. So it seems a reasonable gamble a future regime would be significantly friendlier. The current regime chants "death to Israel" and has spent the last 47 years trying to make this happen, so pretty much anything else should be expected to be better.

Iran has been a unified polity for something like 3,000 years. Most Iranians, even Kurds (who are historically the most sectarian) generally identify as Iranian first and whatever sect they are second. I am guessing you haven't' come across any Iranian Jews, but even most Iranian Jews (including those living in Israel) retain their Iranian identity.

Because of this history there is no reason to assume it would fall into sectarian violence with the fall of the IRGC. Just as it didnt when the British came, either time the Shah was deposed, or when Mossadegh was deposed. As opposed to Arab countries where tribe has traditionally been the primary locus of identity and there is a tremendous history of sectarian violence.

You clearly know extremely little about Iranian society or history. They dont necessarily represent all Iranians, but maybe you should ask yourself why the worldwide Iranian diaspora (who presumably is much more knowledgeable about Iran than you) is generally supportive of Israel. Because based on their knowledge they are making the same calculations I am about how a post IRGC Iran might go.

Q: Remember the last time Congess formally declared war?
A: WWII. And it was near unanimous.

This is bad-faith, intellectually dishonest posting on your part. Please try harder. Thanking you in advance.

CRD is trained in philosophy and is typically well thought-out and articulate. So, not surprising to me that you would not enjoy engaging him.

You think Israel stating they want the Iranian people to revolt against the current state is evidence that they want Iran to have a government that works for the people? If so, do you have an argument for why that raises the probability of the proposition? As far as I can tell, this is consistent with my theory that they want Iran’s government to be splintered by any means for regional dominance. If they can get some Iranians to revolt to that end, it wouldn’t matter whether they succeeded or failed.

If Iran breaks apart they would be much more easy to control, even if the constituent states were just as bad for Iranians than the current state is. So if you’re Israeli and you’re thinking in terms of realpolitik, what exactly is motivating you to give a single flying **** whether Iran becomes a democracy or a benevolent force or not? As long as they are killing each other and not you, your goal for regional dominance is advanced.

But I do find it funny that you are using the Iranian diaspora that was forcibly removed due to oppression calling for the toppling of the current Iranian regime as evidence that sectarian violence isn’t likely in Iran.

Looks like 70-80% of Iranians want a secular government. I would think Israel would want that.

Well, maybe after we fix Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, and few dozen other countries, we can fix America.

If you mean the citizens of Israel by and large, I agree. If you mean the Netanyahu who has openly bragged about his divide and conquer strategy with the PA and Hamas, then I don’t know. In any case, do you think that Israel would tolerate a secular democratic government that still sought nuclear weapons for their self-defense?

Sure if they weren't hostile towards them. They'd probably be okay with pre Revolution Iran sort of government getting them. They were pretty much allies back in the 70s.

They deployed ICE to attack America first.

Impressive how many stupid ideas he can memorise.
All the stupidest conspiracies in one package.

during the first strike they specifically didn't target the pope to leave the door open. I think they killed the 2-9 ranked leaders of the military but spared him

I do find it amusing that the IRGC is basically using the Arab world as its hostage against Israel; when most of those countries are just as antagonistic towards Israel as they are.

There are also reports that the GCC are courting Ukraine drone defense experts to help them in their defense (obviously this is something that should have been done a long time ago, and not doing this was a failing on Trump's part); although Ukraine wants diplomatic help against Russia in return. And it isn't clear the GCC are willing to do this, so nothing may come of this.

Bessent is floating the idea of taking sanctions off Iranian oil. This signals that the Trump administration feels that the IRGC is already degraded to the point they wouldn't be able to survive politically and benefit from this. And this would severely complicate China continued buying of Iranian oil at massive discounts on the black market.

Where do you think the income from selling Iranian oil will go?