Why ARE the US and Israel Obsessed With Eliminating Iran’s Ballistic Missiles?

Previous Thread Next Thread
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
oil&gas said:
Saddam Hussein back in the years when he was a firm U.S. ally
was not banned from using chemical weapons against the Kurds
as well as Iranian troops and civilians in the Iran-Iraq war. Seems to
me a better analogue is one of not permitting non-American-ally
to deploy even non-nuclear defensive weapons against their enemy
if that enemy is on the side of the U.S.
Click to expand...
i see, its equality of evil that you wish to see
""no fair, you let a different madman play with chemical weapons ''

your views are absurd

the thing about religiously driven fanatics and weapons is they will use them
''it is gods will '

a failure from decades ago does not justify allowing a new catastrophic failure with nuclear weapons

your views are absurd

So other than regime change what weapons can Iran use for
self-defense so they won't suffer the same fate as Iraq?
Click to expand...
1. recognizing and accepting the fact that the sovereign state of Israel has the right to exist

2. they could greatly increase their self -defense by adopting policy based on real word circumstances and reality rather than religious fanaticism.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: xmontrealer
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
southpaw said:
I'm sure they would. As they would with a peaceful end to Russia-Ukraine, or any other conflict in the world. What you need to ask them, is how much they're willing to pay for it.
Click to expand...

what is the price of a nuclear exchange, making both both Tel Aviv and Tehran glow in the dark wastelands ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: xmontrealer
O

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
16,547
3,198
113
Ghawar
JohnLarue said:
.............................
1. recognizing and accepting the fact that the sovereign state of Israel has the right to exist
Click to expand...
That is a problem between Iran and Israel. It is absurd to waste billions
to police the region of the Middle East because people there don't get
along with Israel. Iran poses no threat to us.

2. they could greatly increase their self -defense by adopting policy based on real word circumstances and reality rather than religious fanaticism.
Click to expand...
Would that increase their self-defense when they were invaded by
Saddam Hussein, a strong American ally at the time?
 
O

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
16,547
3,198
113
Ghawar
JohnLarue said:
a failure from decades does not justify allowing a new catastrophic failure with nuclear weapons
Click to expand...
Never said anything to the effect that Iran is welcome to use
nuclear weapons. It is just not clear to me what non-nuclear
weapons they could use for self-defense.
 
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
oil&gas said:
That is a problem between Iran and Israel. It is absurd to waste billions
to police the region of the Middle East because people there don't get
along with Israel. Iran poses no threat to us.
Click to expand...
that is utterly naive
these nutjobs hate the west all most as much as they hate Israel

Would that increase their self-defense when they were invaded by
Saddam Hussein, a strong American ally at the time?
Click to expand...
that is a forward looking question about a past event

since we can not change the past, one can only speculate
had there been non religiously driven, hatred filled policy makers, perhaps that 1980s nasty bloodbath could have been avoided, ... or perhaps not
since there were 2 religiously driven, hatred filled nutters intent on destruction, the odds for peace were slim


we can only hope religious fanaticism dies out and gives way to more enlightened, civilized thinking,
until then keep the nuclear weapon capabilities out of the reach of religious fanatics
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: xmontrealer
O

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
16,547
3,198
113
Ghawar
JohnLarue said:
.................................
that is a forward looking question about a past event

since we can not change the past, one can only speculate
had there been non religiously driven, hatred filled policy makers, perhaps that 1980s nasty bloodbath could have been avoided, ... or perhaps not
since there were 2 religiously driven, hatred filled nutters intent on destruction, the odds for peace were slim
Click to expand...
Iraq was attacked by Israel circa 1981 and later invaded by
the U.S. in 2003. These attacks had next to nothing to do
with religious fanaticism--Iraq was among the most secular
states in the Middle East. And for most of the 1980s Iraq was
firmly on the list of U.S.'s allies.

Iran has to be out of its mind to buy your BS in place of
real weapons for defense against the U.S. and Israel.
Acquisition of state-of-the-art military weapons and technologies
from China and Russia is absolutely essential to the security
future of Iran

we can only hope religious fanaticism dies out and gives way to more enlightened, civilized thinking,
until then keep the nuclear weapon capabilities out of the reach of religious fanatics
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Klatuu
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
oil&gas said:
]Iraq was attacked by Israel circa 1981 and later invaded by
the U.S. in 2003. These attacks had next to nothing to do
with religious fanaticism--Iraq was among the most secular
states in the Middle East. And for most of the 1980s Iraq was
firmly on the list of U.S.'s allies.
Click to expand...
and the us, great Britain, Russia ,France, Germany have all been both allies and bitter enemies
all of which means nothing when it boils down to the question of permitting religious hated filled lunatics access to nuclear weapons capabilities


Iran has to be out of its mind to buy your BS in place of
real weapons for defense against the U.S. and Israel.
Acquisition of state-of-the-art military weapons and technologies
from China and Russia is absolutely essential to the security
future of Iran
Click to expand...
the leaders are religious hated filled lunatics, so they are already out of their minds
''out of their minds '' as are those who foolishly think in terms of nuclear weapons equality
nuclear weapons and naive woke ideology are a poor mix

starting thinking in terms of millions of lives at risk instead.
millions of innocent people on both sides turned instantly into ash and they would be the lucky ones

would you then strive for equality of misery and death ?
 
Last edited:
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
oil&gas said:
Trump doesn't have to be anti-Israel to refrain from attacking Iran
a country that poses no threat to North America. He simply has to
cease to be Israel's guard dog.
Click to expand...

i suspect there are several billion people who do not agree with your assessment and certainty do not agree with your nuclear weapon equality policy

1771372912609.png

Likewise Trump doesn't have to be anti-Ukraine to
withdraw the U.S. from funding the proxy war.

The smart thing for Trump to do is to leave Ukraine
to America's NATO vassals in Europe.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
oil&gas said:
Iraq was attacked by Israel circa 1981 and later invaded by
the U.S. in 2003. These attacks had next to nothing to do
with religious fanaticism--Iraq was among the most secular
states in the Middle East. And for most of the 1980s Iraq was
firmly on the list of U.S.'s allies.
Click to expand...
hmm
so you say Saddam Hussain was not a religious nutjob

AI Overview
Saddam Hussein is generally not characterized by historians as a "religious fanatic" in the traditional sense, but rather as a
secular nationalist dictator who instrumentalized religion to maintain power, particularly in his later years. While he became increasingly Islamist in rhetoric during the 1990s, this was largely a political survival tactic rather than a personal transformation.
Click to expand...
ok
just a regular every day nutjob who would leverage Islamist religious intolerance as an instrument of his evil
same problem, different country

do you not agree it is a good thing he did not obtain nuclear weapons ?
he most certainly would have used them when everything was falling apart for him, rather than shout shoe insults at his captors
and he would have used nuclear weapons on Iran in the 1980s , if he had them

either way, you should realize it is best that all varieties of hate filled nutjobs are prevented from obtaining nuclear weapons
they will use them
 
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
psykick456 said:
From an Israeli standpoint: Israel is an expansionist entity that has a blank cheque from the world's preeminent military superpower. Iran having the ability to deter israel militarily is not good for israel.

From a US standpoint: Many US elites have connections to israel. Even more so if you've been following the whole Epstein email thing. In addition, a lot of evangelicals have been brainwashed to believe israel is a continuation of biblical israel and is needed for JC to come back.
Click to expand...
from a global / humanity standpoint: it is best to prevent hate filled religiously driven nutjobs from obtaining nuclear weapons
 
K

Klatuu

Well-known member
Dec 31, 2022
8,187
5,414
113
JohnLarue said:
from a global / humanity standpoint: it is best to prevent hate filled religiously driven nutjobs from obtaining nuclear weapons
Click to expand...
Case in point, POS Nation
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter
O

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
16,547
3,198
113
Ghawar
JohnLarue said:
do you not agree it is a good thing he did not obtain nuclear weapons ?
he most certainly would have used them when everything was falling apart for him, rather than shout shoe insults at his captors
and he would have used nuclear weapons on Iran in the 1980s , if he had them

either way, you should realize it is best that all varieties of hate filled nutjobs are prevented from obtaining nuclear weapons
they will use them
Click to expand...
I agree it is a good thing no one in the Middle East (israel included) has nuclear weapons.

In none of my posts did I advocate letting Iran or any other gulf states to have
nuclear weapons. I do think Iran and everyone else do need non-nuclear
conventional weapons for self-defense. Bush's invasion of Iraq must have served
as the lesson on the consequence of demilitarization by sanctions. Do you expect
Iran would wish to meet the same fate as Iraq?
 
Last edited:
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
oil&gas said:
I agree it is a good thing no one in the Middle East (Israel included) has nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...
too late
Israel already has them


In none of my posts did I advocate letting Iran or any other gulf states to have
nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...
sure you have


I do think Iran and everyone else do need non-nuclear
conventional weapons for self-defense.
Click to expand...
ballistic missiles are offensive weapons


AI Overview


Yes, ballistic missiles are overwhelmingly classified as strategic offensive weapons
designed to deliver conventional, nuclear, chemical, or biological payloads to distant targets. Their high speed, long range, and ability to penetrate defenses make them premier tools for deterrence and offense. While they can be used defensively, they are distinct from defensive, anti-missile systems
Click to expand...
Bush's invasion of Iraq must have served
as the lesson on the consequence of demilitarization by sanctions. Do you expect
Iran would wish to meet the same fate as Iraq?
Click to expand...
no
that is why they need a regime change

BTW
Iraq had more than enough time / chances to avoid invasion after their first ass kicking, instead they sought to acquire offensive weapons
go figure
 
J

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
19,796
5,054
113
oil&gas said:
Saddam was a secular tyrant. The VP of Iraq under him was Catholic.
Click to expand...
what part of this do you not understand ?

AI Overview
Saddam Hussein is generally not characterized by historians as a "religious fanatic" in the traditional sense, but rather as a
secular nationalist dictator who instrumentalized religion to maintain power, particularly in his later years. While he became increasingly Islamist in rhetoric during the 1990s, this was largely a political survival tactic rather than a personal transformation.
Click to expand...
Saddam was a secular tyrant lunatic who wanted to wipe the sovereign state of Israel off the map
Iran's leaders are religious nutjob lunatics who want to wipe the sovereign state of Israel off the map


neither should EVER acquire nuclear weapons or ballistic missile technology
they will use them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom