Iran is certainly an enemy of ours. They do fund terrorists and they have killed Americans by proxy. So permanently reducing their power isn't the worst thing in the world.
I would prefer that it would be impossible for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. I'm not informed enough to understand if their program is actually peaceful or not, but they should just stick to oil.
The Iranian people would likely be better off if the ayatollahs were usurped. I say this because Persians are generally better behaved than Arabs and the country is firmly Shiite, so it might not be an Iraq/Lybia/Egypt situation.
All of this goes out the window if:
- The US commits direct military forces
- the strikes do not permanently degrade Iran's power
You can't be an KiA oldtimer if you believe that being against retarded wars is new to this place. What, do you think it was full of neocons like you?
Way back when, I saw people criticize drone strikes and the destruction of Libya, when I was still stupid enough to support it. I can't say I remember your username.
I'm still not a neocon, you midwit.
The forum got invaded by leftist faggots who do nothing but screech about the jews all day.
Right, you now disown the label while shilling for every neocon war of aggression.
I don't see the killing of terrorists as a bad thing. It doesn't mean I think the US should be involved.
What's a terrorist? The people the previous war you supported put into power in Syria?