Iran totally won't use nukes so it's fine to let homicidal jihadists have a strategic weapon that bypasses typical conventional military capability
really guys believe me the jihadis definitely won't use nukes so just let them have weapons that literally redefined war and don't even need to reach a target to be effective
No. Retarded position. Nuclear proliferation is a failure, and allowing demonstrated lunatics that hate us to get nukes would be an absolute failure for a president.
Let me put this in terms you will understand. If some retard at the end of the block is constantly yelling how he hates you and hopes you die, and he gets a fucking mortar tube set up that he could easily point at your house, allowing that to continue to exist is retarded.
If you truly believe that, then why not start with Israel?
Also, Nukes have arguably been the biggest weapon for peace. Recall prior to it, we had wars every decade. Not really anymore.
Iran, Syria, Libya, North Korea, etc.... all were equal "bad guys", but 1 wasn't fucked with. So, please smarten up.
Again, Iran even if they had the weapons, and even if they wanted to attack the US, just like with Iraq before, it doesn't matter what they want, as they have no method of getting anything here. FFS, again, smarten up.
Someone screaming at you from across the world isn't a threat to you - stop being a coward.
Definitely did not stop because of nukes. There was constant war during the 20th century, many of which the CIA participated in and instigated.
I would gladly wish on a lamp for Israel to not be a nuclear power, but that ship has sailed. They already have a lot of nukes. You can't stop a nuclear power once they reach that stage, you have to stop them before they get them.
Someone screaming at you from across the world isn't a threat to you
You do not understand the strategic capacity of nuclear weapons beyond "big fireball hiroshima" clearly and that means you have not been reading my posts, just flinging "but what about da jooos" at me. Stop wasting my time, then. Getting an ICBM isn't beyond Iran's capacity, and ICBMs are far from the only viable delivery mechanism. You don't actually need to directly strike a target with a nuke either. I explained this already. A high altitude detonation could be used to disrupt our power grid or damage our satellite network.
It sure did stop because of that. War was escalating until then, and immediately dropped to proxy and regional. To say otherwise is simply not true, after watching what the US did to Japan, the cost of those wars were too high, and thus... gone.
As for Israel already having them - thats a cop out, and further means that Israel can, and should do it on their own, without any US involvement seeing as they attacked first... Right?
Of course its right.
If you want war - go fight.
If you want to fight Israel's war - go to Israel.
Not hard.
Everyone see's what's happening, and who is promoting it. Again.
Except we aren't fighting israel's war. Trump even gave the iranians warning so they would move their personnel - we haven't hit conventional targets. We hit the nuclear development sites. The part that IS our problem.
No. Retarded position. Nuclear proliferation is a failure, and allowing demonstrated lunatics that hate us to get nukes would be an absolute failure for a president.
Let me put this in terms you will understand. If some retard at the end of the block is constantly yelling how he hates you and hopes you die, and he gets a fucking mortar tube set up that he could easily point at your house, allowing that to continue to exist is retarded.
If you truly believe that, then why not start with Israel?
Also, Nukes have arguably been the biggest weapon for peace. Recall prior to it, we had wars every decade. Not really anymore.
Iran, Syria, Libya, North Korea, etc.... all were equal "bad guys", but 1 wasn't fucked with. So, please smarten up.
Again, Iran even if they had the weapons, and even if they wanted to attack the US, just like with Iraq before, it doesn't matter what they want, as they have no method of getting anything here. FFS, again, smarten up.
Someone screaming at you from across the world isn't a threat to you - stop being a coward.
Definitely did not stop because of nukes. There was constant war during the 20th century, many of which the CIA participated in and instigated.
I would gladly wish on a lamp for Israel to not be a nuclear power, but that ship has sailed. They already have a lot of nukes. You can't stop a nuclear power once they reach that stage, you have to stop them before they get them.
You do not understand the strategic capacity of nuclear weapons beyond "big fireball hiroshima" clearly and that means you have not been reading my posts, just flinging "but what about da jooos" at me. Stop wasting my time, then. Getting an ICBM isn't beyond Iran's capacity, and ICBMs are far from the only viable delivery mechanism. You don't actually need to directly strike a target with a nuke either. I explained this already. A high altitude detonation could be used to disrupt our power grid or damage our satellite network.
Definitely did not stop because of nukes.
As for Israel already having them - thats a cop out, and further means that Israel can, and should do it on their own, without any US involvement seeing as they attacked first... Right? Of course its right.
If you want war - go fight. If you want to fight Israel's war - go to Israel. Not hard.
Everyone see's what's happening, and who is promoting it. Again.
Except we aren't fighting israel's war. Trump even gave the iranians warning so they would move their personnel - we haven't hit conventional targets. We hit the nuclear development sites. The part that IS our problem.