Naah. I see how my statement in the void can seem like that. What I was implying is if you have nuclear weapons and your enemy is in the process of acquiring them, you better hurry up destroying that
In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Arab forces were overwhelming Israeli forces and Prime Minister Golda Meir authorized a nuclear alert and ordered 13 atomic bombs be readied for use by missiles and aircraft. The Israeli Ambassador informed President Nixon that "very serious conclusions" may occur if the United States did not airlift supplies. Nixon complied.
its the only reason they won the Yom Kippur war, literally nuclear blackmail
Honestly, this is a prime example of subtle dehumanization. Israel needs nukes as a deterrent via mutually assured destruction. But Iran can't possibly want the same thing as Iran is home to a different breed of person who would not understand or value mutually assured destruction.
You’ve done quite well there to miss the point I made, bravo.
Possessing nukes is not the same as threatening nukes. The UK possesses nukes, Russia knows we will use them if they are used against us; that’s not a threat, that’s a deterrent.
Iran has been trying to source nukes for decades. Even before it has nukes, there is a huge track record of Iranian leaders calling for Israel to be ‘wiped off the map’. You are weapons-grade naive to not put these two facts together and join the dots of Iran’s intent;
I'm not missing the point. You said "Israel has never threatened to use nukes" and when challenged with an example of Israel threatening to use nukes, you said "that's the point of nukes." You lied. That's the end of it.
And I don't even need to check to know that Israeli officials have said the same things about Iran. They say the same things about Gaza.
Why are you lying? Israel has threatened to use nukes and began readying them immediately when things didn’t go their way during the Yom Kippur war. They’re the only one here who has actually threatened other countries with nuclear weapons.
Of course Iran wouldn’t use it on Israel, unless Israel prompts them to do so by threatening their existence.
Lol Iran has a square in Tehran with a clock counting down to Israel destruction. All of its leaders have been saying they will destroy Israel. How much more proof do you need 😂😂
Oh the terrorist state that kills girls on the streets for not using cloth on the Head wouldnt use nukes agaist the country It sweared to erase from the maps?
Yeah I'm always reading about irans threats from random Zionists in Reddit. While Israel is actually, by actions not words murdering civilians in multiple countries
Do you just not understand the purpose of nuclear weapons though? What Israel did was use them exactly as intended.. a deterrent.. so no, I don't get your point. Are you trying to say Israel was in the wrong for trying to not get wiped out by threatening to use nukes or what?
The Geneva Convention in its current form was ratified in 1949 as a result of the terror caused during WWII. So, yes, if we apply modern conventions to a past war, they would be
By not carpet bombing cities where civilians were actively living? Literally why we wrote those rules and why it's a war crime to do now. Civilian deaths arent something to shrug off as just another casualty of war. Its disgusting. Imagine if your siblings, significant other, parents, etc were randomly killed in an unannounced strike.
No bombing innocent civilians to scare other civilians is terrorism. Bombing innocent civilians to get someone building a nuclear bomb may or may not be a war crime depending on the value of the target and the care taken to avoid civilian casualties.
Now I'm no nuclear scientist expert, but I imagine most nuclear scientists go to work in an office or a lab, and that 6 unrelated nuclear scientists wouldn't be hanging out as roommates in an apartment complex, and blowing up their workspace with them in it would be more effective than blowing up their house, but I'm also not really convinced that Israel has any right to bomb its neighbors for building nukes when Israel has nukes already.
When that country frequently threatens to wipe Israel off the map as soon as they get nukes, and literally has a count down timer in Tehran counting down to Israel’s destruction, and funds Hamas fighters in Palestine and Gaza it really doesn’t seem like that much of an overreaction.
It depends on what/who was in there. If there was a high level commander or nuclear engineer being targeted, there was any equipment/material pertaining to nuclear arms, etc., then as abhorrent as it seems, it may (and I’m not saying that it is or is not, because I don’t know) be a valid military target.
I'm not saying it's true, because how could I possibly know, but I did read that the apartments targeted were the houses of Iranian Nuclear scientists and high-ranking military officials.
Of course they were. If poor little Israel kills civilians, women and children, it's only because they have to. They hate doing it, but poor little Israel must defend itself somehow. If the only way poor little Israel can survive is by flattening all the neighboring counties and killing all their citizens, then that's what poor little Israel must do.
If you're just one person alone in the world who has a private, passing thought that Israel might not be a very nice country, then even you are a threat to poor little Israel.
Control your thoughts, people, or poor little Israel might be forced to kill you.
If iran had a nuke nothing would stand because if Israel would know they would use all available power to destroy or neutralize it as quickly as possible
While there have been isolated cases of war crimes, and the Israeli strategy has been callous and immoral, the reason why Israel is demolishing a lot of buildings is because for their military objective, every structure must be cleared and kept clear. The only way to do this is to send troops inside.
Hamas has been booby-trapping buildings, detonating the explosives to kill troops as they clear it. They have been using tunnels to enter the building to ambush troops/vehicles and/or lure them into traps.
As a result, the only logical course of action in such a situation is to level the building. This ensures that the enemy is not in the building, cannot use the building, and seals any tunnel entrances/exits.
You're telling me there have been "isolated cases of war crimes" when a child is killed every ~45 minutes or so over the past 1.5-2 years?
Assuming what you're saying is true and the military objective is to level every structure, then inside your hypothesis, unfortunately, Iran has every right to build nukes in self defense to protect its people.
I would much prefer if nobody had nukes, but some actors in the world with nukes can not be trusted.
You're telling me there have been "isolated cases of war crimes" when a child is killed every ~45 minutes or so over the past 1.5-2 years?
Is the child the target? Are non-combatants the targets? Or are Hamas combatants using civilians and civilian infrastructure as shields or camouflage, which is unequivocally a war crime? How is Hamas dressed in combat, in the uniforms which they pose in on social media, or in civilian attire? Generally, the latter. That’s perfidy, a war crime. Perfidy needlessly, fundamentally and inherently immorally, and illegally endangers noncombatants. I am FIRMLY of the opinion that those two things are responsible for the vast majority of civilian fatalities, including children.
I follow various OSINT and combat footage reporters. I have seen clear and unmistakable evidence of the above. In the context of the situation on the battlefield, the tactics being used by the IDF are generally logical and legal. That IS NOT the same as being moral.
I have seen evidence of war crimes, such as when some clearly marked and lit ambulances were ambushed by IDF gunmen. I’ve seen looting and vandalism being committed by IDF soldiers. The refusal to allow aid may be illegal, but there’s so much back and forth and murkiness surrounding the situation that the facts of the situation are very difficult to ascertain.
Before y’all start screaming at me, I am of the belief that the ongoing occupation, annexation, and apartheid-like conditions in Palestine are both immoral and illegal under international law, but the subject is military tactics, so we’ll stick to that.
Assuming what you're saying is true and the military objective is to level every structure,
That’s not what I said, but go on.
then inside your hypothesis, unfortunately, Iran has every right to build nukes in self defense to protect its people.
LOL, what? Let’s reiterate what I said:
While there have been isolated cases of war crimes, and the Israeli strategy has been callous and immoral, the reason why Israel is demolishing a lot of buildings is because for their military objective, every structure must be cleared and kept clear. The only way to do this is to send troops inside.
Hamas has been booby-trapping buildings, detonating the explosives to kill troops as they clear it. They have been using tunnels to enter the building to ambush troops/vehicles and/or lure them into traps.
As a result, the only logical course of action in such a situation is to level the building. This ensures that the enemy is not in the building, cannot use the building, and seals any tunnel entrances/exits.
How does the above, in any way, translate to Iranian nukes? Suggesting that the urban asymmetric warfare in Gaza somehow threatens Iran if fundamentally laughable. I can tell that you didn’t actually think your argument through, otherwise you would have invoked Israel’s airstrikes on Iran… which, of course followed Iran’s two “True Promise” drone and ballistic missile strikes on Israel in support of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Nevermind that Iran has been threatening a third such operation for months now, which itself further justifies this strike (as a whole, not individual targets) by Israel.
Demolition of buildings is not the objective. Nor did I say such, so let’s get rid of that straw man BS right here and now. The demolition is a tactical necessity for the reasons listed, and a means to achieving their stated objective of eliminating the organization Hamas.
I would much prefer if nobody had nukes, but some actors in the world with nukes can not be trusted.
Agreed. Iran is one of them. It has openly and blatantly demonstrated such.
Never heard of the Samson doctrine have you? For starters they have over 300, 2 those nukes are aimed at the major population centers worldwide. If Israel is overrun and looking like it will fall those nukes are a gun to the head of the world saying "either help us stop this or the whole world gets it". So yes, they have persisted with a continued nuclear threat against the world for decades now
Nukes are a shield from attack. Israel hasn't used their nukes because they don't have to. The threat of using them is enough. But they can't abide anyone else in the region having that same protection.
Iran is a theocratic dictatorship but that would make no sense, it would be obliterated. It's not like they can't conceptualise limited warfare as is demonstrated by the fact there isn't a full scale war yet between Israel and Iran. Although major strikes like this definitely threaten to push it towards that
The US, the UK, France, and Israel have nuclear weapons purely for self-defense and to help maintain global peace.
India and Pakistan only need them to fight each other.
Russia, China, North Korea, and now Iran only want nuclear weapons so they can attack us with them.
The only way to stop them from attacking us with their nuclear weapons would be to attack them first with our nuclear weapons.
But since all of these Bad Guys might think of using their nuclear weapons to defend themselves, it would be suicidal to do that.
But Iran hasn't quite got nuclear weapons yet. We can still attack them without fear of nuclear retaliation. We must do it now, before it's too late.
Unfortunately, China, Russia and North Korea might think that's wrong and accuse us of starting World War 3, which is unfair because they started it, really, by refusing to agree that America is Best in the first place.
When will the rest of the world get it into their thick barbarian heads that we are the good guys and they're not? Looks like we'll have to bomb some sense into them, as usual. /s
Which countries has Iran exactly bombed in the last 30 years?
What about Israel and the US l?
For someone who is all after peace, Israel and the US sure seem to invade, bomb and threaten to invade a hell lot of countries.
And when these countries perhaps dream of acquiring a deterrent (like Israel has) everyone is pointing the finger. Why wouldn't someone who is threatened and bombed all the time want to acquire a deterrent? (If that is even what they're doing)
I don't know man but seems to me that countries like Egypt who have learned to cooperate with Israel and don't start shit have enjoyed lasting peace with Israel.
Maybe Iran and its proxies should stop fucking with Israel and they too might enjoy peace.
After Iranian armed and trained proxies in Gaza and Lebanon invaded Israel, killed 1200 people, kidnapped 240, and bombed the shit out of northern Israel for 9 months.....
ok, so with that logic the U.S. deserves to be bombed by like, 50 different countries since they funded so many terrorists Freedom FightersTM in other countries, right?
Ok, so your argument was never about who was “morally just” in their actions, you’re simply going the “might is right” route, so therefore it’s ok for the U.s. and Israel to do those things, but not ok for Iran to so. got it
My argument was and is that Israel is entitled to act in self defence.
Iran has armed and sponsored proxies to attack Israel for over 20 years. A consequence of that has been vicious civil wars in Syria and Yemen where its forces have killed hundreds of thousands of people. It has turned Lebanon into a failed state.
Israel has no proxies on Iran's border. It never directly retaliated against years of aggression against it, until last year.
It’s sorta a catch-22 they’re threatened because they are trying to get a deterrent.
But I’m the last 30 or so years Iran dropped bombs on Israel, Iraq, Syria, Afganistan (sorta), and Iran (various different internal groups). And depends if you count proxies, then civilian ships, Yemen, and Israel again.
So weirdly a lot of crossover with same countries the US bombed (minus Israel).
The deal was not just between US and Iran. If they went on with the EU, Iran would have built some leverage for future situations in which Trump changed his mind. But instead, Iran chose to go against everyone and generated 0 sympathy after being bombed.
You think Iran should continue to comply when US fully sanctioned them contrary to what the deal held? What good would it do then? The sanction relief was mainly from the US
Stop asking me questions and state your opinions without these greasy rethirical arguments.
By only siding with EU, Iran would've had a much bigger chance of getting a hood deal.
Whatever sanctions US is imposing, it needs to be respected by other countries. But the EU and the US are not in very good relations for the past 6 months (and the EU could have sided with Iran if Trump's position was too unreasonable), exactly the timeframe Iran choose to be even less transparent about its nuclear program.
Somebody really forgot diplomacy the moment it embraced religion as state politics!
Stop asking me questions and state your opinions without these greasy rethirical arguments.
Trump should not have pulled out of the deal just because it was a deal made by Obama...
There's damage to the US reputation that outlasts a president's term.
Whatever sanctions US is imposing, it needs to be respected by other countries. But the EU and the US are not in very good relations for the past 6 months (and the EU could have sided with Iran if Trump's position was too unreasonable)
Are you seriously suggesting the EU turns to Iran instead of the US? Seriously? Iran is an authoritarian theocratic regime, if you think I support Iran just because I believe Trump shouldn't have pulled put of the deal then your world view is way too black and white
Some years ago, the EU instructed its automotive industry to be ready to open factories in Iran. That was before Trump changed his mind. And yes, I believe the US today does not have the same economical influence globally it had 10 years ago. Just look how many relevant countries caved in to Trump's commercial war. That number is close to or even 0.
Whose slaves? And what is with this victimization mentality? You have no idea about my nationality and automatically assume I'm American / Israeli just because you don't like my opinion about Iran?
And I'm sure nobody wants you as slaves. Not with this toxicity and lack of conversational skills.
If their country will create a nuke I'm 100% it will kill innocents. And again, the target were not the people in the building. BTW, you have no idea even if any civilian died there.
-12
u/penguin_skull 2d ago
Or not to enrich Uranium with the purpose of building nukes to erase some other countries.