- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Can we please stop with the BS. Iran is getting a bomb. Guaranteed.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:23 am
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:23 am
If not this year, if not next year, if not in five years, THEY…ARE…GETTING…THE…BOMB.
LINK
quote:
Iran agrees to dilute nuclear stockpile in draft deal
LINK
10
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:24 am to Geekboy
They are certainly not going to stop trying to make one, at the least.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:27 am to Geekboy
No because 1. They are terrorists 2. They want one. 3. They have worked towards one. 4. Say they will not agree to not getting one. 5. They are terrorists so they need to be removed period. If pointing out their nuke ambitions helps idiots see them as a danger then that narrative will be pushed
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:28 am to Geekboy
Wrong …..There’s a reason that Iran has not received a nuke from the Norks or the Chicoms or the Jeets…. a very valid reason
This post was edited on 6/14/26 at 7:30 am
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
They are certainly not going to stop trying to make one, at the least.
Could be, but not necessarily. It is possible that Iran becomes governed by those who don’t think the nuclear ambition is worth the squeeze. This has been the case in a number of countries. It is a very expensive project and a very dangerous one, as we have just seen.
As long as they are partially governed by the IRGC they will go after nukes. But the radical elements might be overcome.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:32 am to Penrod
quote:
As long as they are partially governed by the IRGC they will go after nukes. But the radical elements might be overcome.
After the past 6 months, this is a "theoretically could happen" scenario with a small chance of success anytime soon.
They just fought the US and largely won, and they may be getting paid more billions to pinky promise to stop (again) as the consolation prize. This is after slaughtering 30k citizens who protested that government.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:34 am to Penrod
quote:
It is possible that Iran becomes governed by those who don’t think the nuclear ambition is worth the squeeze.
Especially given the administration’s hint that the door is open for Iran to participate in the Abraham accords.
Imagine lasting peace in the Mideast. Their collective economies would boom for the first time since the Silk Road era
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:34 am to cadillacattack
quote:
Especially given the administration’s hint that the door is open for Iran to participate in the Abraham accords.
Israel would never allow this without regime change, and I doubt the US would, either.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:36 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
They just fought the US and largely won
No. They lost.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:38 am to Geekboy
We’re sending them pallets of cash, aren’t we?
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:39 am to theballguy
quote:
We’re sending them pallets of cash, aren’t we?
It's going to be funny to watch the spin on this, but yes, it appears that way.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:40 am to Geekboy
quote:
If not this year, if not next year, if not in five years, THEY…ARE…GETTING…THE…BOMB.
The radical mullahs will continue to pursue one absolutely because they correctly view it as the only way to ensure the US/Israeli alliance can’t threaten them moving forward.
They’re insane radical fundamentalists and I would’ve loved to see them overthrown, but the IRGC is no joke and clearly have a firm hold on their country.
The question isn’t whether they will continue to pursue one, it’s what are we able and willing to do to stop it.
If the price of preventing it is 100k US casualties and a multi year war that prevents us from fixing our own domestic issues which I believe are existential to the future of our country and the world my answer is deterrence should continue to be our policy as we get our own house in order.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Israel would never allow this without regime change, and I doubt the US would, either.
Correct
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:44 am to tide06
That country is ruled by a vast minority's iron fist. Nothing will change until somehow the majority can overthrow them.
An ideology can never be extinguished. They will defy any agreement and be rewarded with time to rebuild the machine.
An ideology can never be extinguished. They will defy any agreement and be rewarded with time to rebuild the machine.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:45 am to cadillacattack
It didn’t turn out like Trump had hoped. The negotiations are simply a negotiation of ‘saving face’ for both sides.
Absolutely nothing will change. Both sides need to be able to walk away looking good. That’s it.
No regime change. No preventing the bomb.
A lot of you folks are too young to remember Vietnam and the Paris Peace Accords. Look that up. See how that turned out. See how successful negotiations are with an enemy that is determined.
It’s a shame we don’t learn from history. If anyone bothered to look they would see that history has taught us undeniably that the way to deal with an enemy is to conquer them. That’s it. Total surrender.
Absolutely nothing will change. Both sides need to be able to walk away looking good. That’s it.
No regime change. No preventing the bomb.
A lot of you folks are too young to remember Vietnam and the Paris Peace Accords. Look that up. See how that turned out. See how successful negotiations are with an enemy that is determined.
It’s a shame we don’t learn from history. If anyone bothered to look they would see that history has taught us undeniably that the way to deal with an enemy is to conquer them. That’s it. Total surrender.
This post was edited on 6/14/26 at 7:54 am
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:50 am to Geekboy
Let's hope we send them 50.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:52 am to omegaman66
quote:
No because 1. They are terrorists 2. They want one. 3. They have worked towards one. 4. Say they will not agree to not getting one. 5. They are terrorists so they need to be removed period. If pointing out their nuke ambitions helps idiots see them as a danger then that narrative will be pushed
You had me at 1. We are “negotiating” with terrorists. Deal with that reality.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:57 am to Geekboy
Ok. So how is this more of a dire emergency than North Korea having one? The US is still the only nation to actually drop one in a city, right?
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:57 am to omegaman66
quote:
If pointing out their nuke ambitions helps idiots see them as a danger then that narrative will be pushed
Everyone understands the danger of the Iranian regime.
The problem is the cost/benefit of regime change, an endeavor we have a high % of failure at, mind you. Iran is likely to be another Afghanistan situation, but more difficult and costly (and the Taliban is running Afghanistan currently).
Posted on 6/14/26 at 7:59 am to SlowFlowPro
Mind you!
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News