re: Iran is not an irrational actor

I think a common reality in all Islamic authoritarian regimes with any length of rule (revolution in Iran, Assad, House of Saud, Qaddafi, etc. - even someone like Erdogan or entities like the ISI) is that over time it becomes quite a balancing act of satiating the (likely minority) who've kept the Islamist/"revolutionary spirit" and retaining the regime (which means staving off regime change efforts from the West or Israel).

I think Iran has done pretty well with this balancing act for decades. They know that on the true brink of a nuclear weapon, the regime is dire trouble (perhaps the case here). If close but not imminent, they have cards to play with the West and credibility with the hardliners in Iran. I think if Iran could snap their fingers and have a nuclear weapon and delivery system, they'd do it. But they can't, so they've been toeing the line for years and years.

Unlike what many will say, I don't think Iran, with a weapon and a delivery system - is going for Israel's throat immediately. Why? Because it ends the regime and sustaining the regime is the root purpose of every act Iran undertakes.

Here's the entire post you're attempting to respond to. You mistakenly missed a few pieces. Thanks for the opportunity to clarify and repost.




"We don't talk about that enough. Even without nuclear weapons, Israel is the biggest, baddest motherfricker in the region and they have the United States of America fully planted in their pocket. If any country doesn't need nuclear weapons, it's Israel.

In fact, South Korea is bordered by an impoverished, cultish, nuclear armed hermit kingdom and they don't even have them.

Throughout this entire ordeal, no one that I'm aware of has asked Israel to enter into non-proliferation talks or even consider it. What's Israel's responsibility in decreasing nuclear tensions in the region?

That's a rhetorical question. I think we all know the answer to it".

quote:

---

This argument that if they finally develop the one weapon that they’ve been weeks away from finishing for the last 30 years, they’ll immediately detonate it is crazy

---

That argument is crazy. Fortunately it's not the argument being forwarded in the main.

We supported Iraq to help neutralize Iran. We didn't want either to be superior to the other.

quote:

---

I mean, the ISI built and ran training camps for Al Qaeda prior to AQ murdering 2000 people in NYC and DC, so...

---

They also likely murdered Benazir Bhutto to prevent her from either becoming prime minister or to prevent a power sharing deal with Musharraf.

Good gosh you are one stupid poster

What’s the Obama quote, something like flood the place with so much bullshite nobody will know what to believe? Or thereabouts? Looks like it’s working

quote:

---

So in your mind that equates to Nuking Tel Aviv and New York City right?

---

Let's just say something that actually happened is considered better evidence to me than something threatened that very likely wouldn't or couldn't happen, sure

Are you a pathological liar or just real real stupid?