re: Is Trump supposed to let Iran get a nuke

quote:

---

Was Bush supposed to let Iraq get WMD? You peope are so stupid.

---

So your argument is he should?

quote:

---

giving us more enemies

---

That we are supposed to now let have nukes.

I guarantee you that’s worse than debt.

quote:

---

Want to hear some facts? We don’t know what the real truth is. Maybe they are close to a Nuke. Maybe they have one now, maybe they are 20 years away. We the public have no real idea

---

Well do you want Iran to have a nuke?

That should be the first question.

quote:

---

And frankly I don’t know why Iran can’t have a nuke. I think they’d be just as pragmatic and responsible as Israel

---

Misguided take.

quote:

---

Is President Trump supposed to let Iran get a nuke

---

The negotiation terms seemed like a moving target. Iran supposedly would agree to 3.67%, for now. The sticking point was the stonewall on inspections and their enriched uranium, which I supposed would go to an international commission. Ballistic missile ban was mentioned, but was a non-starter for Iran. Iran wanted sanctions re-lifted for economic reasons but without completely transparent inspections.

The only way they could get one would likely only come from China or Russia. That is not something that could just go unnoticed or would not have already been published far and wide, and those two know that would poke too many bears in my opinion. The only people I have ever heard advocate for them to get nuclear weapons do so on the general premise that any country should be able to have them.

This circles back to your question. Let Iran is not what is being discussed and somewhat of a strawman. The primary discussion which has so many people at odds is do(?) they have one and are we supposed to believe that the quick pivot is justified. The basis for the current war was supposedly prevention not possession. Is we think or we suspect a high enough bar for the U.S. to take action instead of we know? I personally believe that if the former has not been the position for action, it should not be now. It should not be seen as irrational for suspicion since we have experienced this before.

quote:

---

If we’re going to attack Iran we should do it for our own purposes, not because Israel tells us too. And frankly I don’t know why Iran can’t have a nuke. I think they’d be just as pragmatic and responsible as Israel. And I say that as someone who hates Iran.

---

Well our purpose would be the nuke.

But if you don’t care if Iran has one then the argument is moot. You don’t see that as a reason we should intervene. Them having one or not doesn’t actually matter.



But if you don’t think they should have one, then at some point we might have to stop them.

quote:

---

But if you don’t think they should have one, then at some point we might have to stop them.

---

It sure doesn’t seem like that’s the reason we may join in on this war. If stopping Iran from getting a nuke was the goal why did we have to wait for the Israelis to beg us to join in on their war? We could’ve done this on our own anytime we wanted.

quote:

---

Is Trump supposed to let Iran get a nuke

---

Since the Obama years, we've been hearing that "Iran is just months away from having a nuke!".

Think about that. Seriously. Scan the old memory vault, and tell me this doesn't have the appearance of more propaganda designed to pull us into war. WMD in Iraq rings a bell, which led to OIF/OEF and a 20-year unresolved war in Afghanistan in which we ultimately stepped aside and let Al Qaeda reclaim it in the end.

Sovvycits787
Member since Jun 2025
12 posts

TUCKER: “I don't want my country to be further weakened or destroyed by another one of these wars. And if you can't connect the dots after 25 years of this sh*t, you're either too dumb to participate in the conversation or you're like Mark Levin — just a liar who doesn't care.”