re: People here rooting for Iran can go frick themselves

quote:

---

The evidence is extremely one sided with respect what Iran was doing with their nuclear research.

---

Part of the overarching criticism is that Trump talks too much. There's a release on the white house website to this day that says "Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Have Been Obliterated — and Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News." People here are tired of the doublespeak. If you criticize it, you're a panican TDS lib. If you point it out after the fact, you get crocodile tears about hating America. It's embarrassing.

quote:

---

The majority of the board members criticizing our response criticized it from day 1 (before they knew what was going to happen), and they offered no alternative actions that could have ensured that Iran didn't obtain nuclear weapons.

It was, almost exclusively, a stream of "But Trump said no new wars!". Over and over, and over, and over.

Outside of "We shouldn't be doing Israel's bidding", what arguments have been made?

---

See: Trump talks too much. The ardent defenders keep the mission a moving target so they never have to address criticisms. They're intentionally vague on the goals so victory can always be claimed and doubts can always be painted as unpatriotic, impatient, and kept at bay with "you'll see"s that they never return to.

We were going to be there 4 weeks, we're leaving immediately. But also it may take months. The nuclear facilities were obliterated. But we also have more bombing to do. The talks are going well and a deal is close. But we're going to blast them back to the stone age this weekend. The goals were simultaneously regime change, decimation of Iran's nuclear capabilities, a grassroots overthrow by the people, but also none of these things, all at the same time.

quote:

---

You don’t think it matters any whether folks here view you as a retard imbecile, versus a rational, logical, pragmatic poster??

---

Nope, it really doesn't matter.

There are people here who think all kinds of weird things.

You can't care what people here think.

The only one you owe it to to make the best argument you can is you.

quote:

---

Part of the overarching criticism is that Trump talks too much. There's a release on the white house website to this day that says "Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Have Been Obliterated — and Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News." People here are tired of the doublespeak. If you criticize it, you're a panican TDS lib. If you point it out after the fact, you get crocodile tears about hating America. It's embarrassing.

---

I'm not following. What does this prove? That since we destroyed it, it's literally impossible that they can ever rebuild it?

quote:

---

See: Trump talks too much. The ardent defenders keep the mission a moving target so they never have to address criticisms. They're intentionally vague on the goals so victory can always be claimed and doubts can always be painted as unpatriotic, impatient, and kept at bay with "you'll see"s that they never return to.

We were going to be there 4 weeks, we're leaving immediately. But also it may take months. The nuclear facilities were obliterated. But we also have more bombing to do. The talks are going well and a deal is close. But we're going to blast them back to the stone age this weekend. The goals were simultaneously regime change, decimation of Iran's nuclear capabilities, a grassroots overthrow by the people, but also none of these things, all at the same time.

---

My understanding:

A regime change is preferable, but not necessary. A grassroots overthrow by the people is preferable, but not necessary. The main goal was to make obtaining nuclear weapons hurt so badly that the next leadership in Iran wouldn't attempt to do it.

Sinking Iran's navy, destroying its airforce, destroying/depleting its missiles and drones and their capability to produce more, destroying whatever rebuilding they'd done to their nuclear program over the last 8 months, destroying other key military targets, all of that was done to make the IRGC hurt so badly that they realize them obtaining nuclear weaponry is a red line in the sand and decide to not develop nuclear weapons in the future.

Deals are on the table, fricking around gets you slapped back down into the dirt again.

I'm not sure how this isn't clear.

quote:

---

You don’t think it matters any whether folks here view you as a retard imbecile, versus a rational, logical, pragmatic poster??

---

It definitely doesn't. Half the people here are complete clowns. Why would you be worried about being the popular person in such a group? That's the real irrational thing.

Thinking that tax paying law abiding citizens literally support terrorists isn't anywhere in the zip code of being reasonable. So you've already lost that battle if you're worried about your reputation here...

Your reputation as a reasonable pragmatic person is completely destroyed by claiming you think people who disagree with you are literally pulling for a terrorist regime.

Bud I don't know how to tell you this but that is an absolutely insane delusion.

quote:

---

then why are you bothering to spend any time conveying anything to them??

---

Because in many cases the same people who call you retarded about topic X actually make a good point about topic Y.

We don't have to all agree. Its a discussion, some will agree, some will disagree.

Some points are worth making even if everyone here hates you.

I've made far more sacrifices at work for saying what I believe is right than a few down votes and people being offended by whay I've said.

But again, people are free to agree, disagree, ignore, or flame. I don't take it personally, and I don't hold it against someone if they call me a retard. I'm still going to give them an up vote if they give some really useful information in the next post.

Because none of this is personal. At least to me.

Lol, I’ve taught that same lesson several times here as well. But although I can’t speak for you, and only myself, I only say those same things because it’s precisely how I operate, not because I spit something out that sounds super good. I keep tabs on who actually practices the principles touched on in your post……it’s a very, very short list.

No one ever said anyone was “literally rooting for a terrorist regime.” You’ve got it all wrong, intentionally, to better suit your footing, so of course Im not going to respond to your incorrect and inaccurate statement and claim. But again, people already know all of this about us.

quote:

---

I'm not following. What does this prove? That since we destroyed it, it's literally impossible that they can ever rebuild it?

---

Not according to that press release.

quote:

---

Israel Atomic Energy Commission: “The devastating US strike on Fordo destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable. We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years. The achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material.”

---

Here's a tweet and response to CNN and NYT reports that Iranian facilities were badly damaged but "only set back a number of months," from Rubio:

quote:

---

The Iranian program — the nuclear program — today looks nothing like it did just a week ago … That story is a false story and it’s one that really shouldn’t be re-reported because it doesn’t accurately reflect what’s happening.”

---

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

Witkoff claims that their conversion facility was completely destroyed and "they cannot convert uranium even if it's been enriched," plus claims all their enrichment facilities have been "obliterated" and it's "preposterous" to suggest otherwise:
LINK

I'll stop there but the release has an entire section of links to statements from the officials saying any report questioning complete destruction is fake news.

quote:

---

A regime change is preferable, but not necessary. A grassroots overthrow by the people is preferable, but not necessary. The main goal was to make obtaining nuclear weapons hurt so badly that the next leadership in Iran wouldn't attempt to do it.

Sinking Iran's navy, destroying its airforce, destroying/depleting its missiles and drones and their capability to produce more, destroying whatever rebuilding they'd done to their nuclear program over the last 8 months, destroying other key military targets, all of that was done to make the IRGC hurt so badly that they realize them obtaining nuclear weaponry is a red line in the sand and decide to not develop nuclear weapons in the future.

---

This is something I can engage with. It's more than we get in other threads, so it at least opens a discussion. I wish more people would clearly lay out their argument this way!