- 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
re: Seemingly lost in all this Iran BS is they refused to stop developing nukes….
Posted on 3/8/26 at 2:01 pm to KingOrange
Posted on 3/8/26 at 2:01 pm to KingOrange
Very much possible. 
Posted on 3/8/26 at 2:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
What’s wrong with that WH release slo? Please explain? If I say I obliterated the fort that is what I did. I did not say I obliterated ALL forts.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 2:06 pm to eddieray
You have trouble with comprehension.
Trump saying facilities obliterated and Iran continues trying to develop nuclear weapon are not the same thing.
Trump saying facilities obliterated and Iran continues trying to develop nuclear weapon are not the same thing.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 2:11 pm to idlewatcher
quote:
Therefore, what would you propose as an alternative seeing what has and what hasn’t worked thus far?
I wish I had a nickel for every time that putz has been asked this question.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 4:32 pm to rltiger
They might have been.
You missed my point.
We don’t go to war for that.
It’s an excuse for another reason.
You missed my point.
We don’t go to war for that.
It’s an excuse for another reason.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 4:38 pm to geoag58
quote:
wish I had a nickel for every time that putz has been asked this question.
I'm not going to make y'all feel better about your hypocrisy
Posted on 3/8/26 at 4:46 pm to rltiger
quote:
I don’t think there is a sane person alive who thinks Iran should be allowed to have nukes
Lots of people have nukes I don't want having nukes. Should we invade all of them?
quote:
this bombing campaign and push for regime change has been the only option left for some time and time had run out
the only option left? how about leave them the frick alone? that's an option. Since when has Iran posed a threat to the US, with or without a nuke?
Posted on 3/8/26 at 4:49 pm to Asharad
quote:
horrible but necessary
necessary for what?
Other than to destabilize the region and piss off our actual allies who depend on us for protection, allow us to build bases on their soil, invest billions and billions into the economy, and don't blow up our ships, why was this "necessary?"
Posted on 3/8/26 at 5:09 pm to Giantkiller
This is not about nukes. It's about the Greater Israel Project.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 5:42 pm to Masterag
quote:This action is to keep an unstable regime from acquiring Nukes. There is a reason the overwhelming majority of middle east countries are backing and supporting US and Israel strikes.
Lots of people have nukes I don't want having nukes. Should we invade all of them?
For your information, here are the countries with Nuclear Weapons….
The United States, Russia, France, China, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea.
quote:Again, were are trying to keep them from acquiring a nuclear weapon. They are a threat to stability in the world if they ever acquire nukes. It instantly destabilizes that area and every country in the area will want nukes to counter the Iranians. Within a year the probability of one popping off goes up a thousandfold.
Since when has Iran posed a threat to the US, with or without a nuke?
I for one don’t want that.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 5:47 pm to Masterag
quote:
Lots of people have nukes I don't want having nukes. Should we invade all of them?
We don’t invade countries with nukes because they have nukes, which is why countries that don’t have nukes want nukes.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 5:48 pm to DawgCountry
quote:
I missed the part where they developed a nuke. You seem to be implying the attacks didn’t work.
Obliterated doesn't mean as much nowadays.
But look, this attack, this attack is gonna stop them.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 9:32 pm to Masterag
quote:The answer was in my post.
necessary for what?
Posted on 3/8/26 at 9:42 pm to DawgCountry
quote:
I missed the part where they developed a nuke. You seem to be implying the attacks didn’t work.
They have been six months away from developing a nuke for several decades now. At least according to Bibi.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 9:45 pm to DawgCountry
quote:
I missed the part where they developed a nuke.
Confirmation that they developed a nuke will come in the form of a big flash.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 10:22 pm to Jbird
quote:
God Dam SlowFappingPro is all giddy!
If she has a chance to take a shot at the USA and if it’s bad for America, she’s in.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 11:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Yeah we told you the bombing last year wouldn't stop them and was nothing more than a speed bump long-term.
Didn't stop people from pounding their chest and proclaiming victory.
Yeah?
So?
Are you o.k. with Iran getting nuclear weapons?
Because it doesn't sound like you were opposed to the bombing last year because you wanted a more permanent solution. It sounds like you were opposed just for the sake of opposing it. Because now you don't seem happy about a more permanent solution either.
I personally think it would be a very bad thing if Iran—with their current fundamentalist theocracy—ever got working nukes.
Posted on 3/8/26 at 11:10 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
They have been six months away from developing a nuke for several decades now
All that means is that this is several decades over due.
Popular
Back to top



0







