- 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: Why Can’t People Learn To Accept Permanent U.S. War In The Middle East?
Posted on 2/21/26 at 1:56 pm to Narax
Posted on 2/21/26 at 1:56 pm to Narax
The Iranian wouldn’t give a nuke to one of their proxies. Iran having a nuke would actually have a stabilizing affect on the region IMO.
I still think we s should jump on this opportunity for regime change though.
I still think we s should jump on this opportunity for regime change though.
1
Posted on 2/21/26 at 1:56 pm to BOHICAMAN
quote:
I don’t really care if Iran gets nukes. Honestly I think the region becomes more stable with a nuclear armed Iran.
I'll disagree with you on that.
quote:
I do however think that the Iranian regime is at its weakest point ever right now and that we should take this opportunity for regime change because a friendly Iran is the most favorable scenario.
But agree with you on that.
I do hope we have a chance to have friendly relations with Iran again.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:01 pm to Narax
delete
This post was edited on 2/21/26 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:02 pm to Toomer Deplorable
Bc flyby bombings is not war
Like drive by shootings, just shoot up a house and only the child gets killed. Rinse and repeat.
Diplomacy is something this admin is incapable of, so bomb and run is easier.
Obliterated? Not yet, tbd
Like drive by shootings, just shoot up a house and only the child gets killed. Rinse and repeat.
Diplomacy is something this admin is incapable of, so bomb and run is easier.
Obliterated? Not yet, tbd
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:19 pm to Narax
quote:
You can go do some research, read the records.
You have conceded and I accept your surrender.
quote:
Because they already have nukes
Thanks for validating why Iran should definitely be pursuing nukes.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:23 pm to Narax
quote:
I don't know, why can't you accept that Iran needs to not have nukes
Any country that would use them should not have them...frick...wait a minute
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:24 pm to PurpleCrush
quote:
Diplomacy is something this admin is incapable of, so bomb and run is easier
Wait...is Obama back in office?
Or maybe Bush
Or maybe Clinton
Shite, we farked
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:25 pm to Narax
quote:
I do hope we have a chance to have friendly relations with Iran again
We would need to stop overthrowing their governments for that to happen
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:25 pm to Narax
I have no desire to reply to any of the very nuanced comments in this thread, so I will just respond to the OP. Out of the dozens of ‘good’ reasons that have been given as to why we should attack (not go to war, because using warlike tactics and saying it is a war are actually different things, or so I’m told) Iran, the continual drumbeat of nuclear weapons reason should be retired for a while.
To say that they are weeks or months away from a nuclear weapon for 20+ years and use that as a premise to keep bombing them has to eventually resonate with rational minds. If our intelligence says they are not close to having them and do not have them, then why do we have to use this as the excuse? Is it because Iran’s largest enemy says the opposite? Concerning that, the most recent time (last year) they said this, the administration said the threat was ended. Is Iran somehow this incredible super-power that can just rebound in a few months and once again become the greatest nuclear threat in the ME?
Why not just say we want a different regime because the current one is bad and call it a day, (or one among a laundry list of other reasons)?
To say that they are weeks or months away from a nuclear weapon for 20+ years and use that as a premise to keep bombing them has to eventually resonate with rational minds. If our intelligence says they are not close to having them and do not have them, then why do we have to use this as the excuse? Is it because Iran’s largest enemy says the opposite? Concerning that, the most recent time (last year) they said this, the administration said the threat was ended. Is Iran somehow this incredible super-power that can just rebound in a few months and once again become the greatest nuclear threat in the ME?
Why not just say we want a different regime because the current one is bad and call it a day, (or one among a laundry list of other reasons)?
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:30 pm to Boodis Man
quote:
they should give up nukes and/or nuke ambitions just like Ukraine did and suffer the same fate.
Who exactly do you think is going to invade Iran?
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:32 pm to UtahCajun
quote:
Any country that is not the United States that would use them should not have them
FIFY.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:32 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
FIFY
Are we the baddies?
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:34 pm to TigerAxeOK
quote:
We created problems so we can fix them and keep the Military Industrial Complex well-fed.
Anybody who really believes this is a moron.
No offense.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:35 pm to Boodis Man
quote:
You have conceded and I accept your surrender.
I've posted a detailed summary in the past with sources of the Budapest Accords, including from US, Russian, and Ukrainian negotiators.
You can go look it up, or stay ignorant.
That's up to you.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:37 pm to UtahCajun
quote:
Are we the baddies?
Nope.
Not even close.
And that's what the Hate America crowd doesn't get.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:39 pm to Toomer Deplorable
We are dealing with a part of the world dominated by a religion that sanctions slavery, blesses violence, subjugation, conquest, and encourages self-destruction in the name of glory.
There is not much hope in bringing peace to a people whose ethos is opposite of peace.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:50 pm to BOHICAMAN
quote:
Iran having a nuke would actually have a stabilizing affect on the region IMO.
That might be one of the dumbest statements I've ever seen here.
If Iran ever gets a functioning nuke it will be launched at Israel within 24 hours of acquisition, with Israel's counterstrike happening within seconds or minutes after that.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:51 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
We are dealing with a part of the world dominated by a religion that sanctions slavery, blesses violence, subjugation, conquest, and encourages self-destruction in the name of glory.
And whose biggest goal in life is to eradicate Israel.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 2:54 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
And that's what the Hate America crowd doesn't get
Funny
Realizing the bad one's nation does =/= hating that nation.
Call it self-reflection.
Posted on 2/21/26 at 3:09 pm to Narax
quote:
If it happens, there will be a coalition of supporting nations.
Let them handle it.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News