Iran / Israel Conflict

[CF DolFan]

Let's Devil's advocate here a bit. STUXNET was unleashed on Iran in 2010 and then we were in need of an agreement in 2016. How long do we expect any of that to last? How much do you trust that country? I was growing up during the hostage crisis and I bet many of you were not alive or old enough to remember. The middle east has long memories and Iran has a serious distaste for us and Israel. They top my list of countries that I don't trust. At least with Russia I always had faith in avoidance of mutual destruction. The Ayatollah has no such concern. Only time will tell if this was the right decision.

This here^^^.  Iran has funded more terrorist's against the US ( as well as others) than anyone. Their "Death to America" montra has never been hidden by their leaders. They have no concern for losing their lives as long as they destroy Israel and America.

[Spider-Dan]

STUXNET was unleashed on Iran in 2010 and then we were in need of an agreement in 2016. How long do we expect any of that to last?

I'm not sure why you would think one computer virus was expected to permanently end Iran's nuclear program.  It's certainly not comparable to an international treaty.

As far as the rest goes:

How much do you trust that country? I was growing up during the hostage crisis and I bet many of you were not alive or old enough to remember. The middle east has long memories and Iran has a serious distaste for us and Israel. They top my list of countries that I don't trust. At least with Russia I always had faith in avoidance of mutual destruction. The Ayatollah has no such concern.

Iran has funded more terrorist's against the US ( as well as others) than anyone. Their "Death to America" montra has never been hidden by their leaders. They have no concern for losing their lives as long as they destroy Israel and America.

You both are repeating the same old "regime change" mentality that got us into Iraq.  Republicans have been lusting for war with Iran for decades, using the same "terrorism" arguments you're putting forth now.  The JCPOA eliminated the "They are trying to get nukes" argument... which is exactly why Trump had to end it.  Doing so created the excuse Republicans needed to start the war with Iran they desperately want.

[CF DolFan]

I know you like to be a revisionist but every U.S. president since President Bill Clinton—Democrat or Republican has agreed on one thing and that's Iran must never get a nuclear weapon. You can also add Hillary Clinton to the mix.

[Fau Teixeira]

I know you like to be a revisionist but every U.S. president since President Bill Clinton—Democrat or Republican has agreed on one thing and that's Iran must never get a nuclear weapon. You can also add Hillary Clinton to the mix.

I don't think that's up for debate,  Obama even signed an agreement with Iran to accomplish just that.  Which apparently Iran was complying with according to every report I've ever seen. But Trump decided to rip apart that agreement because reasons i guess.

[CF DolFan]

Iran wasn't complying. They were constantly giving UN inspectors the run around.

[Spider-Dan]

Iraq wasn't complying. They were constantly giving UN inspectors the run around.

You can literally just reuse the same talking points from 2003 by just swapping the names.  Iran has yellow cake!

Republicans were always going find an excuse to start a war with Iran.  Again, they have desperately wanted this for decades.  And we can see this in the arguments that both Phishfan (perhaps insincerely) and you have put forward: Iran needs to be dealt with because they are terrorists who hate America.  "Nuclear weapons" are just a pretense.

[Dave Gray]

I am not going to make a big deal out of whether or not this worked.  I don't think we should evaluate the judgement on whether to strike on whether or not the actual result had the intended effect.

But I do think we should look at what we knew, whether the plan made sense, who was involved, and how we are reporting in.  I'm universally unhappy with all of this.  I am very concerned that Trump's information (through Tulsi) is either compromised, where he doesn't believe her or he believes her and is going against her anyway.  I know that authoritarians don't really care, but i care.  I assume the plan was sound -- no reason to believe the military didn't carry it out properly, but I'm also greatly bothered that Trump came out to address the people immediately and he was intentionally full of shit.  I know that Trump's a liar, but are we really lying to the Americans about nuclear threats around the world?  That's a problem.

So, to come out and say that their nuclear program was completely obliterated -- what does that mean for us if (and it sounds like when) it's not?  How do we navigate that?