What has it achieved??

For many years NitanHitler and his New Nazis have been telling us Iran is only months from having the bomb!

Everyone knew it was true.

Except THE MAGA ARSEHOLE!

He dropped Americas’s reputation into the gutter.

Made absolutely sure there is no doubt who his masters are!

Haven't you heard? The trumpster himself, along with his alcoholic womanizing secretary of defense done told you twice: Iran's nuclear proliferation program has been OBLITERATED!!!!!

Get with the program.

Plus they're still telling us that the 2020 election was stolen.

Saeed,

I have a dumb hypothetical question I'd just like to run by you. Let's say some country, Let's call them "Lower Moldovia", says for twenty years that they want to wipe UAE off the face of the earth, but that's not a real worry because Lower Moldovia has no real effective army or sufficient weapons to do so, but boy do they hate UAE. But then, Lower Moldovia starts cooperating with other countries who agree to share nuclear technology with Lower Moldovia and Lower Moldovia starts to hire nuclear scientists to develop a nuclear weapon, and oh by the way they have developed ballistic missile technology capable of delivering a payload to UAE to kill its citizens, just not nuclear yet. All the while chanting "Death to UAE".

Now UAE finds out Lower Moldovia is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon with its missile technology that could in fact mean "Death to UAE." What would you do? Beg, plead, or eliminate the threat.

I thought so.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Saeed,

I have a dumb hypothetical question I'd just like to run by you. Let's say some country, Let's call them "Lower Moldovia", says for twenty years that they want to wipe UAE off the face of the earth, but that's not a real worry because Lower Moldovia has no real effective army or sufficient weapons to do so, but boy do they hate UAE. But then, Lower Moldovia starts cooperating with other countries who agree to share nuclear technology with Lower Moldovia and Lower Moldovia starts to hire nuclear scientists to develop a nuclear weapon, and oh by the way they have developed ballistic missile technology capable of delivering a payload to UAE to kill its citizens, just not nuclear yet. All the while chanting "Death to UAE".

Now UAE finds out Lower Moldovia is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon with its missile technology that could in fact mean "Death to UAE." What would you do? Beg, plead, or eliminate the threat.

I thought so.

Pointless question.

Why did you supply Israel with plutonium so they can make nuclear weapons?

Israel has been at war with its neighbors from the day it was illegally created.

And has been expanding like a cancer ever since.

Your own stupid puppet of a president is supporting them kick the last of the Palestinians from their last hangout, the virtual concentration camp, Gaza!

Do you honestly blame the Palestinians for fighting the illegal occupiers of their homeland?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Saeed,

I have a dumb hypothetical question I'd just like to run by you. Let's say some country, Let's call them "Lower Moldovia", says for twenty years that they want to wipe UAE off the face of the earth, but that's not a real worry because Lower Moldovia has no real effective army or sufficient weapons to do so, but boy do they hate UAE. But then, Lower Moldovia starts cooperating with other countries who agree to share nuclear technology with Lower Moldovia and Lower Moldovia starts to hire nuclear scientists to develop a nuclear weapon, and oh by the way they have developed ballistic missile technology capable of delivering a payload to UAE to kill its citizens, just not nuclear yet. All the while chanting "Death to UAE".

Now UAE finds out Lower Moldovia is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon with its missile technology that could in fact mean "Death to UAE." What would you do? Beg, plead, or eliminate the threat.

I thought so.

Pointless question.

Why did you supply Israel with plutonium so they can make nuclear weapons?

Israel has been at war with its neighbors from the day it was illegally created.

And has been expanding like a cancer ever since.

Your own stupid puppet of a president is supporting them kick the last of the Palestinians from their last hangout, the virtual concentration camp, Gaza!

Do you honestly blame the Palestinians for fighting the illegal occupiers of their homeland?

It's not a pointless question, it's a question you don't want to answer.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Saeed,

I have a dumb hypothetical question I'd just like to run by you. Let's say some country, Let's call them "Lower Moldovia", says for twenty years that they want to wipe UAE off the face of the earth, but that's not a real worry because Lower Moldovia has no real effective army or sufficient weapons to do so, but boy do they hate UAE. But then, Lower Moldovia starts cooperating with other countries who agree to share nuclear technology with Lower Moldovia and Lower Moldovia starts to hire nuclear scientists to develop a nuclear weapon, and oh by the way they have developed ballistic missile technology capable of delivering a payload to UAE to kill its citizens, just not nuclear yet. All the while chanting "Death to UAE".

Now UAE finds out Lower Moldovia is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon with its missile technology that could in fact mean "Death to UAE." What would you do? Beg, plead, or eliminate the threat.

I thought so.

Pointless question.

Why did you supply Israel with plutonium so they can make nuclear weapons?

Israel has been at war with its neighbors from the day it was illegally created.

And has been expanding like a cancer ever since.

Your own stupid puppet of a president is supporting them kick the last of the Palestinians from their last hangout, the virtual concentration camp, Gaza!

Do you honestly blame the Palestinians for fighting the illegal occupiers of their homeland?

It's not a pointless question, it's a question you don't want to answer.

I will.

As soon you answer why were the Palestinians are made to pay for the crimes of Germany?

They are not. They are being made to pay for the crimes of Hamas and wars to destroy Israel by Islamic States they lost.

One can question the rational or benefit of the Iran strike.

However, the President’s actions were legal.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
They are not. They are being made to pay for the crimes of Hamas and wars to destroy Israel by Islamic States they lost.

One can question the rational or benefit of the Iran strike.

However, the President’s actions were legal.

Bloody hell!

You knowledge of history tells me you have an IQ of a snapping turtle!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Saeed,

I have a dumb hypothetical question I'd just like to run by you. Let's say some country, Let's call them "Lower Moldovia", says for twenty years that they want to wipe UAE off the face of the earth, but that's not a real worry because Lower Moldovia has no real effective army or sufficient weapons to do so, but boy do they hate UAE. But then, Lower Moldovia starts cooperating with other countries who agree to share nuclear technology with Lower Moldovia and Lower Moldovia starts to hire nuclear scientists to develop a nuclear weapon, and oh by the way they have developed ballistic missile technology capable of delivering a payload to UAE to kill its citizens, just not nuclear yet. All the while chanting "Death to UAE".

Now UAE finds out Lower Moldovia is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon with its missile technology that could in fact mean "Death to UAE." What would you do? Beg, plead, or eliminate the threat.

I thought so.

Pointless question.

Why did you supply Israel with plutonium so they can make nuclear weapons?

Israel has been at war with its neighbors from the day it was illegally created.

And has been expanding like a cancer ever since.

Your own stupid puppet of a president is supporting them kick the last of the Palestinians from their last hangout, the virtual concentration camp, Gaza!

Do you honestly blame the Palestinians for fighting the illegal occupiers of their homeland?

It's not a pointless question, it's a question you don't want to answer.

I will.

As soon you answer why were the Palestinians are made to pay for the crimes of Germany?

Shit, Saeed. I don't know. Bad timing? Because these people are going to fight no matter what? Because Israel is the only friend the US has in the area and we need them to represent our interests?

HAMAS does itself no favors when it massacres hundreds of innocent people in a sneak attack. The Israeli response to that can be judged in a lot of different ways. I'd be in favor of feeding Hamas smoke. What else can Israel possibly do. When Japan sneak attacked the United States, we responded by ramping up and kicking the shit out of the Japanese. I can't even imagine what the US response would be to some sort of a terrorist attack that killed 1200 Americans. Same as 9/11, I guess. We'd probably be back to that 20 year Middle Eastern War that you post about incessantly.

Saeed, I answered your question.

Your turn.

Something besides the US being the great evil empire please.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
They are not. They are being made to pay for the crimes of Hamas and wars to destroy Israel by Islamic States they lost.

One can question the rational or benefit of the Iran strike.

However, the President’s actions were legal.

Bloody hell!

You knowledge of history tells me you have an IQ of a snapping turtle!

Your refusal to admit the truth of this matter tells everyone your prejudices of the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Saeed,

I have a dumb hypothetical question I'd just like to run by you. Let's say some country, Let's call them "Lower Moldovia", says for twenty years that they want to wipe UAE off the face of the earth, but that's not a real worry because Lower Moldovia has no real effective army or sufficient weapons to do so, but boy do they hate UAE. But then, Lower Moldovia starts cooperating with other countries who agree to share nuclear technology with Lower Moldovia and Lower Moldovia starts to hire nuclear scientists to develop a nuclear weapon, and oh by the way they have developed ballistic missile technology capable of delivering a payload to UAE to kill its citizens, just not nuclear yet. All the while chanting "Death to UAE".

Now UAE finds out Lower Moldovia is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon with its missile technology that could in fact mean "Death to UAE." What would you do? Beg, plead, or eliminate the threat.

I thought so.

Pointless question.

Why did you supply Israel with plutonium so they can make nuclear weapons?

Israel has been at war with its neighbors from the day it was illegally created.

And has been expanding like a cancer ever since.

Your own stupid puppet of a president is supporting them kick the last of the Palestinians from their last hangout, the virtual concentration camp, Gaza!

Do you honestly blame the Palestinians for fighting the illegal occupiers of their homeland?

It's not a pointless question, it's a question you don't want to answer.

I will.

As soon you answer why were the Palestinians are made to pay for the crimes of Germany?

Shit, Saeed. I don't know. Bad timing? Because these people are going to fight no matter what? Because Israel is the only friend the US has in the area and we need them to represent our interests?

HAMAS does itself no favors when it massacres hundreds of innocent people in a sneak attack. The Israeli response to that can be judged in a lot of different ways. When Japan sneak attacked the United States, we responded by ramping up and kicking the shit out of the Japanese. I can't even imagine what the US response would be to some sort of a terrorist attack that killed 1200 Americans. Same as 9/11, I guess. We'd probably be back to that 20 year Middle Eastern War that you post about incessantly.

I would hope we would have learned from 9/11 with the response bring as follows: 1) an actual declaration of war, 2) overwhelming US force on the host government glassing the place, 3) and leave and date them to make us come back. Knowing full well in 15 or so years we might.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Saeed,

I have a dumb hypothetical question I'd just like to run by you. Let's say some country, Let's call them "Lower Moldovia", says for twenty years that they want to wipe UAE off the face of the earth, but that's not a real worry because Lower Moldovia has no real effective army or sufficient weapons to do so, but boy do they hate UAE. But then, Lower Moldovia starts cooperating with other countries who agree to share nuclear technology with Lower Moldovia and Lower Moldovia starts to hire nuclear scientists to develop a nuclear weapon, and oh by the way they have developed ballistic missile technology capable of delivering a payload to UAE to kill its citizens, just not nuclear yet. All the while chanting "Death to UAE".

Now UAE finds out Lower Moldovia is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon with its missile technology that could in fact mean "Death to UAE." What would you do? Beg, plead, or eliminate the threat.

I thought so.

Pointless question.

Why did you supply Israel with plutonium so they can make nuclear weapons?

Israel has been at war with its neighbors from the day it was illegally created.

And has been expanding like a cancer ever since.

Your own stupid puppet of a president is supporting them kick the last of the Palestinians from their last hangout, the virtual concentration camp, Gaza!

Do you honestly blame the Palestinians for fighting the illegal occupiers of their homeland?

It's not a pointless question, it's a question you don't want to answer.

Exactly correct!

The Ottoman s.... That actually owned the Palestine picked the wrong side and lost to the British..... So the British took control of the Palestinian levant, to do with as they wished.....

Notice that saeed doesn't whine even a little bit about the British giving his family dubai?

He doesn't whine about the west discovering oil and developing it in the land the British gave his family?????

I know, I know, death to america......


.

Twelve days of war between Israel and Iran left a trail of devastation across both countries. Yet the clearest takeaway is this: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bold gamble failed. Despite launching one of the most audacious military campaigns in Israel’s history, the war was short, punishing, and ultimately fell far short of its declared aims.
It began with a meticulously planned Israeli offensive. Years of intelligence work culminated in a wave of covert operations—drones assembled inside Iran, sleeper cells detonating bombs, and targeted assassinations of top military figures and scientists. These were followed by conventional airstrikes on military bases and nuclear facilities such as Natanz and Fordow. But Israel’s targets extended well beyond strategic infrastructure. Residential neighborhoods, prisons, media offices, and police stations were also hit, pointing to a broader strategy aimed at sowing chaos and igniting internal unrest.
The human toll was staggering. In Iran, at least 610 people were killed, including 49 women, 13 children, and five health care workers. Another 4,746 were injured, among them 20 health care workers. Medical infrastructure also suffered significant damage, with hospitals, ambulances, and emergency facilities hit. In Israel, Iranian missile and drone strikes killed at least 28 people and injured over 3,200. More than 9,000 Israelis were displaced, and dozens of homes and public buildings were damaged or destroyed.
As the dust settles, the true extent of the damage inside Iran remains unclear. This lack of clarity reveals a core dilemma for Israel and its U.S. allies: Military power alone cannot guarantee strategic success.
Despite Netanyahu’s vow to dismantle Iran’s missile and nuclear programs, and his thinly veiled hope that regime change would follow, Iran responded swiftly. Missiles were launched at Israeli cities and strategic targets. After the United States joined the conflict by bombing Iran’s nuclear sites, Tehran escalated further by striking Al Udeid Air Base, a U.S. military installation in Qatar, drawing Washington deeper into the crisis. Though telegraphed and limited in impact, the strike on Al Udeid sent a deliberate message: Iran could raise the stakes beyond its borders.
Within just 12 days of Israel’s initial strike, a cease-fire was reached under opaque terms, leaving the region in a state of uneasy pause.
There is no question that Israel achieved notable tactical successes, inflicting serious damage on Iran’s military command and scientific infrastructure. But strategic objectives carry greater weight. Based on available evidence, Netanyahu’s core goals—undermining Iran’s deterrence and meaningfully rolling back the elements of its nuclear program that pose the greatest proliferation risk—remain unmet.
One of the most significant failures lies in the nuclear file. There is no confirmation that Iran’s nuclear breakout capacity has been meaningfully degraded. While Trump administration officials have insisted that the strikes set Iran’s program back by years, early U.S. and European intelligence assessments suggest otherwise. Satellite imagery taken prior to the strikes showed trucks potentially removing sensitive equipment from key sites, and Iran had already announced the construction of a new, secret, and hardened enrichment facility that may be untouched. More critically, Iran’s stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium and its advanced centrifuges—the core ingredients for developing a nuclear weapon—appear to remain intact. As many analysts warned before the war, verifying serious damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure is impossible without on-the-ground inspections or a full-scale invasion. In the absence of either, Iran’s nuclear program is entering a far more opaque and unpredictable phase.
This opacity is already taking shape. Just two days after U.S. President Donald Trump announced the cease-fire, Iran’s parliament passed legislation to suspend cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. One lawmaker offered a revealing explanation: “Why was our nuclear facility attacked and you remained silent? Why did you give the green light for these actions? Today, they want to come again and conduct inspections to determine which sites were damaged and which were not so they can attack them again.” In response, Tehran appears set to embrace a strategy of “nuclear ambiguity,” similar to the posture Israel itself has long maintained—refusing to clarify the scope of its nuclear capabilities and denying access to inspectors.
This marks a dangerous new chapter. By attacking nuclear sites while continuing to demand inspections and sanctions, the United States and Israel have undermined the logic of nonproliferation diplomacy. Ironically, their actions may have done more to normalize the idea of an Iranian nuclear weapon than any step taken by Tehran itself.
While the nuclear outcome is uncertain, Iran’s missile capabilities were demonstrated with unmistakable clarity. Its ballistic missiles successfully penetrated Israeli and U.S. air defenses, targeting military bases, intelligence compounds, oil refineries, and research centers. Although Israeli censorship limited public reporting, more than 41,000 compensation claims were filed for war-related damage.
The material and economic costs were also significant. Ben Gurion Airport was shut down, economic activity slowed dramatically, and capital flight increased. Missile defense systems such as Arrow and THAAD were heavily depleted, with estimates indicating that Israel used at least $500 million worth of U.S. THAAD interceptors. Former Trump advisor Steve Bannon bluntly asserted that the cease-fire was necessary to “save Israel,” which he said was absorbing “brutal hits” and running low on defenses. Trump himself admitted that Israel had been hit “very hard” and, in the same press appearance, announced that China would be allowed to purchase Iranian oil to help Iran “get back into shape.”
Iran’s missile strikes also appeared deliberately calibrated. Following an Israeli drone strike targeting an Iranian oil refinery in the South Pars gas field, Iran responded by targeting a refinery in Haifa. After Israeli airstrikes targeted Iranian research centers suspected of involvement in nuclear activities, Iran retaliated by striking the Weizmann Institute of Science near Tel Aviv—a facility long suspected of playing a role in Israel’s own nuclear research. Through these reciprocal attacks, Iran aimed to signal its capacity for measured retaliation and to reinforce its deterrence posture. Notably, both sides refrained from targeting energy infrastructure after the initial exchange.
Beyond the battlefield, the war had significant social and political consequences inside Iran. Rather than sparking regime collapse, it led to a visible surge in nationalist sentiment. For a society long polarized by repression and economic suffering, the war became a unifying moment—not around the Islamic Republic itself but around the idea of defending the nation from foreign aggression.
Timing compounded this sense of national solidarity. The war came just as Iran was engaged in nuclear negotiations with the Trump administration. Many Iranians had hoped that the recent election of reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian, who campaigned on diplomacy and economic recovery, would lead to meaningful progress. Instead, they saw their country bombed while seeking compromise.
In response, a broad cross-section of Iranian society—from artists and athletes to both religious and secular Iranians, including many from Gen Z—mobilized to support one another. Civilians opened their homes to the displaced. The deaths of children, doctors, and ordinary people from indiscriminate Israeli strikes reinforced a perception that this war was not about liberating Iranians but about breaking apart the country.
The long-held belief by many in Washington that Iran’s government only needs one final external push to fall has been thoroughly discredited. Netanyahu launched this war to eliminate the strategic challenge posed by Iran. Instead, he exposed Israel’s vulnerabilities, intensified Iranian nationalism, and failed to destroy Iran’s core military and nuclear capabilities.
Paradoxically, the war may end up bolstering Iran’s position both regionally and diplomatically. While Trump and his envoy Steve Witkoff continue to insist that Iran must abandon all uranium enrichment, Tehran has remained firm that enrichment is nonnegotiable. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has publicly reaffirmed that Iran will never give up this right. At the same time, Trump has suggested a willingness to ease sanctions and even allow Chinese purchases of Iranian oil, framing this as part of “great progress” toward regional calm.
These mixed signals reflect a deeper reality: Both Washington and Tehran appear increasingly focused on stabilizing the situation rather than resolving the underlying nuclear dispute. According to CNN, the Trump administration has been engaged in behind-the-scenes talks—some held even during the height of the war—that propose up to $30 billion in investment for a civilian nuclear program in Iran, contingent on Iran forgoing enrichment. These proposals also include sanctions relief and access to frozen Iranian funds. While U.S. officials maintain that zero enrichment is a red line, the push for a new deal suggests a shift in priorities.
In practice, both sides may now be willing to accept strategic ambiguity. Rather than demanding the dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure that Trump claims is already destroyed, the United States appears open to de-escalation through diplomacy and economic incentives. For its part, Iran seems content to preserve its existing capabilities in an opaque manner while avoiding further escalation. This mutual pragmatism may allow for de-escalation, but it leaves the core nuclear issue unresolved—and potentially more dangerous in the long run.

Thanks Saeed, I sent this around to my family and friends. Brian

Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

Does "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" not register with you?
Nuclear weapon, large army, missiles directed at US bases and Israel- and they are not a threat??

The US should treat Iran that way Gaza now looks...

The world would applaud including most peace loving Arabs and Muslims...

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

Since your relationship with Iran is "fantastic", will they be returning control of Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs to the UAE? Asking for a friend.

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

Does "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" not register with you?
Nuclear weapon, large army, missiles directed at US bases and Israel- and they are not a threat??

The US should treat Iran that way Gaza now looks...

The world would applaud including most peace loving Arabs and Muslims...

They talk.

Israel and their puppet, America, do the killing!

You lot must be the most stupid people on earth!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

Iran has never been a threat to anyone? I’m pretty sure a few hundred thousand dead Iraqis would disagree with you. And that was well before Bush 1 or 2….

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

Does "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" not register with you?
Nuclear weapon, large army, missiles directed at US bases and Israel- and they are not a threat??

The US should treat Iran that way Gaza now looks...

The world would applaud including most peace loving Arabs and Muslims...

... but one day we are told the US does not want to be the worlds policeman and you should bring all your troops home but the next you suddenly do again ...

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

Does "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" not register with you?
Nuclear weapon, large army, missiles directed at US bases and Israel- and they are not a threat??

The US should treat Iran that way Gaza now looks...

The world would applaud including most peace loving Arabs and Muslims...

... but one day we are told the US does not want to be the worlds policeman and you should bring all your troops home but the next you suddenly do again ...

carrying out a grudge match is somehow different than being world cops, though

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
Agree that this may be more dangerous in the long run unless and until there is either a regime change in Iran or a verifiable nuclear protocol. That requires capitulation by Iran. UAE should be the loudest cheerleader for one of those results. Otherwise, Iran is a threat to the entire region.

Iran was never a threat to anyone.

Until you lot intervened!

We have a fantastic relationship with Iran for hundreds of years.

Iran has never been a threat to anyone? I’m pretty sure a few hundred thousand dead Iraqis would disagree with you. And that was well before Bush 1 or 2….

Compare that to what you stupid lot do?

How many MILLIONS have YOU killed in your senseless wars and invasions??

Might be a good idea to look in the mirror when you talk about crimes against humanity!

Iran was never a threat to anyone?

I'm sorry, that's a joke. They funded multiple terrorist organizations and want to end the USA and Israel. They funded the taking of innocent civilian hostages, many of whom their proxies killed. They have funded attacks on shipping and they are a menace to their own people. So don't ask me to cry a river for the current Iranian government. They need to go and I hope the Iranian people do that soon and if force is necessary, I hope we will support them.