Quote (ferdia @ 28 Feb 2026 19:06)

It goes back to the birth of nuclear weapons. The US had a moment where it mulled over nuking Russia before Russia got nukes. They determined it was not viable, noting the technology was there and all that would happen is that the Russians would come out of the Ural Mountains 7 years later and nuke the US in return. The same calculation was had when China was getting Nukes and the US and Russia made the same decision - not to intervene. While the US and Russia were bickering more and more countries got nukes. That made the US and Russia pause. They then worked together to stop Nuclear proliferation.

The US had a DEAL with Iran, whereby Iran agreed not to build nukes. Iran is a religious country and also had a religious decree not to build a weapon. The US, under Trump, BROKE that Deal, and Europe also BROKE that deal. The US has made the calculation for Iran, that it will destroy Iran to stop them from getting a nuke forever. It can easily be argued that this will simply hasten the urgency for Iran to get a nuclear arsenal. Depending on how bad it gets then...lets see what the FAFO looks like. The US and Israel can try to say in the future (if Iran uses nukes or what not) that Iran carried out an unprovoked attack but well, what is today if not an unprovoked attack.

The US has the ability to wage war on Iran for max 2 weeks. based on current assets in the region. so this is not a land invasion. its simply getting a base ball bat and smashing someones house, and killing a few family members. not sure how thats expected to result in a Pro American (or Pro Israeli) government in Iran.

Basically the Deal was, Iran would not get nukes and in response the US would not attack Iran. so now the US has twice attacked Iran in the space of a year. So yea, the obvious thing for Iran now is to get as many nukes as possible. From a logic standpoint.

Quote (Many_Names @ Feb 28 2026 05:37pm)

It goes to nothing
jihadist proved beyond any reasonable doubt they cant be trusted.

Quote (ferdia @ 28 Feb 2026 19:46)

can you please go back to using chatgpt. seriously.

the term Jihadist stems from the 1980's, with some earlier references in the 1960's, ultimately - > the term was coined AFTER the US destroyed Iran's democracy, it grew AFTER the US invited Iraq to wage war on Iran. I dont understand where the trust comes in? Speaking about trust, you might have missed it, but the US and Iran had a DEAL which the US BROKE. There are quite a few incidents which raise the whole trust issue - with the US.

Now I know what your trying to say but sorry I am not giving you a pass. here:

From an Israeli perspective, Iran’s government has a history of hostility. Since the 1980s, Iran has supported proxies (terrorists) in the region that have carried out (terrorist) attacks against Israel. Given this volatile history, Israeli policymakers see (and have) little reason to place trust in Iran’s intentions or commitments.

safe from being refuted.

https://i.imgur.com/y4pArY2.png

Quote (gnarjay @ Feb 28 2026 12:38pm)

Iran has a right to defend herself