• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

War with Iran is probably our best option

JANFU

JANFU

Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
59,347
Reaction score
38,890
Location
Best Coast Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
War with Iran is probably our best option - The Washington Post

The logical flaw in the indictment of a looming “very bad” nuclear deal with Iran that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered before Congress this month was his claim that we could secure a “good deal” by calling Iran’s bluff and imposing tougher sanctions. The Iranian regime that Netanyahu described so vividly — violent, rapacious, devious and redolent with hatred for Israel and the United States — is bound to continue its quest for nuclear weapons by refusing any “good deal” or by cheating.

Nonetheless, we might absorb some strikes. Wrenchingly, that might be the price of averting the heavier losses that we and others would suffer in the larger Middle Eastern conflagration that is the likely outcome of Iran’s drive to the bomb. Were Iran, which is already embroiled in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Gaza, further emboldened by becoming a “nuclear threshold state,” it would probably overreach, kindling bigger wars — with Israel, Arab states or both. The United States would probably be drawn in, just as we have been in many other wars from which we had hoped to remain aloof.
Click to expand...

Thoughts on war with Iran?
 
I can see the possibility and even merits of a preemptive strikes to deter them from achieving nuclear capabilities, but not so much in the case of an actual ground war and ensuing occupation in order to bring about a successful transition and regime change. Even the more hawkish among us seem to shy away from that idea. I would most definitely support the former though, for the sake of the ME as a whole and even Iranians themselves.
 
War with Iran is probably our best option - The Washington Post

Sanctions may have induced Iran to enter negotiations, but they have not persuaded it to abandon its quest for nuclear weapons. Nor would the stiffer sanctions that Netanyahu advocates bring a different result. Sanctions could succeed if they caused the regime to fall; the end of communism in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, and of apartheid in South Africa, led to the abandonment of nuclear weapons in those states. But since 2009, there have been few signs of rebellion in Tehran.

Nonetheless, we might absorb some strikes. Wrenchingly, that might be the price of averting the heavier losses that we and others would suffer in the larger Middle Eastern conflagration that is the likely outcome of Iran’s drive to the bomb. Were Iran, which is already embroiled in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Gaza, further emboldened by becoming a “nuclear threshold state,” it would probably overreach, kindling bigger wars — with Israel, Arab states or both. The United States would probably be drawn in, just as we have been in many other wars from which we had hoped to remain aloof.
Click to expand...

Yes, the US with NATO could do this. Or the US could do this alone. That would read in the ME as the US attacking another Muslim country.
So NATO and Saudi, the chicken **** ****ers, who sit and wait for others to do the blood work, along with others should be at the forefront.
Thoughts are?
For a war?
Against a War
Continued sanctions in the event of a bad deal?
And if Intel shows a break out then War.
And a declaration of War falls under Congress.
What do you think?
 
Last edited:
Pakistan has had nukes for decades, and haven't used them. North Korea has nukes and aren't using them. Merely having nuclear capabilities does not constitute a direct threat. We have absolutely no business having a war with Iran. We have nothing at all to gain. We only have things to lose.
 
I asked for this to be deleted- 1st wrong area - next a duplicate thread. Bad day.
Thanks
 
JANFU said:
War with Iran is probably our best option - The Washington Post



Let the false accusations fly and the fear mongering begin and we'll see how long it takes Americans to line up behind the next failed military adventure, only to realize it was stupid after the fact, again. I wonder if Germany, China, the UK, France and Russia all agree that another middle eastern war has any merit?

Thoughts on war with Iran?
Click to expand...

Let the false accusations fly and the fear mongering begin, and we'll see how long it takes Americans to line up behind the next failed military adventurism, only to realize it was stupid after the fact, again? I wonder if Germany, France, the UK, Russia and China all think war is the best bet with Iran??
 
tell saudi to deal with it if they want their biggest customer still
 
Paschendale said:
Pakistan has had nukes for decades, and haven't used them. North Korea has nukes and aren't using them. Merely having nuclear capabilities does not constitute a direct threat. We have absolutely no business having a war with Iran. We have nothing at all to gain. We only have things to lose.
Click to expand...

Better watch out for those North Korean nukes! I think they might have the power to obliterate my back yard!
 
Moderator's Warning:
Dupe thread topics merged.



Moderator's Warning:
This thread is now in the ME forum. Be warned, all ME M/L rules apply from here forward.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom