144. With the state of the world right now, I'm more concerned with nukes in Trump's and Hegseth's hands than Iran's.

#160 | Posted by Dbt2

So, let's sum up

Iran will now be pursuing nukes

Saudi Arabia will be pursuing nukes

Likely Eygpt will pursue nukes, probably Turkey too.

How does this look now?

Dropping the bunker busters? Are you comfortable with Iran getting nuclear weapons?
#144 | Posted by BillJohnson
We dropped those, over a year ago. Did we fail?
We must have, or why are we bombimg them again.

#158 | Posted by snoofy

To be clear that was a step no president has taken in 47 years-attacking Iran directly.

How is that working out for us?

BTW it was Netanyahu's wet dream. To get the US intertwined with Israel.

Israel knows that if he got the US to participate in active bombing of Iran that moving forward if THEY attack Iran, Iran will now attack US. So we are now locked into Israel's foreign policy and military actions.

Only Piggy was too stupid to realize he was being played.

These are simple facts btw

Sitz one thing piggy cares about is being seen as a loser. He can hide wounded; he can lie about the strait being open. He cannot lie or hide the deaths of dozens of servicemembers. That is a number he cannot obfuscate (even though he is trying by designating the recent deaths unrelated to the Iran war deaths in March).

that is why Piggy taco'd last month.

he was ready to accelerate the bombing.

Iran hit Jordan and killed several servicemembers

It got through to Piggy that a. Iran could and would hit our bases throughout the ME if he went through with the bombing, b. there was nothing we could do about it.

So, he Taco'd

There has been a LOT of reporting to that end.

"Nothing is ever really settled when you're dealing with chronic liars."

Enough about President Piggy.

On the surface I have said over and over dealing with Iran is evitable.

Then you're an idiot

Plenty of adversaries have become allies through diplomacy

Plenty of conflicts have been resolved through negotiation

WE HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH IRAN THAT KEPT IRAN FROM GETTING NUKES.

That was achieved via diplomacy and negotiation

It's all so subjective and based on knowledge the administration is aware of that we aren't.

But you know what bill, you use this -------- all the time.

Iran pursuing a nuke is not "subjective"

there are experts who understand and track this sort of thing.

Iran's actions vis a vis nukes or missiles etc. work within systems.

Those systems have metrics which can be evaluated.

Many of those metrics are publicly available.

The FACT is that Iran gave up its enriched uranium during the JCPOA

They were abiding by the restrictions of the JCPOA

Independent monitors verified that Iran was abiding

Those are facts

Iran's actions since then are the logical, rational response to dangerous neighbors.

Iran has been repeatedly attacked by Israel and now the US

Iran is hearing President Piggy describe destroying Iran back to the stone ages

Iran is witnessing President Piggy giving Saudi Arabia nuclear technology.

It is rational for Iran to pursue nukes at this point.

Truth,
"Bill was America in the right to attack Iran"
I wouldn't word your question with "right to attack".
I would say was anything the US did to Iran "justified"?
It would depend on what you're talking about.
Dropping the bunker busters? Are you comfortable with Iran getting nuclear weapons?
It's all so subjective and based on knowledge the administration is aware of that we aren't.
I can guess there is nothing you would agree was justified so I don't know why you're really wanting me to answer it.

#144 | Posted by BillJohnson

No Bill, I asked you a simple, straightforward question.

Here it is again

Bill was America in the right to attack Iran without notice or declaration during negotiations with a sneak attack that murdered the Iranian leader in his home with his family around him?

You say this was justified.

I say your conclusions are immoral, illegal, unjust, unjustifiable.

And why we deserve to suffer.

FDR rightfully condemned Japan for the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor

What we did was infinitely worse.

Japan at least TRIED to put a DoW before FDR prior to the attack. Japan attacked military bases.

We did neither.

Anyone who cannot understand the essential right and wrong of this is beyond saving.

This refers to the attack on February 28th, 2026

Was it justified? If so what is the justification?

To prevent

When the famine hits it lands in poor countries like Iran. It's not new for them. Western powers starved them in 1942-43. There was food for Westerners, but not Persians.

#141 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-08-29 05:07 PM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

And the MAGA crowd doesn't care about refugees unless they wind up on the US-Mexico border. Us Dems aren't letting them in either, they can wait in Mexico and eventually get processed maybe sometime in the next decade.

#142 | Posted by sitzkrieg

So, America should take zero responsibility for the famine that our illegal war of aggression will cause?

That is the attitude of a sociopath.

The poor of Africa and SA and the far east did not choose this.

Less than 20% of the global nat gas, much of which gets redirected. That goes to Asia anyways, China, Iran's #1 backer. So if nothing moves through the Strait, Iran's allies are the ones that starve. The strategic result is more hardened, buried pipelines. Phosphorous moves in a slurry through pipelines. Dry bulk fertilizer gets redirected through multi-modal shipping. The fertilizer plants move to the Eastern receiving end of ADCOP and Petroline.
What kind of child thinks the Sunni are going to let their economies be held hostage by Shia in the long run?

#137 | Posted by sitzkrieg

What kind of idiot thinks taking 30 or 20 or even 10% of the world's fertilizer supply offline is not going to cause widespread famine?

A year or 2 from now magat scum will be whining about the mass influx of refugees and wonder why

Iran's "vast stockpile of missiles" doesn't exist anymore. It's a very modest stockpile of missiles with a launch rate that went from shock and awe with hundreds of launches to < 10 missile volleys. Nobody is exempt from the depleted burn rate curve.

#138 | Posted by sitzkrieg

It took Iran how many missiles to get Piggy to taco last month during tit-for-tat?

It took a few hitting the base in Jordan killing US troops for Piggy to turn tail and run.

You don't understand the asymmetric warfare in play, clearly.

BTW even US intelligence analysis says Iran has 70% of their prewar levels. I suspect much higher.

Doesn't include drones