Iran and possible bombing etc
Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2026 5:10 pm
What happened wirh the last bombing shit? Was it a
limp d!@# effort and not meaningful?
limp d!@# effort and not meaningful?
I agree we’re not in danger now. A few years ago, Iran had effective control of Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, supported terrorists in Gaza and Yemen, threatening friendly nations and the world oil supply, were refining uranium, and provided weapons that killed civilians in Ukraine (they’re still doing the last one). Pretending they didn’t put us in danger is heedless “America first” isolationism.
We had an effective agreement in place for Iran to drastically cut their nuclear program.jarnon wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 10:10 amI agree we’re not in danger now. A few years ago, Iran had effective control of Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, supported terrorists in Gaza and Yemen, threatening friendly nations and the world oil supply, were refining uranium, and provided weapons that killed civilians in Ukraine (they’re still doing the last one). Pretending they didn’t put us in danger is heedless “America first” isolationism.
Your definition of "effective" must come from the brochures you recieved from Phizer, Moderna, and J&J in 2020.Weyoun wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 11:31 amWe had an effective agreement in place for Iran to drastically cut their nuclear program.jarnon wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 10:10 amI agree we’re not in danger now. A few years ago, Iran had effective control of Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, supported terrorists in Gaza and Yemen, threatening friendly nations and the world oil supply, were refining uranium, and provided weapons that killed civilians in Ukraine (they’re still doing the last one). Pretending they didn’t put us in danger is heedless “America first” isolationism.
Picky picky picky.jarnon wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 10:10 amI agree we’re not in danger now. A few years ago, Iran had effective control of Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, supported terrorists in Gaza and Yemen, threatening friendly nations and the world oil supply, were refining uranium, and provided weapons that killed civilians in Ukraine (they’re still doing the last one). Pretending they didn’t put us in danger is heedless “America first” isolationism.
Now that's funny I don't care...etcetcetcBackInTex wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 3:37 pmYour definition of "effective" must come from the brochures you recieved from Phizer, Moderna, and J&J in 2020.Weyoun wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 11:31 amWe had an effective agreement in place for Iran to drastically cut their nuclear program.jarnon wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 10:10 amI agree we’re not in danger now. A few years ago, Iran had effective control of Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq, supported terrorists in Gaza and Yemen, threatening friendly nations and the world oil supply, were refining uranium, and provided weapons that killed civilians in Ukraine (they’re still doing the last one). Pretending they didn’t put us in danger is heedless “America first” isolationism.
I guess if they had a nuke we might.Weyoun wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 6:41 pmThey've been our enemies for over four decades and the most notable incident between the two countries, prior to the bombing of their nuclear program last year, was the USS Vincennes incident.
They've certainly been a problem for post-Saddam Iraq, Syria, Israel, and Lebanon, but again no one on the North American continent has gone to bed at night worrying that Iran could attack them.
Kinda stupid to cite those, right? I mean the Iranians could cite the more recent Vincennes, or the less recent toppling of Mossaddegh. Either way, AS I SAID ALREADY, no one in this forum has ever gone to bed thinking that Iran could attack them. They are a non-threat and have been that way for years - or maybe ever.Beebs52 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 7:59 pmAlso doc, didja forget
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beir ... s_bombings
and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis
I don't know. Not sure they would appreciate mutually assured destruction if they had a nuclear weapon.Weyoun wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 8:28 pmKinda stupid to cite those, right? I mean the Iranians could cite the more recent Vincennes, or the less recent toppling of Mossaddegh. Either way, AS I SAID ALREADY, no one in this forum has ever gone to bed thinking that Iran could attack them. They are a non-threat and have been that way for years - or maybe ever.Beebs52 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 7:59 pmAlso doc, didja forget
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beir ... s_bombings
and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis
Thx for the history lesson. Seriously. Vincennes was a horrible mistake. Mossaddegh was a convoluted Brit Amer Shah mishmash, which I would not be aware of had you not pointed it out.Beebs52 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 9:35 pmI don't know. Not sure they would appreciate mutually assured destruction if they had a nuclear weapon.Weyoun wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 8:28 pmKinda stupid to cite those, right? I mean the Iranians could cite the more recent Vincennes, or the less recent toppling of Mossaddegh. Either way, AS I SAID ALREADY, no one in this forum has ever gone to bed thinking that Iran could attack them. They are a non-threat and have been that way for years - or maybe ever.Beebs52 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 28, 2026 7:59 pmAlso doc, didja forget
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beir ... s_bombings
and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis