They Found Weapons of Mass Destruction In Iraq

I'm sorry, no they didn't. Has they've found WMD's in Iraq yet? They've got to turn up sooner or later, right?

Oh, wait, no they are looking for evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran. Let me guess. They are 100,000% sure that Iran plans to attain and use a nuclear weapon against the peace loving peoples of the world. We have no other choice but to invade.

 

I'll just put this here for anyone who would like to view it. I suppose for those who always shout for proof that things such as the reasons behind the Iraq War were fabrications, you'd want to view it. If you ignore it, I can understand.

[video=youtube;yowqX2ngHl4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yowqX2ngHl4[/video]

 

Yes, they did find all the evidence the world needed. And do you know where?

In George Bush's drugged up imagination!

 

So the fact that they did not find WMDs in Iraq (which we all know were there because they were sold to Saddam and used against the Kurds) proves that Iran is not trying to obtain WMDs, right? LOL that's quite a leap of logic buddy, time for Logic101 class.

 

What? I didn't say it was proof, and I didn't say it was proof for anything about Iran. I only posted it as "amplifying information" about Iraq and the way the reasons we were made to believe were valid weren't.

Did you even read what I said or did you just instinctively disagree? Either way, I suppose I understand.

 

That's correct, the situations have absolutely nothing in common - different countries, different administrations, different cases, different evidence...the Bush administration's case on Iraq's WMD has absolutely no bearing on the Obama administration, the IAEA position and the situation with Iran today and your attempt to connect the two is a logical fallacy.

 

Actually, it's a bit ironic that the US, the only country in the world known to use a nuclear weapon in an act of war TWICE and who is also one of the most militarily aggressive countries in the world, considers itself to be the nuclear watchdog.

 

Why is it ironic? A cop is the watchdog in your neighborhood, yet he is likely the most heavily armed person in the neighborhood (or he should be anyway) and there is a good chance that he has used his weapons before against the bad guys. Who do you think should the nuclear non-proliferation watchdog be? Ivory Coast because they have no nuclear weapons and have never used them? I bet Ahamdinejad would be shaking in his boots if Ivory Coast sternly told him to cease and desist LOL

 

The world is not the jurisdiction of the US. The US doesn't have the right to interfere wherever it wants, and certainly not without reasonable suspicion. No cop has this authority either.

 

The world (the real world we live in, not some utopian perfect planet) has no jurisdiction, it has no laws worth paper they are written on, it has no unbiased courts capable of enforcing their decisions, it has no cops, no sheriffs, no marshals...The world has no means or ways to protect the victims and punish the perpetrators. In the real world its either the american (the only superpower) cop or total anarchy and nuclear proliferation. You prefer anarchy and nuclear proliferation, I prefer to have this american cop protecting the neighborhood, imperfect as he may be. It's a legitimate disagreement.

 

Did we find anything worth invading Iraq over? No.

What we found were some long-range SCUDs they weren't supposed to have, a drone they were working on to spray biological agents over an area, and some "questionable" experiments by a few mobile labs. Really, still a poor-man's level of crap most any nation could get their hands on.

Further, what we found in their documents was evidence of piecemeal working towards some kind of weapon in order to counter the militaristic superiority of... Iran. Neither the U.S. nor Israel were in their sights.

... TBH, and I mean this with all seriousness: Iran should have been our target all along. The disaster and unneeded action that was Iraq, doesn't dissuade the honest-God threat Iran poses, who preaches daily that they'll launch their nuclear weapon weapon at Israel as soon as they develop it.

Why do we care what happens to Israel? For the same reason we cared what happened to the British in WWII: They are the beacon of freedom in a region dominated by extremists and despots. Plus, we have bilateral agreements.

Well, they say they will, and intelligence shows they're developing rocket frames to at least have something approaching ICBM capability. Don't let Iraq cloud your judgement, consider the situation on its own terms.

 

The idea here is that it is up to the mongers to prove that Iran IS buildings WMDs, it is not up to the Iranians to prove they are NOT building WMDs.

 

One man with all the power who considers himself the law over everyone else. Justice...

Israel is not a beacon of freedom. Compared to the nations size, the nuclear armament in Israel is mind-boggling, but somehow it's justified for them to have these weapons and to deny inspectors the right to inspect their nuclear facilities. But if it's Iran or Iraq it's a major crisis. They must be building a Death Star or something.

Israel has an extensive paper trail of human rights abuses. I don't downplay the violations every other player there may have, but Israel is right there among them. And frankly, so is the United States.

But overall, no evidence was found that gives a country the right to invade Iran. And I find it ridiculous that a country with nuclear weapons who used nuclear weapons against another country has somehow adopted this holier-then-thou policy of condemning another nation the right to merely have one merely on the suspicion of how they will use it.

 

Compared to the nation's size, the number of Israel's enemies is mind-boggling. It's surrounded by 23 states rejecting it's right to exist, it occupies 0.2% the middle east and and its enemies think it's 0.2% too many, it's outnumbered 75 to 1 against Arabs alone (not taking Iranians and other hostile non-arab muslims into account).

Given Israel's precarious position the "mind-boggling" amount of [unproven and unconfirmed] Israel's nuclear armament is just what the doctor ordered. Ironically based on your OP you don't believe multiple credible reports that Iran is building a nuclear weapons program, yet you believe that Israel has nukes without a shred of solid evidence.

Oh and one more thing, it's ironic that someone like you who believes in international law does not understand a simple fact - Israel did not sign the NPT for exactly this reason, to have the legal right to deny inspections while remaining in full compliance with international law.

 

What's America business here? Just let it be

 

Actually as a signatory to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, I do believe it is up to Iran to prove they are not building them, since they are in non-compliance.

 

Just as Israel has enemies, so does Iran. The reasons why those two have enemies is a debate bound to give me a headache, but in the end, a nuclear weapon in our times is a countries only protection against nuclear powers like the US. That's why China, India, Korea, and Pakistan (at one time) said FU to the US. The game is obvious to them, and they don't want to be puppets.

And, realistically, you have to look at Iran's perspective. Countries are being knocked down all around him- America everywhere under the banner of democracy. There are American bases all around his nation, and nuclear weapons are aimed at his nation. His country is being subjected to severe trade and economic restrictions- similar to the kind that turned all of post WW1 Germany into a ghetto and what helped give them a f everyone attitude- and aside from this bullcrap talk from all these countries about we just want to check for nuclear weapons, no one bats an eye that Israel, it's enemy, has not only been supplied with nuclear material, and aided in the construction an acquisition of things like nuclear ballistic submrines currently operating in the Red Sea, but everything else. Israel to Iran is basically the Death Star of the United States right within striking range and looking for- very much trying to instigate a rash and faulty action so that they will have the reason to sweep him from existence. Considering all this, he's a rather cool character. And by he, I don't mean Mahmoud Ahmadineja. He is not the power, it is the Ayatollah.

It's not Israel that is besieged, it's Iran.

Honestly, I think they most certainly are building them. I don't think he's insane and going to fire them off as soon as he gets them. It makes no sense. It's basically asking to be destroyed. Nuclear weapons is the only ability Iran will ever have of becoming a prosperous nation without having to give the US a blow job. I think it's about dignity.

 

I do see the Iran position on this. From an Iranian national security perspective, there is a lot of logic to acquiring a nuclear capability. Once online, it effectively takes any US military response off the table no matter what Iran does in the future. However I'm not convinced that the Iranian leadership are rational actors in the sense that the West defines it. If you really believe that causing world chaos could bring about the 12th Iman, it may be a small price to pay; particular when the hatred for the state of Israel defines Iranian foreign policy like nothing else (and defines a good deal of the rest of the middle east and this forum). Why would it be insane to destroy a hated enemy and bring about a fulfillment of your religion's prophecy at the same time? Sounds like a win/win to me.

 

The way I see it is like this. Despite all those talks of peace-making and neutrality that the US has been yapping about, it has obviously and absolutely sided with Israel- even weaponizing Israel. That's not peace. Despite what they claim are their intentions, it seems clear to me that they are obviously wrestling with different terms outside the camera's eye. There is no peace deal, here, it's Amerca-Israel or nothing. It's not about stability and neutralizing a potential threat, it's about extending power and influence over the entire region. And one by one, they will work through those states that are resistant.

Are they saints, no, but I don't think anyone involved here is.

 

I guess we'll find out when Iran gets deliverable nuclear weapons.

 

Dude, for some reason if Iran get's nukes and a nuclear missile happens to go off, I'm going to be of the mind that it's false flag. I just can't see it happening.

 

Condemning isn't the point. Self-defense is the point.

 

Why not ? No country in the world has been shooting their mouth off about attacking another country (Israel) more than the Iranians. And as Lil Mike said, they do have this 12th Imam (the Mahdi) thing going on. I can't see it NOT happening.

 

You're preparing your conspiracy theory ahead of time? That's disappointing.

So I suppose you think the US will nuke Israel in order to justify going to war with Iran? Sheesh.

How will you spin it if the Iranians admit they did the nuking?

 

How does the West define it and why is Iran not considered so?

It's not hatred of Israel that defines Iranian foreign policy. Iran is a reactionary state in the region wherein its interests lay in regional influence and expansion; this necessitates the Iranian leadership to denounce any percieved Western imperialism in the area (or wherever). Israel is merely part of this equation.