Israel

[rickyb]

The UAE has nuclear power. They buy their enriched uranium from other sources. Iran could do the same. That Iran went way beyond the 3.5% needed for nuclear power, the fact that they built a super reinforced bunker 200 ft underground in order to enrich the uranium, the fact that they built a converter facility that's absolutely needed at the start and finish to metalize the enriched uranium in order to have a bomb, is exactly why everything pointed to them making a nuke.

Theyre at the 5 yard line according to mearsheimer. Enriching to 60% not a violation of international law. Israel and usa attacking was however. The 60% is separate from them having a nuke weapons program which they did not have.

I think usa shouldnt have attacked them. Trump shouldve done his own jcpoa. But greenwald thinks he got duped by the neo cons and israel firsters.

 

[vantexan]

Theyre at the 5 yard line according to mearsheimer. Enriching to 60% not a violation of international law. Israel and usa attacking was however. The 60% is separate from them having a nuke weapons program which they did not have.

I think usa shouldnt have attacked them. Trump shouldve done his own jcpoa. But greenwald thinks he got duped by the neo cons and israel firsters.

Do you know that the enriched uranium in order to make a nuke has to be converted into a metal ball? That's what goes into the bomb. To do that you have to have a converter facility which the Iranians built. There's no need for such a facility for nuclear power. Yes, the Iranians were pursuing making nukes.

You know what? If the Iranians told you that they were trying to build a nuke you wouldn't believe them. No matter the evidence. You want to believe what you want to believe.

 

[UnionStrong]

Do you know that the enriched uranium in order to make a nuke has to be converted into a metal ball? That's what goes into the bomb. To do that you have to have a converter facility which the Iranians built. There's no need for such a facility for nuclear power. Yes, the Iranians were pursuing making nukes.

You know what? If the Iranians told you that they were trying to build a nuke you wouldn't believe them. No matter the evidence. You want to believe what you want to believe.

They were pursuing an ICBM too. Moon shot?

 

[Box Ox]

Theyre at the 5 yard line according to mearsheimer. Enriching to 60% not a violation of international law. Israel and usa attacking was however. The 60% is separate from them having a nuke weapons program which they did not have.

If it makes you feel any better, if Mexico were religiously obligated to destroy the US and had enriched uranium to 60%, we'd be taking out their nuclear facilities too.

 

[UnionStrong]

If it makes you feel any better, if Mexico were religiously obligated to destroy the US and had enriched uranium to 60%, we'd be taking out their nuclear facilities too.

They would be the 51st state by now

 

[MyTripisCut]

If it makes you feel any better, if Mexico were religiously obligated to destroy the US and had enriched uranium to 60%, we'd be taking out their nuclear facilities too.

Lucky for them, it’s the other way around?

 

[Box Ox]

If it makes you feel any better, if Mexico were religiously obligated to destroy the US and had enriched uranium to 60%, we'd be taking out their nuclear facilities too.

Lucky for them, it’s the other way around?

We haven’t threatened to wipe Mexico off the map.

 

[MyTripisCut]

We haven’t threatened to wipe Mexico off the map.

Correct. Just the Gulf…

 

[Box Ox]

If it makes you feel any better, if Mexico were religiously obligated to destroy the US and had enriched uranium to 60%, we'd be taking out their nuclear facilities too.

Lucky for them, it’s the other way around?

We haven’t threatened to wipe Mexico off the map.

Correct. Just the Gulf…

Nice joke but doubt the equivalence.

 

[rickyb]

If it makes you feel any better, if Mexico were religiously obligated to destroy the US and had enriched uranium to 60%, we'd be taking out their nuclear facilities too.

We need to learn how intl law works

 

[rickyb]

Do you know that the enriched uranium in order to make a nuke has to be converted into a metal ball? That's what goes into the bomb. To do that you have to have a converter facility which the Iranians built. There's no need for such a facility for nuclear power. Yes, the Iranians were pursuing making nukes.

You know what? If the Iranians told you that they were trying to build a nuke you wouldn't believe them. No matter the evidence. You want to believe what you want to believe.

No they werent lol

I listened to us intelligence plus ieae

 

[Thebrownblob]

Do you know that the enriched uranium in order to make a nuke has to be converted into a metal ball? That's what goes into the bomb. To do that you have to have a converter facility which the Iranians built. There's no need for such a facility for nuclear power. Yes, the Iranians were pursuing making nukes.

You know what? If the Iranians told you that they were trying to build a nuke you wouldn't believe them. No matter the evidence. You want to believe what you want to believe.

@rickyb says he hatesnuclear weapons and he knows very good and well Iran is trying to build one. Everyone knows that it’s not even disputable.

No one would’ve attacked Iran for enriching material for building power plants, and such things.
Weather @rickyb Lex are not the world does not want a terrorist funding country having a nuclear weapon. I’m sure if they continue, and they most likely will that this won’t be the end of it.

 

[rickyb]

@rickyb says he hatesnuclear weapons and he knows very good and well Iran is trying to build one. Everyone knows that it’s not even disputable.

No one would’ve attacked Iran for enriching material for building power plants, and such things.
Weather @rickyb Lex are not the world does not want a terrorist funding country having a nuclear weapon. I’m sure if they continue, and they most likely will that this won’t be the end of it.

no you are very confused. 60% enrichment is not building a weapon. they are 2 separate things.

now the question is will they agree to jcpoa trump version or will they build a weapon.

mearsheimer says nukes bring stability but unfortunately theres no guarantee they wont be used, so theyre ultimately a bad idea.

trump wanted iran to essentially surrender before israel attacked.

 

[vantexan]

no you are very confused. 60% enrichment is not building a weapon. they are 2 separate things.

now the question is will they agree to jcpoa trump version or will they build a weapon.

mearsheimer says nukes bring stability but unfortunately theres no guarantee they wont be used, so theyre ultimately a bad idea.

trump wanted iran to essentially surrender before israel attacked.

If Iran somehow manages to build a nuke and then uses it on Israel will you be sad or glad?

 

[rickyb]

If Iran somehow manages to build a nuke and then uses it on Israel will you be sad or glad?

if you kill civilians its bad. if you attack first and violate intl law in the process like usa and israel just did, its bad.

i think its bad even if you dont do that stuff, bc with nukes its mutually assured destruction.

i dont like them.

 

[vantexan]

if you kill civilians its bad. if you attack first and violate intl law in the process like usa and israel just did, its bad.

i think its bad even if you dont do that stuff, bc with nukes its mutually assured destruction.

i dont like them.

But will you be sad or glad? Don't lie.

 

[Box Ox]

If Iran somehow manages to build a nuke and then uses it on Israel will you be sad or glad?

if you kill civilians its bad.

How many non-military target civilians do you figure there are inside Israel's borders?

 

[Thebrownblob]

no you are very confused. 60% enrichment is not building a weapon. they are 2 separate things.

now the question is will they agree to jcpoa trump version or will they build a weapon.

mearsheimer says nukes bring stability but unfortunately theres no guarantee they wont be used, so theyre ultimately a bad idea.

trump wanted iran to essentially surrender before israel attacked.

I’m not confused on this issue you are. 60% enrichment 100% means they’re trying to build a bomb along with all the other things they were doing. You should just admit that you don’t care that they were trying to build a bomb that would be more intellectually honest because now you’re being dishonest.

Even funnier is that in your second part of your answer, you admit that you know they were trying to build the bomb and you think it’s OK because somehow it brings stability even though you pretend to be against nuclear proliferation. It blows my mind how dishonest you are with yourself on this issue

Your hatred for Israel and your newfound love of Iran has turned you 100% into a Pro nuclear weapons Warhawk

 

[Thebrownblob]

if you kill civilians its bad. if you attack first and violate intl law in the process like usa and israel just did, its bad.

i think its bad even if you dont do that stuff, bc with nukes its mutually assured destruction.

i dont like them.

I’m sorry this answer does not align with your new philosophy on nuclear weapons. You say they bring stability. You do like them.

The idea that Iran would not get attacked if they had nuclear weapons is ridiculous. Iran attacked Israel during this conflict and Israel never used theirs. Iran didn’t seem one bit worried about Israel launching a nuclear weapon against them.

 

[Thebrownblob]

if you kill civilians its bad. if you attack first and violate intl law in the process like usa and israel just did, its bad.

i think its bad even if you dont do that stuff, bc with nukes its mutually assured destruction.

i dont like them.

Who says they violate international law? And what are the consequences? Seems like most of the world is pretty happy that Iran’s nuclear program has been set back.

Wake me up when this international law force has any authority to prosecute anything.

A law that doesn’t have any penalty or any enforcement is nothing more than a suggestion.