Iran should never—ever—be allowed to build nukes. Crush every attempt. Period. But having an administration that lies... bulldozes the Constitution...and silences accountability? That’s also a danger to us. Stopping one threat doesn’t justify creating another. #NuclearWeapons #Accountability
Agree. But also, use diplomacy with Iran. Offer them security from being bombed/invaded, if they agree not to build nuclear weapons, not to attack neighboring civilians, etc. As it stands, by bombing them, we have motivated them to going nuclear, to defend themselves.
Of course, we had such an agreement, and TFG ripped it up. Sure, there can always be better monitoring/enforcement. But now we’re watching a nuclear arms race in the ME.
We have motivated them to build a nuke. And the US has shown it’s untrustworthy in regards to offering protection for not making a nuke. Ukraine understands this.
If the threat was so dire and imminent it should have been an easy matter to state the case to Congress and get its buy-in.
Exactly.
so disappointing, I used to respect your opinion. so tired of this garbage, it's not up to you whether Iran is allowed to have nukes or not. at least be consistent and condemn Israel, the US, and everyone else for having nukes.
One day soon they’ll have nuclear warheads and delivery method tested and in service, and every comment like this will look ridiculous. If anything, the region will be more stable.
1/3🧵 That’s a dangerous assumption. Nuclear weapons don’t stabilize bad actors...they shield them. Iran with nukes won’t suddenly play by the rules...they’ll push harder... knowing the cost of stopping them just skyrocketed.
With respect, it’s a dangerous assumption to think we can politically or militarily stop Iran from developing a bomb now. Previous options existed, but if I was advising counsel I’d be changing all my COA’s to “they’ll have a nuke in 5 years… what now”
2/3 They’ll empower proxies with a nuclear umbrella and dare anyone to respond. That’s not stability...that’s hostage-taking at a regional scale.The idea that adding more nukes to volatile regimes makes the world safer isn’t just wrong...it’s historically reckless.
3/3 Every step toward more nuclear actors increases the risk of miscalculation...escalation, or a catastrophic mistake. There’s nothing stabilizing about gambling on perfect self-control from regimes that openly thrive on brinkmanship.
It’s all well and good to say that we hope Iran doesn’t develop nuclear weapons. But at this point, we need to accept that it is more likely that they’ll be able to successfully develop one and it will change the political landscape. Obama had it right, but now we have to accept a new era
This is objectively true and I do no lt dispute it. What I DO dispute is your (and others) assertions that the Iranians can never have a nuke. Everything we have done is incentivizing the further development of nuclear weapons. They are looking at North Korea and how no one is fucking with them.
Of course, you know there is an alternative approach that Obama created.
This is preferable to nuclear proliferation, I totally agree. Unfortunately, the Iranians ar unlikely to ever jeopardize their sovereignty again
Iran could and probably has secreted fissile material and could make a NBomb - this would make Trump and more importantly the US look like morons! Would make us all radioactive! Trump got excited and jumped the gun! He’s shot his load! Trump declaring a win has sealed Irans victory!
Replace 'nukes' and 'Iran' with 'guns/semi automatic weapons' and 'MAGA morons' who are terrorising the public on the streets of the USA at the moment!
The reality is the USA has taught the world that the only way to save themselves from being bombed by the US at some point, is to have nuclear weapons. Bombing Iran just makes them want nuclear weapons even more.
Well said. Truth!
Why? That's the same nonsense rhetoric we heard about N. Korea. No one can ever use a nuke b/c 'mutually assured destruction'. Iran just wants to be the 10th in an exclusive club. An atomic bomb like they are trying to build (uranium) is a firecracker compared to a 40 meg thermo nuclear device.
Mutually assured destruction works...until it doesn’t. All it takes is one miscalculation...one rogue faction...one bad day. Letting more unstable regimes into the nuclear club doesn’t make the world safer...it multiplies the chances that someone eventually pulls the trigger.
We already nine, instead of starting wars to try to prevent a tenth maybe the whole fucking world should be screaming disarmament!
We currently have 5. Trump, Putin, Netanyahu, Modi and Zardari. And the loose cannon right now is Netanyahu.
You could add little rocket man at 6 but I don't think his are viable.
WE 🇺🇸are the rogue fucking faction at this point!! Shitler is one bad day away from taking out the whole gd world
Lots of people in 🇨🇦 are saying we need nukes to protect against an insane dictator to the south
Believe me, nobody with a brain in this country wants tRump to have access to the nuclear codes!
Israel should definitely not have them either but they do and they attack everyone around them , to Keep the Polish, Belarusian,Ukrainian etc Knesset in power . When is USA going to bomb North Korea because they have nukes and they should not either ?
Isreal has nukes and is engaged in ethnic cleansing while sucking up billions in US tax dollars. I hope that someday the decayed, conservative old guard in Iran will be replaced by the more moderate younger generation, but they aren't the most evil player in the ME.
Yet the US has how many nukes? And Israel lied to the US on building their nukes foreignpolicy.com/2025/02/07/i...
Maybe Israel shouldn’t have nukes either ?
Israeli tale wags American dog every single time
But hay let’s have a deal where we can monitor. EU UK US China and Russia. And US pisses it down a tube. And blames it on Iran.
Makes Iranians mad to have one. And the latest attacks by Israel and US bombers. It makes them more determined
Hmmm...why shouldn't they have nukes? Do we have moral superiority? (I think nukes are awful, and dangerous)
Let me double down. Killing kids and moms and dads to stop some country for trying to get what we have is bullshit. Stop playing their game and start playing the human game.
I don't think Iran is a serious national security threat to the United States. This is my Ted Talk.
Fair enough...but here’s the thing: Iran doesn’t need to launch directly at the U.S. to be a serious threat. They can destabilize entire regions...hit allies...cripple global shipping..and empower proxies that target U.S. troops and assets. That is national security.
Let's not forget they are exceptionally good at terrorism and are not beyond initiating individual attacks on US soil.
One might say the same of the US., grasshopper.
Fyi, I ain't nobody's grasshopper.
Just kicking your shins, Cricket.
They might even try to invade Irak, imagine all the horrors they would inflict on the population there.
The counties that are serious threat to world peace are: USA, Israel and Russia. All the countries that were and are the aggressors and have nukes. Unbelievable hypocrisy this is.
Do you notice how only countries with nuclear weapons don’t get pushed around or invaded?
Imagine you’re in a country that deposed the monarchy that had brutalized the country for 54 yrs And, after the people formed a Democratic government, a superpower fomented a coup and put the ‘King’ back in power Wouldn’t you be pissed? We really need to ask ourselves ‘why’ Iran hates us
What about Israel's nukes? Or Pakistan's?or India's?or Russia's? Oh yeah...closer to having them North Korea. What about Trump's buddy Kim
TODAY, TRUMP IS MAKING IRAN & CHINA GREAT AGAIN, BY SUPPLYING OIL NEEDED IN CHINA WITH IRANIAN OIL, PROVIDING BILLIONS TO IRAN. WHY? Putin said so.
The Trump Regime can't tell its foreign enemies apart from American citizens. They treat them all the same.
No argument there. Not from me anyway...
Why should not a sovereign country have atomic power? Who dictates what others can have? Has Iran invaded or bombed any country which was legally established? I am not for terrorism, don't misinterpret that just look at who creates all the problems and who gets all the blame.
I totally agree, and speaking of threats, I don’t like the American ‘good for nothing’ president threatening my country and others with economic warfare and annexation. He wants our minerals and water. Period. He doesn’t give a shit about Canadians.
The world would be safer if Iran had nukes.
No one should have nukes.
Sure, but as long as some countries have nukes they should all have them.
No, that's idiotic. It's already too big of a risk that any have them. Making more opportunities for decisions that lead to all of us dead is not a way to make humanity safer. It may be a smart decision for a country individually in a world where any country has nukes, but that's different.
Otherwise it allows countries with nukes to declare unlimited wars on countries without them.
1/2🧵 That’s flat-out reckless thinking. The world doesn’t get safer by handing nuclear weapons to regimes that openly fund terror...chant "Death to America," and use proxies to stir up constant conflict.
You don't understand anything about global politics and simply rely on your own racist assumptions that foriegners are unreasonable, in thinking "savages".
2/2 Nukes wouldn’t make Iran cautious...they’d make them bolder...more dangerous...and untouchable while they push the limits. You don’t gamble global security hoping bad actors suddenly play nice once they have the deadliest weapon on Earth. That’s not strategy...that’s suicide.
You're describing Israel right now.
This could be said about the United States under the Regime, with a thin skinned toddler bypassing congressional authority, bent on revenge and impressing Putin. “You don’t gamble global security hoping bad actors suddenly play nice once they have the deadliest weapon on Earth.” 🎯 Impeach. Remove.
Agree, of course!
You're just uneducated and racist.
A master's degree in psychology, fluent in 4 languages, and I am the uneducated🤓😱
Yes. Highly uneducated on this topic
Now I realise I am not alone! Thanks, paisano!!
Tell me exactly, using specifics, how your personal safety has changed since North Korea developed a nuclear weapon.
You know what MAD means, I hope. The pudgy dictator knows there would be nothing left of his country if he attacked us with any type of weapon!
Trump?
I'm no fan of the Iran regime (that is only in power because of the US!), but Iran must have a way to defend itself, because Israels expansionism does not give them a lot of alternatives. US and Israel aggression will be the reason Iran will want to rush nuclear weapons, just to have security.
1/2🧵 That’s a thoughtful point...but deterrence doesn’t automatically require nukes. Plenty of nations defend themselves without them. Iran's security concerns are real... but nuclear weapons don’t stabilize situations like this...they escalate them.
I agree on principle, but if you are already the target of 2 nuclear nations regardless of your ambition to become a nuclear backed nation - one of them with the largest military in the world - there are not many options left. There is no defense against strikes from half a globe away except nuclear
2/2 The more nuclear actors we allow...the higher the odds that deterrence eventually fails. It’s not about denying defense...it’s about preventing a regional arms race where everyone loses.
If the US used their power to stop their aggression, then there would be another way forward. Sadly Trump plays with fire internationally to distract from the reconstruction of the USA into an autocracy - the big bad bill, the data monster created with palantir, the "ethnic cleansing lite" by ICE.
So, fundamentalist theocracy with over 2000 nuclear weapons, bombs fundamentalist theocracy with no nuclear weapons to stop them getting how many? Also just been reminded which country remains the only one to bomb civilian populations using nuclear weapons. Oh yes, justifications.
No wonder Iran hates the USA. The CIA go in to topple the regime, completely fuck it up and deliver millions of people to an Islamic revolution.The CIA then try to assassinate the Ayatollah and fail.Then Regan and North get pally and start selling them missiles only to be attacked for having them
ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY!
Yep!!! Poor American soldiers paid with their own life the agency fuck up.
History class is over. I’m not here to defend every blunder the U.S. has ever made. I’m here to say letting Iran build nukes today is suicidal. You can obsess over the past all you want... but nukes in the hands of people who openly chant ‘Death to America’ is still a no-go. Period.
It is over! After his majorly failed bunker bombing stunts,Trump had better reintegrate with Ukraine and NATO and hope to regain favor with the EU. (His other huge mess!) All bets are off while Russia aligns with Iran over weapons production and secure uranium $tores. Biggest world class idiot ever!
The openly chant death to America , but the flags they are burning are bought with the US$. It’s the currency of business. There are private USA banks operating in Iran.They were trying to rebuild an economy The biggest lie seems to be that they were planning to build bombs in the first place .
I think that getting a nuclear weapon stabilizes a country's foreign policy. Currently, when Iran wants to create mischief the leadership sends out proxies and they don't care whether they live or die. If nuclear war is threatened, the first thing that happens is a decapitation strike.
The mullahs aren't directing others to die, they are the primary targets. If you look at India and Pakistan since they went nuclear, it's not all roses, but they both are aware of the consequences of stepping over the edge. Iran can have nukes for all I care, they just need to hear about
the consequences of stepping over the line. Massive Retaliation has a sobering effect on a group whose mission is to live extravagantly on the backs of the people they control
Anyone that uses one knows it's suicide.
At some point these America/Iran debate and explainers should explain the long history between the two countries.
It’s crazy, Iran uses the dollar. They have their own currency but anything costing more than food and all business transactions are done in the dollar. There are private American banks operating in Tehran. That’s just one aspect of the complex relationship.
That's not why the relationship is complex.
That’s one of the reasons. Not many countries use the currency of the people they are at war with.
You are unlikely to stop them by bombing them. And this is leading to less information about what they're doing, while increasing their motivation secretly to proceed. See Iraq, 1981-1991.
1/3🧵 You’re right that bombing isn’t a guaranteed solution, and history proves that. But doing nothing...or worse...signaling acceptance...also isn’t a solution. Iraq’s nuclear program was set back by those strikes in 1981. Perfect? No. But it bought time.
2/3 Stopping Iran’s program isn’t just about bombs...it’s about pressure...visibility...containment...and making the cost of pursuing nukes outweigh the benefit.
3/3 It’s not binary. It’s not bomb or surrender. It’s sustained strategy...not blind aggression or blind tolerance.
Do you speak as an Israeli or an American?
We call it "diplomacy," which can include implied or explicit threats and use of force. But as Sun Tsu would have it, the best victories are won without the resort to force. The JCPOA was a good example.
Except, with Trump as US President, well, I hate to tell ya, but America having nukes is no more or less dangerous than any other nation, such as as Iran, having them. If only there were a nation that could blow up the Yanks' nuke facilities too.
Not the CIA they don't use car bombs; usually
They taught a hell of a lot of others how to make them though.
The only thing I would add is that the worst kept secret in the world is the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons, although its official policy is to neither confirm nor deny this. It is also one of only four nations that have not acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. /1
No one in the Middle East should have nukes. Zero is a verifiable number.
With Israel acting the bully and the assassin of its neighbors maybe the US should be pushing for Israel to give up its nuclear weapons. How does Iran defend itself? We gave Ukraine same bad deal and look where they are now.
1/3🧵 Israel’s nuclear weapons have functioned as a deterrent.. not a tool of conquest. They’ve had them for decades without using them...despite being surrounded by hostile nations. Iran, on the other hand...actively funds terror, destabilizes neighbors...
2/3 ...and strikes through proxies...a nuclear Iran wouldn’t hold their weapons as a last resort...they’d use them to shield aggressive behavior. And the Ukraine comparison doesn’t hold. Ukraine gave up nukes in exchange for paper promises without the means to defend themselves.
3/3 Iran isn’t being asked to disarm...they’re being stopped from crossing a line that would destabilize the entire region. Iran can defend itself without nukes...just like most of the world. Nuclear weapons aren’t defense...they’re escalation.
You just described the USA as well...just sayn
So why is Israel allowed to destabilise the region with their nukes..?
They havent
Nuclear weapons are also a status symbol.
"Iran can defend itself without nukes".......clearly they cant.
Israel funds terror as well, so does the US. Ask the Palestinians or the immigrants in this country. Or Hamas. Or the Mujahideen. Let's not act like Israel is so morally superior.
I've read your whole conversation on why Iran shouldn't have nukes. Ok. Besides the argument about them being a sovereign nation and protecting themselves against the threat of Israel & the USA, which is clearly an issue.
We had an accord in place with Iran, that they agreed to, that would allow us to actively monitor them. Why would they do that? And let's say they do have nukes. Why are Israel's nukes "defense" and Iran's nukes a threat? Yeah I've heard the "death th America" argument.
Couldn't disagree more on this subject. It implies Israel, somehow, are the good guys and Iran are the bad guys. Yet, both have done things that objectively are bad. See Gaza and the genocide Israel is currently engaged in. This whole notion of "I can nukes but you can't" is not realistic.
I’ve always found it odd that the ONLY country to drop atomic bombs, wants to decide who deserves them.
That’s a fair observation...it’s a complicated legacy. But the issue today isn’t about who deserves nukes...it’s about who can be trusted not to use them to start the next catastrophe. History matters...but so does preventing the next one. That’s the priority now.
Or ignoring it
If they weren't a couple of weeks ago they certainly are now.
NO COUNTRY IN THIS PLANET should be allowed to build and keep nukes,and then again israel has a bloody hidden arsenal of nukes, so we need to understand why Iran is an incredible threat without nukes, and israel with 300 nukes is not. What kind of narration is this?There is a misinterpretation here.
1/6🧵 The idea that no country should have nukes is morally attractive but strategically unrealistic. Nuclear disarmament is a noble goal...but we live in the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. Nukes already exist...and simply pretending everyone should give them up won’t make them disappear.
Thanks for your reply Jack, this is a very important topic... Really important. I remember in 1987 there was a significant and noble attempt to disarming the world from Nuclear arms (INF) Treaty, that was a great chance for everyone in this planet.
2/6 Now, about Israel. Israel’s nuclear arsenal is no secret, but what matters is how it’s been used...or more importantly... how it hasn’t been used. Israel has maintained nuclear deterrence for decades without deploying or proliferating it.
So far... but we have a huge problem with israel current government, so huge that has a tremendous influence on our administration, which, it may not be so intelligent enough to "resist" the temptation of nuking a country just to make a "beautiful" example...
3/6 They don’t hand nukes off to proxies, they don’t threaten to erase countries off the map...and they don’t attack civilian populations using nuclear cover. Whether you like Israel’s policies or not...their nuclear posture has been defensive and restrained.
4/6 Iran, on the other hand...isn’t dangerous because of the nukes they don’t have...it’s because of how they actively behave right now without them. Iran funds terror groups... launches proxy wars...threatens international shipping lanes...and calls for the destruction of other nations.
Jack... I understand, but you know better than I do, that there governments who make threats in plain sight and others who strike silently just to destabilise other Nations and then take control. Back to Iran, we have a problem with their fanatic Government, but why an unprovoked attack from israel?
... that there are Governments...
5/6 The fear isn’t theoretical...it’s based on an aggressive... ongoing pattern. Giving that kind of regime nuclear capability doesn’t balance the scales...it throws gasoline on the fire.
Well... in that case we have to recognise there isn't a real interest in creating and establishing peaceful relations between Nations if suspect and fear pull the strings. I was a Kid, but what I remember of that Treaty between Regan and Gorbachev, is that we felt it as a global distension.
6/6 This isn’t a misinterpretation. It’s a reality check. It’s not about who has nukes...it’s about who can be trusted not to use them as leverage for destruction. Iran’s current behavior shows exactly why they can’t be.
In that reality check though, israel's government move doesn't fit... that looked like a pre-emptive attack where many innocent Persian civilians died for nothing. Furthermore there was already a Nuclear Treaty signed by President Obama who was working just fine until...
💯
Except... Iran. We should make nukes disappear from IRAN. That's ok. Got it. So everyone else can freely proliferate them.
Oh come on. Israel is killing Palestinians and doing whatever it wants, EXACTLY because they have nukes. Their far right secretaries even alluded on using them on Gaza for crying out loud. You are right about the fact that sadly enough the “nuke-ghost” is out of the bottle but stop pretending
Israel is on the moral high ground here and can be trusted because that is simply not true. It’s not even a democracy because the far-right is doing exactly the same thing there as Trump: attacking free speech, attacking minorities, attacking separation of powers, attacking dissidents etc.
And they are not only attacking Palestinians but also liberal Jews who fight along their Palestinian brothers and sisters for a better world. The state of Israel is completely derailed and is full of hate and is strongly divided.
That is true, all of it... israel government is doing exactly what our administration is doing here... even killing its own people as long as that helps them to keep control...
Honestly, the US shouldn't have nukes either with this current administration. I really hope that someone "goofed" and gave Trump the wrong codes.
Everything we have done to them could just convince them to get nukes for their own security. Iran had nuclear technology since the 1950’s if they wanted nukes they would have had nukes. The US & Israel are the danger for the world we accuse Iran of being. We elected a lunatic with the nuclear codes
We elected a lunatic. However, the idea that Israel and the US are the greatest dangers….that falls flat.
Unfortunately, because of this administration, that's exactly how the world sees this country.
Not that flat when you’re living in Canada. I won’t go in to all the details
Russia is the threat to the world. Putin is the last person to threaten the world with nukes. Unfortunately, he's thick as thieves with trump and Netanyahu.
Yes, Russia is definitely a threat as well. It’s sickening that Trump is abandoning Ukraine. 🇺🇦
Yep. Biden had 3 years to get rid of both trump and putin. End that war and remove every republican insurrectionist in office. The last administration and every Democratic leader share the blame for the mess we are in.
Maybe they could have some kind of agreement where Iran promises not to make weapons grade nuclear materials and have regular inspections to confirm that.
Iran would use nukes to do to the world what it does to its own people masih alinejad
@supportdemocracy.bsky.social @wyden.senate.gov @hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social @aoc.bsky.social @repjasmine.bsky.social @raskin.house.gov @progressdems.bsky.social @sanders.senate.gov @warren.senate.gov @repbonamici.bsky.social
Iran is not causing a genocide Iran doesn’t steal land Iran doesn’t run on apartheid Iran doesn’t suck up our tax 💲 Iran doesn’t corrupt our politicians Israel does all the above 👆🏽
Iran funds terror...destabilizes entire regions...attacks U.S. troops through proxies...and openly calls for wiping nations off the map. Bad actors aren’t excused just because you hate Israel. Both can be problems. This isn’t a scoreboard. It’s reality.
Jack..really? Trump tore up Iran deal because Obama's name on it. Really? You think THESE countries need nuclear weapons? Russia, the United States, China, France, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea.
And, their INCOMPETENCE doesn't provide the comfort of BELIEVING that they have actually achieved what they "claim".
Why should they never have a nuke? NK is allowed to have one. Israel is allowed to have many. I don’t trust either of them.
Announcing “complete obliteration” makes returning to the sites more difficult if they restart their program.
These last 12 days of exchanging missiles between Iran and Israel has taught us one lesson that Israel is the evil of the two countries! Iran has done everything about the book-internal law whereas Israel acted exactly like a rogue state! Chest pumping about idiotic victories & not following the law
….therefore IRAN should have the nuclear weapons! It’s for their own defense
1/3🧵 The idea that Iran "does everything by the book" isn’t supported by reality. Iran has a long...well-documented history of using proxies...funding terror groups...attacking commercial shipping...and destabilizing the region through back channels...all while denying involvement.
Your arguments apply equally to both sides unfortunately. Right and wrong are determined by personal bias. An eye for an eye For an eye forever.
3/3 If your basic argument is that defense doesn’t require nukes, tell Israel to handover their nuclear weapons to the IAA! If Iran does get nuclear weapons, they will will create balance in the Middle East and the international community will be happy with that bat the USA whose is punish Iran
2/3 Its true that Iran has been supporting proxy wars in the religion purposely those fighting for Palestinians freedom since Israel declined a two state solution because for them, taking the Palestinians land by force is better than negotiating peace. Iran did all that for tue defenseless
During the 12 days of bombing each other, Iran sought the UN, EU and other Asian countries to stop Israel and Iran had even a session in their parliament to find a solution to Israel’s unprovoked attacks. If that’s not doing things by the book, i don’t know what you are Blueskying about
2/3 That’s not “by the book.” And giving a regime with that track record nuclear weapons doesn’t create safety...it creates a far more dangerous chessboard where their proxy attacks would now come with nuclear cover.
3/3 Defense doesn’t require nukes...it requires stability. Iran’s nuclear program isn’t about defense...it’s about leverage, power, and reshaping the region on their terms. That’s the real game.
Trump is the bigger threat to America.
You can include Canada, Panama and Greenland.
Even if Iran had the capability to make a nuke. 2 weeks isn’t long enough to assemble it and test it and I doubt they want to test a nuke on their land of oil. So they just don’t do it. Maybe dirty bombs they would be able to make in weeks. But not a major nuclear bomb.
Hard pressed to say which is worse. Both are horrific.
It’s embarrassing to hear Trump spout crap at the NATO summit! He is ranting, telling lies, insulting reporters, insulting allies, patronizing and so nonsense continues! Blah blah! In US town hall meetings (if he wasn’t the so called President) he would have been forcibly removed and arrested!
Trump created Iran craters. Without proof those craters = craters! Allied WW2 area bombing analysis showed delta between smoke and explosions and actual damage upon German industrial capacity. Often, production restarted within days! No leaks (unless there’s something to leak), just common sense!
Terrible take. If we ain’t disarming everyone needs one.
That...is refusing to face reality by educating yourself on the issue...looking at the real dynamics at play.
I’m as qualified on the topic as you. It’s cute though to see a dude in a nuclear armed country with the most insane leader of all time acting like it would be really dangerous for another country to have them. I agree with a lot you say. But this is silly.
Jack I have to ask, seriously, why Iran can't have nukes in your opinion? Israel has 'likely' had them since the late 60's after 'acquiring' the information and material from the states. Why is the religion based ethnostate allowed them, but not the religious autocracy?
... Good question.
1/5🧵 Fair question. The core issue isn’t about who’s "allowed"...it’s about who can be trusted not to use them as tools of escalation. Israel’s nuclear posture has been consistent for decades: deterrence, not aggression.
No but they might, why else do they have them?
Apparently you have much to learn about the history of the neighborhood around Israel. Bob Dylan’s song, Neighborhood Bully, is a riff on those neighbors
Arrogant much?
Apparently you don’t want an answer to your question about why Israel has them. You just want to troll. Whatever.
Apparently you are arrogant, probably Zionist. If you believe that the Netanyahu Government would never use them then you are a fool.
2/5 They’ve never used nukes...never proliferated them to proxies...and haven’t openly threatened to wipe entire nations off the map.
3/5 Iran’s regime...has a proven track record of proxy warfare... terror financing...destabilizing regional governments... attacking international shipping...and openly calling for the destruction of other nations.
4/5 Nukes in their hands wouldn’t be a quiet insurance policy...they’d be a shield to aggressively expand that behavior.
5/5 This isn’t about religion. It’s about behavior...governance... and credible threat assessment. One holds the weapon quietly. The other has spent decades proving they’d use the cover of that weapon to push further...faster..and more dangerously. That’s the difference.
Credible threat assessments? Interesting. Like Schrodinger's nuclear program right? 1996, 2002, 2012, 2015, 2025...
Israel are a rogue state at this point.
If Iran did have the bomb, then any missile launch big enough would be presumed to be nuclear and Iran wiped out with nukes, as deterrent, right?
There's only one country in history that's actually used a nuclear weapon against an enemy. That's the one we should be worried about.
Fair point on history, but that’s not the issue on the table. The country that used it ended a world war. The countries we’re talking about now would use it to start one. It’s not about who’s had nukes...it’s about who we can trust not to launch them. Big difference.
Right now I can’t trust the 🍊 to not drop one. He wanted to nuke a tropical storm if I remember correctly.
Unfortunately so far the lesson Trump is teaching everyone is is that they should all have nukes.
Why? So the u.s. can invade them again?
If you're pulling for Iran...over the US....you're in the wrong thread, pal.
I'm pulling for the international rules based order.
A life in Iran is worth as much as yours or mine.
1/3🧵 On a human level, absolutely...every life has equal value. But national security decisions aren’t made on a personal... emotional scale. They’re made to protect nations...prevent mass casualties...and neutralize threats that can destabilize entire regions or cost millions of lives.
2/3 It’s not about whose life is worth more...it’s about preventing regimes that openly threaten other nations from acquiring the power to kill at scale. The conversation changes when a state actor can wipe out cities in minutes. National security isn’t about individual worth...
3/3 ...it’s about protecting populations and preserving global stability. This isn’t personal...it’s practical...it’s strategic, and it’s necessary.
The nuclear deal with Obama was obviously working and America's own intelligence said Iran wasn't working on a bomb. This is not only just a pretext for bombing Iran, it is also pushing Iran into a corner where they are more likely to seek one since nothing they do can prevent an attack.
This is just standard "I'm the adult in the room making the hard decisions" rhetoric, where the hard decisions are always suffered by someone else. It's also counterproductive to safety everywhere else in the world.
Aside from all that, Iran last week showed it has the capacity to severely damage Israel without nukes. They didn't until Israel did a surprise attack on them using negotiation over this very nuclear issue which killed hundreds of their civilians.
That’s just unabashed imperialism and aggressive interventionism. And Iran are the “bad guys!” I fucking think not, warpig.
Call it whatever you want...imperialism...intervention.Whatever makes you feel sharp. But pretending Iran’s regime isn’t dangerous is willful blindness. You don’t have to cheer for war to know some fires need to be put out before they burn down the house.
Netanyahu is far more dangerous - and the west is actively arming him.
Referring to Iran’s government (and implicitly its people) as a “fire” that “needs to be put out” is the language of extermination. This removes political context and replaces it with imagery justifying preemptive annihilation. That’s genocidal rhetoric in euphemistic terms.
1/2🧵 That’s a desperate stretch. Calling a regime’s actions a fire that needs to be put out isn’t genocidal...it’s common sense. Nobody said annihilate a people...I said stop a dangerous government from getting nuclear weapons.
2/2 Pretending this is genocidal rhetoric is intellectual laziness trying to score points by twisting words instead of addressing the actual threat. Don’t confuse targeted policy with mass extermination...that’s not serious debate, that’s bad faith posturing. I enjoy intellectually stimulating..
3/3 ..debate. You've offered no opportunities for that thus far. You insert the hot button words of the day...and then offere nothing of substance to support them. Move along.
Perhaps you forget the millions dead from the “common sense” policies of U.S. empire, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Palestine, Yemen, Somalia, Vietnam, DPRK, Yugoslavia, and more. Every one of those began with the same euphemistic framing: “dangerous regimes,” “fires to put out,” “targeted policy.”
You keep saying you aren’t calling for genocide, but you use metaphorical language that dehumanizes and abstracts political resistance. Framing a sovereign state’s existence as a “fire to put out” has never been neutral. It’s the exact euphemistic logic that gets used to justify sanctions,
Why does it not surprise me to find out that you are literally employed by the military industrial complex, via the Pentagon and defense contractors, including Boeing. Do your “fans,” which are admittedly mostly bots, but do the actual humans understand this?
air strikes, and regime change campaigns that leave hundreds of thousands, and often millions, dead. Doubling down on respectable-sounding rationales for structural violence while sneering at moral clarity is what war pigs like you do best!
“Crush every attempt. Period.” This is an open endorsement of war or sabotage against a sovereign nation based on unproven future intent. That is not caution; that’s imperialist aggression and war propaganda. No amount of constitutional handwringing at home balances this out.
Counterpoint, as soon as the USA gives up it's nukes it can start telling other countries they can have nukes or not.
That's not how national security works. Nor should it be.
Well you might get a lot more cooperation and agreement from countries if it did work that way 🙄
I remember a president once did a deal with them to not built nukes then another fat felon childish petty jealous president came in & tore the agreement up because…Obama
Right, let’s not buy into the bull shit trumps ratings were tanking. Vladimir has a plan for his oil, Trump is a yes man, Vlad let him pull off this show, Bibi gets more cover to kill the hungry and everyone can shit on Iranians.
... exactly
🔥
They had the uranium. Iran was never going to just stop everything. They just weren't assembling the bombs. We're doing the same thing. Our gov't. wants to pretend that we've washed our hands of all materials. Not possible with an adversary like Russia.
Far as I’m concerned NO ONE should have nukes. What for ? The reason to have them Is deterrence from invasion. As long as they exist countries will strive to attain them.
IRAN WITH NUKES? NEVER. But if we fight tyranny abroad while IGNORING it at home—silencing courts, trashing the Constitution, dodging oversight—we’re not protecting democracy, we’re imitating its enemies. You stop a threat by standing taller, not sinking lower.
Okay. I responded to an earlier post in the timeline that was a thread before seeing this post. You basically just reinforced what I was trying to say in my reply. Only you’re better at being more succinct than me.
Thanks. I'm sure I just said it differently, and not necessarily better.
Crush who allowed it.
They wouldn’t have nukes if Orange mcfatfuck didn’t rip up the Iran nuclear deal in the first place.
And they didn’t even stop the one threat.
You are so right
Attention Democratic leaders. We aren’t okay. Please send help.
The only reason he’s bombing Iran is to shift the focus away from deporting citizens and those without criminal records and from the Draconian big bill!
That’s a fair suspicion...and one you and I have in common: leaders have played the distraction game before. But two things can be true at once: the Iran threat can be real, and political distraction can be in play. It’s our job to keep both in focus, not ignore one because we’re mad about the other
Yes, you are correct, but Israel and the Republicans have been saying the threat is imminent for over 20 years. If they had the real capability, it would have happened by now. That doesn’t mean not to be vigilant, but lying isn’t helping
America and Russia are more dangerous with nuclear weapons now than Iran.
1/3🧵 America and Russia have managed nuclear arsenals for decades under established protocols...deterrence frameworks...and direct communication channels...even through the Cold War.
You assume “America and Russia” think the same way as those nations thought in 60s, 70s, 80s, 90, 00s, 10s 2025–Trump is the not the statistical norm. Trump’s moods, ego, goals, values, vanities, and lack of respect for opinions causes Trump to be the one that can make an atomic war WWIII happen
2/3 Iran doesn’t have those guardrails. Iran funds terror groups...uses proxy warfare...and has a history of calculated deniability...the exact recipe for reckless nuclear risk.
So does Russia.
3/3 The danger isn’t just in who has nukes...it’s in who’s most likely to gamble with them. Iran’s track record shows they’d play with fire. That’s the difference.
And yet Israel routinely kills people every day!
And has had nuclear weapons for many decades and not used them. And made serious preparations to use them on exactly one occasion, *in response to an existential threat to its survival*. Iran OTOH… en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruc...
and please, don’t start with “gamble with nukes’ while a failed gambler in the WH has the codes. the aggressors are Netanyahu, Putin and TACO Dunce.
True...all true but so do the Saudis & the Trumps are constantly gobbling Prince BoneSaw's 🍆
and republicans America is not a reckless nuclear risk? when even NATO bends over for Daddy, we have a problem. and by the way, for us here in Europe, who gives America the right to decide which country can have or not have nuclear technology? Ukraine is paying a heavy price for America’s guardrails
Not popular but IMHO who do we think we are to tell another country they are too unstable to have nukes when we have a demented old man throwing bombs at everyone because no one came to his birthday parade. Until we stabilize the horrible government we have , maybe just shut up about everyone else.
I hear you, but this isn’t about moral superiority...it’s about survival. You don’t need to be perfect to recognize a live threat. You don’t leave the front door wide open just because your kitchen’s a mess. Fix our problems..absolutely—but you still lock the door.
I wonder though, if it's about survival then, every Country in this planet has the right to survive, therefore entitled to have their own nukes right? To be fair it should be... ALL or NONE.. I'D LIKE A WORLD FREE OF NUKES but I suppose I will have to wait until all the stupidity is gone first.
About that. bsky.app/profile/oldd...
Iran has been providing weapons to russia against Ukraine.
Correct. The threat is not just from Iran's nuclear program.
We are just as much a threat to the world now as any other country run by a lunatic. Degree of lunacy or flag color is irrelevant. We have no high ground to preach from.
Having nukes is the only way to guarantee Irans safety from Israel and US aggression
I'd rather Iran have nukes than a country like Israel.
But Trump said they were obliterated and won’t shut up about it still. Why is he saying that?
Because he's an idiot...and an extremely small man.
I guess so, I mean no one believes him except his followers that drank the kool aid.
I'll tell you who should never have nukes. Donald Trump Vladimir Putin Kim Jong
We are not in as much danger from Iran as we are from tRump.
If only there had been some document in place to stop this from happening and it actually worked.
You mean the one Trump tore up? Yeah. Genius...that guy.
This wasn’t a declaration of war. It was the same thing every president has done.
He proudly removed us from the Iran deal.
Too bad Trump tore up the Osama agreement in 2018!!
Trump put us in a really bad spot. Now we have no way of knowing what Iran is doing.
This! If the goal was just to be sure Iran didn't have the bomb, withdrawing from the inspection deal was spectacularly stupid. Iran even offered to resume the inspections but Trump had toys he wanted to play with.
That’s a sharp point. When you burn the inspection channels, you don’t just lose leverage...you lose visibility. It’s hard to enforce what you can’t see. The challenge now is figuring out how to rebuild enough pressure or presence to keep a window into what’s actually happening.
If only Donald ThinSkin hadn't destroyed (or at least tried to destroy) everything President Obama accomplished, we wouldn't be here!!! The nukes agreement was working.
His public lies are going to harm many people and likely already have.
Nukes shouldn't exist. Nobody should be allowed to have them
I fear that this will only embolden Iran, and increase their political will to produce a nuke.
You're probably right on both. However, read my lengthier comments in this thread, as to why I believe that even though I despise Trump and his entire administration...I believe the bombing was warranted for national security and regional de-escalation...and buying time.
What's the logic though? Everyone wants to bomb us so we better get nukes so they stop bombing us but that makes them bomb us more so we had better make nukes faster? Complete logic fail, stop bombing, no nukes, keep bombing, more nukes.
If we had a sane competent leader, he would use peace negotiations and good will to defuse the situation. Instead, thanks to MAGA(and Lil musk) we got 47. He'd rather have WWIII than peace. And yet he thinks he should get the Nobel Peace Prize... delusional prick.
You’re not even original in your Islamophobia
Trump is a bigger threat to the world than Iran having nuclear weapons.
True story, no one knows what the crazy fucker is liable to do next!
Only white supremacy says that the U.S. can have a world of nuclear weapons and other countries can't. Shit has never made sense ...
No, that’s not white supremacy...that’s called global power dynamics and common sense. It’s not about skin color...it’s about who can and can’t be trusted not to turn the planet into ash. Pretending this is some racial issue is intellectual laziness dressed up as activism. TRUMP...is racist as f*ck
And you can trust the people who have been at war with the world for the past 500 years? Levels of insanity. Not global power dynamics.
1/2 That’s a classic deflection. You’re dodging the point. This isn’t about who’s been at war for 500 years...it’s about whether Iran’s current regime should be allowed to go nuclear right now.
2/2 Global security decisions aren’t history class..they’re about present-day risks and who’s most likely to pull the trigger. Stay on topic.
Trump/Netanyahu are most likely to pull the trigger, obviously. That IS the topic. The U.S. has bombed the entire planet, and they are the ones deciding who can and cannot have a nuclear weapon? You are deflecting from the reality that the U.S. is not morally superior to the people they despise.
Iran was strictly adhering to the agreement signed under Obama. But chump ripped that up because Obama did it. This shit is chump’s fault beginning, middle and end!
Well they’ve just achieved the opposite. Iran was always capable of developing a nuclear weapon, they simply refrained because of the escalation it would entail. Now that Israel and the US have escalated unilaterally — and failed to severely hamper Iran’s nuclear efforts in the process…
…Iran will perceive the development of a functional nuclear weapon as essential to their deterrence. DIA confirms that Iran moved their stockpiles before US strikes came down and that those strikes did not neutralize the facilities. Iran could develop a nuke in as little as six months.
Extend the discussion, Russia was happy to invade Ukraine because there were no consequences. Question really becomes, can any country not work on developing a nuclear deterrent as it is the only thing that is respected.
Thus, those will need to be crushed as well. The regime of Iran...bad actors. Iran cannot have nukes. Period. Your assessment of them now amping up the urgency of getting a nuke online and ready to roll is right as rain. I'm confident of that.
Agreed. Absolutely no fan of Trump but the Ayatollah cannot be allowed to have a nuke. It’s a nonstarter.
In terms of US foreign policy in the Middle East this is a total unmitigated clusterfuck of the highest possible proportion.
The braindead morons running this country are running around claiming that they’ve prevented Iran from obtaining a nuke when in reality they’ve only accelerated that process and guaranteed the advent of a nuclear Iran, which is a worst case scenario for Middle East policy.
Yeah...the lies are as thick as the thieves that are spewing them.
They for sure deserve to have nukes to protect themselves from scum like Americans
That’s why they bombed nothing
Regardless of the administration currently in office, an action to set back Iran’s nuclear program was probably necessary again at this point. We have done it before in subtle ways, like hacking.
Well stated.
✊
Ok. I’m putting this out there. Why is it all “Iran can nerve ever ever have nuclear warheads” but 7 other nations including China, Pakistan, North Korea can? ….and nobody says boo? Wouldn’t it be best if was EVERYONE de-armed multilaterally asap? The assumed western moral superiority disgusts me.
Only 3 of the countries with nukes are western
My point was that it is NATO and western allies constantly declare IRAN having nukes is THE problem while many other nations of dubious stability and “friendliness” have them without rebuke. It’s hypocritical to me. And USA in that mix? Don’t get me started. Hardly a trustworthy bastion of freedom.
1/4🧵 (I've already addressed this question/s several times in this thread, but this is the very reason I posted the original post...to talk and discuss, so here you go.) Fair to want global disarmament...but that’s not the world we live in. I’m not defending who already has nukes...
2/4 I’m saying we can’t afford to let the list grow...especially with regimes like Iran that actively fund terror...destabilize regions...and openly threaten to wipe countries off the map.
3/4 China...Pakistan...and North Korea are problems...nobody serious is ignoring that. But adding another unstable nuclear actor doesn’t solve anything. It multiplies the risk. It’s not about moral superiority...it’s about basic risk management.
4/4 Fewer nukes are better than more...and stopping proliferation today is still better than shrugging and pretending it’s already too late.
But stopping it by force and not confronting any countries that already have them via use of force seems a bit disingenuous and self-serving. If we somehow think we have the right to say Iran cannot have nuclear weapons, it needs to be addressed through diplomacy - WHICH HAD BEEN WORKING.
Ya, like USA does. USA has lost the high ground long ago. No right to tell other countries what toys they can or can’t have. I am not a bot or a plant. I legit do not get why Iran is picked out of the nuke crew for being The Worst. All this dick-swinging in the Middle East is infuriating.
Agree w/ premise. Trump “nuked” the Iran deal we had, probably only b/c it was negotiated by President Obama. And now here we are. It’s not that we dropped bombs, it’s that Trump didn’t brief Congress first w/evidence to justify the attack. That’s the bigger problem.
I see no holes in your assessment
Said the same thing about India, Pakistan (the 1st stan) and all the rest of the stans too didn’t they?
Jack, WTH is going on here? Iran could have had nukes decades ago if they didn’t follow OUR rules. How did N Korea build nukes? The Technology has existed for fucking 80 years. Computer Technology is the cheapest and most effective weapon. Nuclear Facilities are more passé than you know.
Who says Iran is building nukes? They’ve been two weeks out since 2015 FFS
Bibi has been repeating this lie since the 90's
💯
When you work to stop terrorists, you need to be able to take a step back and regularly check to make sure that you're not becoming terrorist-shaped yourself. This regime can't do that, seeing as they're fomenting domestic terrorism via I.C.E. insofar as trying to instill terror within the populace.
... and then there is that...
The biggest domestic threat...no argument from me on that.
Oh, no arguments, friend. That was me reinforcing your point that they in no way have the chops for this 😉
Which country was the only one to use nukes?? They should not have nukes also
1/3🧵 That’s a surface-level argument that ignores context and reality. The U.S. used nuclear weapons to end a world war that had already killed tens of millions...ugly, yes...but aimed at stopping greater destruction.
that’s part of it. keeping Stalin out of Asia… getting a return on the investment…racism..Truman’s naivete…atomic weapons, anyway, not nuclear…much more complicated story than is usually told to most Americans. Even the otherwise excellent Oppenheimer movie focused mostly on the immediate story.
it's why Hiroshima sucked but was a legit hit. Nagasaki was a blunder. When your stated goal includes the concept of breaking Japanese culture (not saying it was good goal, just one the US had) nuking the city that's the center of Japanese Catholicism is dumb. dumb. dumb. dumb.
2/3 Since then, the U.S. has spent nearly 80 years preventing nuclear war...not starting one. The issue isn’t who used them first...it’s who can be trusted not to use them now.
3/3 Iran’s regime has a long, active history of fueling regional conflicts...funding terror...and pushing destabilization. Nukes in their hands wouldn’t prevent war...they’d license it under a nuclear umbrella. That’s the difference.
I agree with you strategically, but the fact that we have lived under a constant risk of humanity's total annihilation at the whim of 5-6 people since long before I was born is a massive failure of any nuclear state to serve the long-term wellbeing of its people.
The argument that the US can be trusted not to use nuclear weapons would seem to be weakening, given Trump's willingness to bomb Iran with no congressional approval. US checks and balances are falling away rapidly. As you say, it's at the whim of a few individuals. Scary
No government is stable forever. No individual should have the ability to destroy all of humanity at their whim. Trump, Putin, Netanyahu, Xi Jinping, Modi, Zardari. I don't trust these folks to make that decision alone. Governments not committed to ending the threat of nuclear war should be toppled.
This isn't what should scare you. what should scare you is that Putin and Trump have stockpiles of medical radioprotectants that don't work particularly well. I know this from being the one who irradiated mice treated with them. Neither Putin nor Trump realize they aren't particularly effective.
So Iran has a neighbour who can wilfully bomb them anywhere with no reply. Kill leadership without any means of reply Doesn’t anyone think this might make Iranians angry and hold to a grim resolve ?
1/2🧵 That’s an interesting detail...but here’s the reality: Iran getting nukes isn’t less dangerous because other leaders misunderstand radioprotectants. Stockpiles of ineffective meds are a separate issue.
Unfortunately, the fake safe harbor of Radioprotectants is part of why Putin and Trump aren't really fighting nuclear proliferation. They think pills mean its okay. indeed, the fact that it's pretty much us and Putin with them supports their insanity. They think a 3rd world nuke drop is safe now.
They both think money will allow them to survive a 3rd world nuke, and that that 3rd world nuke will somehow spare their chosen white people. Money might help them survive earlier climate change, but they are going down with the ship, too.
2/2 What should scare you is adding more unstable nuclear actors to the table who might actually use them...thinking they’ve gained untouchable leverage. Iran’s push for nukes is a live threat...right now. That’s not theory...it’s urgent.
America has had their share since f conflict, Korean War, Vietnam war , Iraq war etc
And that destruction wasn't just US troops, but Allied troops - especially in China - and even troops and civilians in Japan. Japan's publicly announced defense strategy for the Home Islands called for 100 million Japanese deaths - literally a fight to extinction.
Iran has the right to defend itself from terrorist nations however …America is now a terrorist nation under the White GOP Christian Nationalists and their inept chosen one the trump regime !
Why? Because they’re still mad we overthrew their government back in the 60’s? I’m surprised we have a 911 level attack almost every year due to our foreign policies/history of fucking with other countries. I just wish when they attack us they would focus on our politicians and not regular people.
I disagree. Having nuclear weapons would keep Israel in check. Why don’t we try to stop North Korea, India, or Pakistan from having them????
Israel has nukes. They frighten me a hell of a lot more than Iran does.
👎🏽
If that's what is scaring you the most....you can likely breathe...and relax a bit. (I have several explanations why in this thread.)
I read them and am breathing just fine. As far as relaxing goes, I can’t remember how to do that anymore.
No one should have nuclear weapons. No country. No one country should be able to play warlord over the world, to be the world’s police. Because one day, that power in the wrong hands is our end. There is no coming back. Spend money on food and infrastructure, climate not nuclear bombs.
They should have a nuke just so everyone will stop fear mongering about it, it has gotten boring they should have build one back in 1995
Nah...I'm good with fear mongering as opposed to Iran having a nuke.
they have a right and obligation to get one after Trump ripped up the Deal, have they just not gotten boring as a bogyman, What is the worst thing Iran did to you specifically, at what point does pretending to care about a group that never did anything bad to you get hard
1/3🧵 Nations don’t “earn” the right to nuclear weapons because a deal fell apart. That’s not how global security works. Nukes aren’t payback chips...they’re world-ending weapons. Iran’s threat isn’t about what they did to me personally...
2/3 ...it’s about what they’ve done globally: funding terror... attacking allies...hitting U.S. troops through proxies... threatening vital shipping lanes...and destabilizing entire regions.
3/3 National security isn’t about personal beef...it’s about stopping threats that can harm millions of people. You don’t have to wait until it lands on your doorstep to take it seriously. That’s not paranoia...that’s basic self-preservation.
Agree.
bsky.app/profile/thee...
Only you should be allowed to hold the world hostage. Hypocrite war monger douche
It’s not about who’s “allowed”...it’s about who can be trusted not to pull the trigger. Big difference between holding the world hostage and keeping the wolves at bay. If you can’t tell the difference...you’re not serious...you’re just here to say stupid stuff. In that case...you have succeeded.
🔥
I agree with your assessment. I watched this very informative 12 minute history lesson by Heather Cox Richardson. As always, it was another country wanting their oil that created this adversary. In 1953 the US helped overthrow the democratically elected leader. Etc. youtu.be/O_RqEFltBgU?...
I would trust Iran to have nukes more than I trust the US after all, they just joined in a global panel to abolish nukes worldwide, and they have a law against their use Where as, a certain unnamed country used them twice on a nation trying to surrender, just to prove they had them
Shut up you fascist bigot!
People are worrying about Iran. All it takes is one regime change and we have an enemy in Pakistan with plenty of nukes.
You’re right...Pakistan is a real concern. But that’s exactly why you don’t let new nuclear threats pop up. We can’t control every regime...but we can control who we allow to cross the line. One problem is bad enough...we don’t need to add another.
You just said something very interesting Jack. ... Control It's always about that right? The visceral need to control and possess, the increasing Fear of loosing that control, spying governments, making up unnecessary coups, control everywhere and everyone, except our own loose administrations.
Why is it that we can “control” whether a country gets nukes but not whether they keep them?
(they'll just use 60% enriched to make multi-Area Denial / dirty bombs, now.) .."so much winning?!" Iran's problem is with Evangelical/Zionists...not Jews. "we're so doomed,..now."
Why should Israel have nukes? The paranoid state
1/2🧵 Fair question. But whether you like Israel or not isn’t the issue. The reality is Israel’s nukes have functioned as a deterrent...not a launch threat. They’ve existed for decades without being used...despite being surrounded by hostile actors.
2/2 The concern with Iran is that their regime has a history of proxy warfare...escalation...and regional destabilization...they wouldn’t hold nukes the same way Israel has. It’s not about paranoia...it’s about track records and who can be trusted not to light the match.
You reckon Iran would nuke Israel given the opportunity? I dunno, but seems unlikely. I guess the Ayatollahs like being alive as much as the next guy
If ?
I agree with you but two things should be noted. One, the US contributed to Iran’s current situation with our actions to support the shah decades ago. Two, there is an issue of a perceived lack of fairness when it comes to nukes. We wouldn’t allow any Arab state to have one.
Israel offered to sell nukes to Apartheid South Africa
Of course they did They have become what my father fought against feels really evil
How about North Korea? SMH really, the only country that causes trouble and starts wars all over the middle east is ISRAEL!
We can talk about North Korea....Israel...no doubt. My post was about Iran and Trump, though.
I don't dispute that, just pointing out the obvious. Not a fan of Iran, but is my opinion Israel proved to be a danger to any country in a Middle east. If Iran had a nuclear, there would be no attack from Israel.
1/2🧵 That’s a dangerous assumption. Nuclear deterrence isn’t a magic shield...it’s a loaded gun pointed in all directions. The idea that Iran getting nukes would suddenly stabilize the region ignores how Iran uses proxies to strike indirectly...creating constant conflict with plausible deniability.
2/2 Nukes wouldn’t prevent that...they’d just embolden it...making every proxy attack a nuclear-backed gamble. That’s not peace...that’s gambling with global security. Deterrence only works if both sides play by the same rules...and Iran’s history shows they don’t.
While Israeli history of actions do ... lol I get it.
bsky.app/profile/af68...
Maybe Trump should have left the nuclear ban alone. 2009-2017.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi....
If you were Iranian and had a character like Netanyahu on your doorstep wouldn't you be thinking of "deterrance"? No sane person would nuke Israel - they would pay a "terrible price".
I don’t trust any country having nuclear weapons. Including my own.
Fair point.
If the us, russia, china and israel can have nukes - dictators of the worst sort - what moral principal says Iran cannot have a nuke? They should all be gone, think of the world wide savings on eliminating something you can never really use. 🤷
I try not to launch into over-generalized, jingoistic stereotypes, but fuck Teheran. I can't fathom why so many right-wingers are looking to turn the US into Iran 2.0.
I still don't understand the first statement. It's not our business if Iran has nukes. In fact, seeing what is happening to Ukraine I don't blame them for stepping up their work. You won't ever stop a war with bombs
Meh. Until the Iranian people sweep the mullahs out of power, the way they swept the fetid shah out, Iran will remain an enormous threat. And religion is the broader threat. The sooner we sweep that away as well, the better.
It's not our business. Israel has nukes and crazy leadership. We're not stopping them. We have nukes and crazy leadership. Haven't we done enough damage with regime change in the Mid East?
We've done plenty. All I'm saying is Iran, *with its present government*, is a threat. How we address the threat is debatable. Religious fundamentalism--be it Muslim, Christian or the misogynistic orthodox Jews--is the true enemy of civilized people. Also, the mullahs, Netanyahu & Trump *all* suck.
So let's save time, money, and lives by minding our own fucking business.
In general, that is a good philosophy. But total isolationism has its own problems. See World War II.
The reason everyone wants nukes is that N Korea has taught them that’s how you avoid USA bombing you. This attack has immeasurably strengthened nuclear proliferation
1/4🧵 North Korea didn’t “teach” the world that nukes prevent war...they taught the world that living under constant nuclear blackmail is dangerous and destabilizing. Their nukes didn’t bring peace...they’ve created a permanent... volatile standoff.
2/4 The idea that attacking Iran automatically fuels proliferation ignores a key point: nations pursue nukes for leverage.. power...and regime survival...not just fear of the U.S.
3/4 If we follow that logic, it means we should just let every hostile regime go nuclear to keep the peace...which isn’t peace at all. That’s a world where the odds of nuclear miscalculation skyrocket.
4/4 Stopping nuclear programs before they cross the line doesn’t encourage proliferation...it’s a necessary effort to prevent a far more unstable, multi-nuclear world.
I dunno. Seems like a rational country could surmise that it’s better to *have* a nuclear weapon (see North Korea) than to advertise *almost* having a nuclear weapon (see Iran).
We had an agreement with Iran and trump backed out of it in his first term. Now it’s a problem??
The threat to Americans is in the White House.
Iran agreed to the JCPOA. The world was celebrating & peace was within reach.But Israel,specifically Netanyahu and the extremists on the Right did not want peace.And here we are. Iran was Never our enemy before 1979. I was around & I assume you were too. The Shah was brutal & the US hands are dirty.
1/4 Yes, Iran agreed to the JCPOA. Yes, the Shah was brutal. Yes, the U.S. has made mistakes. All true. But none of that changes the fact that Iran’s regime right now funds terror.. attacks U.S. troops through proxies...destabilizes the region...
2/4 ...and openly calls for the destruction of other nations. That’s not ancient history...that’s this morning’s headline. The idea that Israel is solely responsible for this breakdown ignores Iran’s own pattern of violations...deception...and aggression. Iran isn’t being forced into hostility
3/4 ...they’ve actively chosen it. The JCPOA didn’t collapse because Israel disliked it...it collapsed because enforcement was weak...trust was eroding..and Iran saw an opening to push further.
4/4 Bringing up pre-1979 Iran doesn’t matter. We don’t make national security decisions based on how things were 50 years ago...we make them based on who’s a threat today. And today, Iran’s regime has proven they can’t be trusted with the world’s most dangerous weapons. That’s the issue.
America has no business interfering even if it's for God again, gold oil or drugs. Like every other American invasion worldwide.
What proof is there that they're any more dangerous than Pakistan?
Sorry. That was meant for Jack.
None.Iran didn't harbor Osama bin Laden &even offered to help the US after the 9/11 attacks.I remember that too. I also remember Iran in 2003 was willing to give up its nuclear technology after the US bombed Iraq.Dick Cheney nixed that. I know you remember that, because I do.Cited by NY Times & Wapo
The way it’s panning out, nor can Trump and the US! Trump will cause a domino effect on a global basis!
It collapsed because Trump collapsed it, c'mon
BTW. Israeli generals and if I remember correctly Mosaad were on board. Netanyahu and Israeli hawks were against it. Poor Mr Obama. He tried and against the odds succeeded through Peace mutual respect.
Enforcement was working just fine. Joy Reid was right, Biden should have made this a priority. But Folk like Brett McGurk, Tony Blinken and Amos Hochstein pushed for more. Trump with Netanyahu's blessing tore up the agreement unilaterally. It had little to do with Enforcement. Facts..
And we don't?
Just asking Jack,but why not? India Israel,Pakistan,&now North Korea have them. I personally wish no country had them,but why is Israel specifically allowed have 100's of nukes but not Iran?🤔. Just wondering why so many Americans have this bias view of Israel!Using starvation as a weapon,no problem.
Honestly Iran doesn't scare me. The pychos they hire to do their dirty work are the problem.
I am against any kind of nuclear proliferation because it increases the chance of nuclear war, but the Iran nuclear agreement was working, and Trump tore it up out of personal pique. At present, I am more worried about Trump dropping tactical nukes on Iran, than I am about Iran acquiring nukes.
That’s a fair and thoughtful position. The Iran deal did have value, and pulling out set us back. And yes...concern about escalation...especially with tactical nukes, is legitimate. We should be able to stop Iran from going nuclear and hold our own leadership accountable for restraint. Both matter.
Thanks. It is a concern because Trump has been itching to use nukes since he was first elected president. He has no regard for the consequences.
North Korea is more dangerous than Iran FFS. They have ICBMs. Iran having nuclear weapons doesn't change anything. A singular submarine from Washington state has enough warheads to annihilate Russia... Fuck Iran Fuck NK They won't do shit.
North Korea’s dangerous. Iran’s dangerous. It’s not a contest...they’re both problems. “We’ve got bigger guns” isn’t a strategy...it’s lazy thinking. Deterrence only works until it doesn’t. You don’t wait to see who blinks first when nukes are on the table. You stop it before it starts.
Yep…current iran regime rhetoric always hostile threats to US & Israel - and Iran or proxies used Every weapon they get on Israel and world shipping and US troops. This Iran regime makes trouble - so they can’t have nukes. Regime change = prosperity & peace ..so CIA arm the rebels? What next?
1/2 That’s exactly the tightrope, isn’t it? Iran’s regime has proven it will weaponize whatever it touches...that’s why nukes are a hard no. But jumping straight to regime change playbooks without understanding the cost?
2/2 That’s how we repeat past disasters. Stopping nukes doesn’t mean sleepwalking into another endless war.
Ah regime change…have we ever tried that before? Yes. Has it ever worked? Not that I know of. The ONE virtue in the MAGA movement is that it wants to pulled the US back from interventionism. But their guy went ahead anyway. BTW, avoiding interventionism ≠ isolationism. There’s a diff.
Iran could and probably has secreted fissile material and make a NBomb - this would make Trump and more importantly the US look like morons! Make us all radioactive! Trump got excited and jumped the gun! He’s shot his load! Opened Pandora’s box! Trump declaring a win has sealed Irans victory!
Isn't that kinda how we ended up with this Iran problem anyway? Unadvisable regime change?
Exactly this Jack! Our administration creates more evil and dysfunction than it solves.
No country ANYWHERE should be allowed to build nukes.
So instead they have lots of <90% enriched uranium, which can be used to make any number of dirty bombs, which are arguably better tools for propagating terror anyway. Plenty of ways for them to wreak havoc without "having Nukes". I think a new way of looking at this whole issue is warranted.
1/3🧵 You’re right that Iran can...and does...wreak havoc without nukes. But that’s exactly why stopping them from crossing the nuclear threshold matters.
2/3 Dirty bombs are bad. Actual nuclear weapons are exponentially worse. It’s not either/or...it’s a matter of scale and deterrence. A new way of looking at this is fine...but pretending nukes wouldn’t fundamentally change Iran’s leverage and boldness is a misread.
3/3 They already destabilize the region with proxies and terror. Giving them nuclear cover would turn a dangerous player into an untouchable one. That’s not a risk worth normalizing.
Puts the World at Danger!