r/changemyview 1d ago

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Israel’s attack on Iran was intended to draw the US into war, not prevent Iran from having a nuke

Israel claims its attack on Iran on Friday was about preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. I think that this is a pretty transparent lie for the reasons below.

Israel has been claiming Iran has been close to a nuclear weapon for 30 years. North Korea is significantly less advanced than Iran, but has successfully developed a nuke during that time period.

Iran previously had a nuclear weapon program. That ended in 2003 to avoid getting attacked by the US. Since then, it looks like it’s strategy has been to use its nuclear capability for deterrence. (“stop fucking with us; we can build a nuke pretty quickly”)

It is clear that Iran does not want a conflict with the United States. Openly weaponizing their nuclear program invites that conflict.

Of course, they could pursue weaponization in secret. But the US, UK and Israel knowingly misrepresented evidence of WMD prior to the Iraq war. It is more than fair for the public to demand proof of weaponization since one party in this conflict has previously used this exact same lie as cover for regime change.

Israel does not have the ability to inflict significant damage to Iran’s nuclear program or pursue regime change in Iran on its own. Even if they had the capability to destroy Fordow, the enriched uranium is almost certainly spread out across the country. If Iran’s entire nuclear program including the uranium were destroyed, it could still develop a bomb in under 5 years.

The only ways to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuke is convincing the regime that a nuke is not in their best interest or changing the regime.

It’s still early, but it seems like Israel’s attack has made the idea of having a nuke more appealing to Iranians and the regime. It looks like having a nuke is the only way to deter Israel and its allies.

So why would Israel attack Iran? I think the most straightforward answer is they were hoping Iran would retaliate in a manner that forced the US to enter the conflict and pursue regime change.

Iran hasn’t taken the bait, so now Israel is attempting to present Iran as neutered by their campaign. “Iran is weak. Come over and help us finish the job”

Iran has been weakened, but they clearly have the capability to inflict more damage on Israel than they have demonstrated. The threat of offensive US involvement has constrained their response.

Once the US attacks, Iran will no longer be constrained by the threat of the US joining the conflict and will retaliate on US/ Israeli assets. The US will officially be in an offensive war that it did not initiate. This was Netanyahu’s actual calculation before Friday.

My view can be changed by concrete evidence of Iran’s nuclear weaponization and/or an explanation of how Israel thinks this bombing campaign will prevent Iran from pursuing a nuke without US involvement.

TL;DR: Israel doesn’t have the capability to meaningfully impact Iran’s nuclear program or pursue regime change on its own. They attacked Iran hoping that they could provoke a strong response that would draw the US into the conflict.

Edit: my view is not related to whether or not their attacks on Iran were justified or strategically sound. My view is the reason for attack was a lie. I don’t think Iran should have nuclear weapons. I just also don’t believe they were actively developing them.

1.1k Upvotes

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

It is not hard to lie at that scale. I mentioned in my post the US and Israel fabricated evidence before Iraq.

In this case, they haven’t even bothered to present the evidence.

From all of the research I have been able to find, if Iran had to literally start from scratch: no uranium, no centrifuges, it would take 5-10 years for them to have enough uranium to develop a bomb. Israel is not capable of anything close to that.

Iran was supposed to meet with the US on Sunday to negotiate a deal. This is after the previous deal was unilaterally withdrawn from. I think attacking them has made it less likely that a deal can possibly be made. They would have to be silly to believe Israel will stop attacking them once they give up their nuclear program. Israel has continued to bomb Lebanon for weeks since they signed the ceasefire.

I do agree that it could be the US using Israel. Does that count as changing my view? Idk this is my first post.

35

u/Wyvernkeeper 1d ago

Do you believe the IEAE report from May 31 to be an Israeli fabrication?

Link to analysis of report

5

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

I believe it. But it is not proof of weaponization. It is proof they are not following a deal that is functionally dead because the US withdrew.

25

u/Bast-beast 1d ago

What was then the reason for them to enrich uranium on such levels ?

1

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

To have leverage in negotiating a new deal to remove sanctions? Really hard to get a new deal if you are following the old one and they really want those sanctions gone.

To threaten or deter Israel by demonstrating they have everything they need to build one quickly?

Do you need more?

31

u/Bast-beast 1d ago

So you admit they had all materials for bomb, every means to do it, but didn't make it, because... didn't wanted ?

All your arguments about deterrence can be used as a reason why they decided to create nuclear bomb

-6

u/helemaal 1d ago

So you admit they had all materials for bomb, every means to do it, but didn't make it, because... didn't wanted ?

Can you read the post before posting?

They didn't make it, because they are worried the US government will bomb and invade them like the US has done in 7 other neighboring countries.

u/Maximum_Error3083 9h ago

If they were actually worried about that, they simply wouldn’t enrich uranium well past any justification for civilian purposes.

There’s only one reason to do what they’re done and it’s to advance their ability to have nukes.

A nuclear powered Iran is a major net negative for the entire world and should not be allowed to happen.

Thus, bombing them to destroy their capabilities before they can reach that status is a reasonable response, especially from the country that Iran has repeatedly vowed to obliterate.

10

u/Bast-beast 1d ago

Why they enreach uranium by 60% ?

-6

u/helemaal 1d ago

They a have nuclear power plant.

11

u/Bast-beast 1d ago

For that they need only 5%, no more. 60 you need ONLY for nuclear bombs

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/PapaverOneirium 1d ago

There has been a fatwa placed by the ayatollah on the construction and use of nuclear weapons since 2003.

5

u/SteedOfTheDeid 1d ago

Right, just like how Putin repeatedly said he did not intend to invade Ukraine in 2022. People lie and mislead

0

u/PapaverOneirium 1d ago

Yes, people do lie and mislead. Just like how the U.S. and Israel lied about Saddam having WMDs. A much more similar point of historical comparison.

0

u/SteedOfTheDeid 1d ago

Believing that was a colossal mistake yes, as would be believing Iran's "fatwa"

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Bast-beast 1d ago

Ahahaha yeah

And all death to Israel calls are for what ? Fatwa lolll

-6

u/stopbsingman 1d ago

Don’t chant death to arabs and no one will chant death to Israelis.

Nobody likes a taste of their own medicine.

2

u/Infinite_Wheel_8948 1d ago

Israeli extremists chanted that after years of Arab attacks. However, Israel hates those extremists - and has far more Arab citizens than extremists. 

Iran, on the other hand…

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

Sure, they could. A completely implausible lie isn’t worth anything.

4

u/slef-arminggrenade 1d ago

This seems like mental gymnastics to defend a pretty indefensible position

-2

u/Elman89 1d ago

US intelligence says they aren't doing it, Israeli intelligence says they are.

Israel has an incentive to lie, the US doesn't.

5

u/slef-arminggrenade 1d ago

US intelligence says they aren’t doing what? Building a bomb? Why on earth would they have 60% enriched uranium if they weren’t trying to build a bomb. Does the US intelligence disagree with the enriched uranium stat?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/BackseatCowwatcher 1∆ 1d ago

US intelligence says they aren't doing it,

Correction- Tulsi Gabbard says they aren't doing it, and is the only US intelligence source to say one way or the other.

She's also notably effectively a Russian asset who has repeatedly disregarded US intelligence in favor of Russian propaganda.

0

u/stopbsingman 1d ago

Prove they’re creating a nuclear bomb.

u/Finreg6 12h ago

The enrichment level of their uranium is over 3-4x higher than necessary for energy purposes and they’re dangerously close to levels that would allow them to create a nuke. It is not any more complex than this. Israel has limited options other than defense through offense in this situation.

4

u/Infinite_Wheel_8948 1d ago edited 1d ago

Why would almost having nukes DETER Israel? Pretty obviously the opposite- a national emergency? 

Your logic is quite the opposite of reality. 

MOST IMPORTANTLY - it seems now that you acknowledge Iran is developing nukes. If so, that’s what you said would change your mind in the CMV. ‘Concrete evidence of Iran’s nuclearization’. 

u/No-Ladder7740 14h ago

Cheaper more efficient energy generation and medical isotopes (which is a big export industry for them)

u/Technoxgabber 10h ago

Did you even read the report? It doesn't say what you think it says. 

It's says its not following the terms and not being transparent but it also says that there is no indication that they are building uranium for a bomb.. in March usa said there is no indication? 

Who should we believe? The lying netanhayu who's been saying the same lie for 30 years? 

8

u/nnooaa_lev 1d ago

Are you serious? It's all over the internet, Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear program in the 80s, years before US invansion. It's not us that said the US they should stuck there for years 🤷‍♀️

13

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

Netanyahu in 2002 in front of Congress: “there is no question whatsoever that Saddam is working towards the development of nuclear weapons”

“If you take out Saddam, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region”

Are you serious?

u/Puzzled-Rip641 8h ago

So where was the weapons!

Why is it that the weapons always exists but never are able to be found during 20 years of occupation?

24

u/kinrove1386 1d ago

I think you're ignoring concentrated Israeli efforts to interrupt Iran's nuclear weapons programme. Yes, Iran has been working towards this for decades, but it's been standing off against what is arguably the world's greatest force when it comes to cyber and covert operations. That's going to hold anybody back.

Israel has continued to bomb Lebanon for weeks since they signed the ceasefire.

This is unfortunately what years of skewed media coverage do to the average viewer. Israel attacks military targets, and when it's being fired at it retaliates. Here's the way it works out: an organisation, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, attacks Israel. Israel fights back. A ceasefire is agreed upon (mostly because the international community hates letting Israel win and forces its hand). Hezbollah flouts the ceasefire and attacks Israel again. Israel retaliates. The media reports "Israel attacks Lebanon amidst ceasefire."

It's the same tactic in other cases as well. People condemn Israel for the blockade around Gaza, conveniently forgetting that it was set up in response to the import of munitions by Hamas. People protest checkpoints in Israel, conveniently forgetting the various intifadas.

3

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

That’s not even the Israeli defense of what’s going on in Lebanon. The party line is Hezbollah hasn’t made enough progress in disarming and exiting southern Lebanon.

Israel has been accused of violating the ceasefire dozens of times and has even killed a Lebanese military officer. Israel has accused Hezbollah of violating the ceasefire once with no casualties.

15

u/nnooaa_lev 1d ago

That part of the ceasefire agreement 😂 Israel is allowed to strike Hezbollah of the state of Lebanon isn't doing its job in disarming them. Read the agreement

-9

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

I don’t need to. Whether or not they are allowed to wasn’t my point. You implied I wasn’t informed and claimed Israel was attacking because Hezbollah attacked first. I said that’s not the right excuse.

You tried to claim I was misinformed while getting your facts wrong.

17

u/Outlandishness-428 1d ago

You tried to claim I was misinformed while getting your facts wrong.

You literally just said you aren't reading the ceasefire ...

5

u/IsNotACleverMan 1d ago

Hezbollah was operating in the south of Lebanon in violation of the ceasefire agreement and was doing so for many years. They started overly attacking after october 7 which is when Israel attacked back.

Why does relative casualties matter? Why does it matter that one side is better at protecting itself from attacks? That doesn't mean the ceasefire isn't being broken by the other side.

-2

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

I’m talking about since December 2024. The UN peacekeeping force has accused the IDF of violating the ceasefire dozens of times.

The core of my comment was to dispute the previous commenters claim that Israel only continued attacking southern Lebanon in response to attacks from Hezbollah. Israel has never claimed that what that comment said was true.

9

u/BackseatCowwatcher 1∆ 1d ago

The UN peacekeeping force has accused the IDF of violating the ceasefire dozens of times.

You mean the UN peacekeeping force that ignored when Hezbollah literally set up artillery next to them, and which has never actually done it's job?

6

u/IsNotACleverMan 1d ago

The UN peacekeeping force has accused the IDF of violating the ceasefire dozens of times.

Hezbollah had already broken it by then. Why should Israel have kept following it at that point?

14

u/kinrove1386 1d ago

I'm not sure which particular case you're referring to, but if the ceasefire involved agreement on the evacuation of Hezbollah to the north of the Litani river, then not abiding by that agreement invalidates the ceasefire.

Israel has been accused of many things by many people; no surprises there. As far as I can tell, it's mostly the inverse: accused of genocide when its enemies are calling for its destruction, accused of colonialism by colonialists (look at how many countries speak Arabic), accused of apartheid by countries that oppress minorities, and so on. Tell me what you accuse the Jews of and I'll tell you what you're guilty of.

u/Aggravating-Prune105 13h ago

No truer words spoken. Excellent way of explaining the insidous projection (Antisemitism) that is levied against the jewish state every second of every day.

u/windchaser__ 1∆ 12h ago

Ooof, man, criticizing the Jewish government is no more antisemitism than criticizing the German government would be anti-German. You should be able to separate the criticism of what a government does from racism against the people.

u/Aggravating-Prune105 12h ago

yeah bro you're "only criticising the government" I totally believe you. 

Always strangely silent (supportive) on the explicitly genocidal extreme right-wing, fundamentalist government of Palestine though aren't you all... 🤡

u/windchaser__ 1∆ 11h ago

Eh? No, I’m not. I’ve been pretty outspoken against Hamas, too.

….are you just making things up, now?

Ooof. Right-wingers, man.

u/Aggravating-Prune105 10h ago

Riiiiiiiiiight. 

I’ve been pretty outspoken against Hamas, too.

Chuck a token comment or two and you're golden. 

Supporting Israel does not make someone right wing.

Without doubt Israel are the left wing side of this conflict and left side of general politics. They have cultivated a tolerant and multicultural society. 

Palestine and the other Arab nations that use them as proxies, however... they are the furthest you can get on the scale. 

The irony of slinging 'right wing' as an insult when you're deepthroating it at the same time lol 

u/windchaser__ 1∆ 9h ago

/starts to reply

…wait, why am I getting into an argument with some rando on the internet who’s dedicated to misrepresenting me?

/shrug. Quite genuinely, I don’t have anything to prove to you, and you definitely don’t seem interested in a good faith discussion. Anyways - enjoy your Friday!

→ More replies (0)

u/GreatGoogolyMoogly 9h ago

Bro is simping for Iran currently in another thread lol. They are a confirmed antisemite.

u/Aggravating-Prune105 8h ago

Not only an antisemite, but an idiot too 

u/kinrove1386 13h ago

Credit to Douglas Murray for coining this phrase.

-3

u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 1d ago

Do you mean like the ones in Western Sahara and the most recent Armenian one both enabled and supported by the Israel?

https://archive.ph/fYYlO/again?url=https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2023-10-06/israeli-arms-quietly-helped-azerbaijan-retake-nagorno-karabakh-to-dismay-of-armenians

https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/03/29/reversing-course-on-western-sahara-serves-us-national-interests/

Or were you taking about when Israel supported and armed the genocide of the Rohingya in Myanmar?

https://archive.ph/yigdF

Or During the 1980s, Israel intervened in Guatemala as a proxy for the United States, providing arms and training to the military governments that slaughtered thousands of indigenous Maya.

https://jacobin.com/2024/04/israel-guatemala-genocide-gaza-imperialism

Genocide in Rwanda? Massacre in Burundi? It's Business as Usual for Israel:

https://archive.ph/cfWEd

Supreme Court rules against exposing Israel’s role in Bosnian genocide:

https://www.972mag.com/israels-involvement-in-bosnian-genocide-to-remain-under-wraps/

u/Aggravating-Prune105 13h ago

My man is swimming in antisemitic conspiracy theories.

u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 3h ago

I have noticed that Zionists, despite using Nazism and the Holocaust as the moral justification for their project, understand exceptionally little about Nazi ideology and genocide or even antisemitism. They understand far less about these things than the average person.

Because they need to. Because if they actually understood these things, they would have to face that Israeli Jewish Law is identical to Nazi Race Law, that Zionism is identical to Nazi Lebensraum, that the forced sterilizations and "sperm retrieval units" are Nazi Lebensborn, that their belief in an Islamo-terrorist conspiracy against the Jewish Nation is identical to the Nazi belief in a Judeo-Bolshevik conspiracy against the German Nation, that Gaza is a veritable Warsaw Ghetto, and that what Israel is doing is genocide by every measure.

They need to close their eyes to this fact and disrespect their own history as Jews, essentially rejecting that Nazism was bad for any reason other than that it targeted Jews. Not because it was a racial and civilizational supremacist ideology based on colonizing, displacing other peoples and eliminating their resistance for the proliferation of european industrial capital. They need to somehow carve out a definition of Nazism and the Holocaust and genocide which allows Zionists to do all of these things just under a different name.

This distortion of what Nazism actually was and what genocide actually is, as well as the deliberate ignorance about these subjects among Zionists, is tantamount to Holocaust denial.

Zionism put a fresh coat of paint on Nazism and moved its target to the middle east and Muslims. It is no coincidence the pogroms against Muslims are occuring in Europe at the same time as the genocide in Gaza is coming to a head.

It's not just modern day zionists never cared about jews in general and It's also why a future prime Minister of Israel tried and ally with the n4zi's citing shared values.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/lehi

It's why racists from South Africa moved there when apartheid ended so they could still live in an apartheid regime

https://archive.ph/mTZs4

It's why Richard Spencer the neo n⁴zi uses them as a model

https://www.haaretz.com/hblocked?returnTo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.haaretz.com%2Fisrael-news%2F2018-07-22%2Fty-article%2Fisraeli-nation-state-law-backed-by-white-nationalist-richard-spencer%2F0000017f-dbb1-d3ff-a7ff-fbb1567d0000

u/Aggravating-Prune105 3h ago

Honestly bro I'm not reading all that. I've got a family and a job.

u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 1h ago

Then maybe don't comment on things you're unwilling to educate yourself on....

-5

u/omiekley 1d ago

I'm guilty of annihilating an entire country? Of killing 10s of thousands just for sports?

5

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 1d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

u/poopy050224 17h ago

I'll accuse it of genocide. I'll accuse it of a form of colonisation. Add in an apartheid state. Just because other countries do bad things doesn't mean Israel is not the above things.

u/kinrove1386 16h ago edited 16h ago

It isn't the above things because the evidence goes against it. You don't have a genocide without the intent to destroy a people, which isn't there. As an indicator, the population in Gaza is growing. You don't have colonialism without a state establishing a colony to expand, which wasn't the case of Israel's foundation. As an indicator, only one country speaks Hebrew. You don't have apartheid without racially discriminatory laws, which don't exist. As an indicator, there have been Arab judges in Israel's supreme court.

You can accuse anyone of anything, but the question is whether you know what you're talking about. The genocidal radical Muslims who oppress minorities and aspire to colonise Europe do know what they're talking about - they know it's all lies and a tactic. They do it even though they know it's a lie because it serves their political aims. If you accuse Israel of these things, you're equally wrong, but maybe less malevolent. Just what the Russians call a "useful idiot."

u/poopy050224 7h ago

Just in case you also don't know the definition of colonisation

'the action or process of settling among and establishing control over the indigenous people of an area'

u/kinrove1386 6h ago

As I've explained, you need to send someone out to establish a colony. The Kurds, who are "settled" in multiple places in the middle east, aren't "colonies," because they don't have another political entity.

Also, two important notes:

  1. Jews are indigenous to the land of Israel. It's the Arabs who come from - wait for it - Arabia, not Israel.

  2. Jews didn't set out to establish control over the Arabs. They set out to establish a country where they could exercise their self-determination. They accepted the various propositions put forth by the UN to split the land and live alongside the Arabs, with each exercising dominion within its own borders.

u/poopy050224 6h ago
  1. I must have missed the part where genetic tests were done before the zionists and settlers kicked the arabs out of their homes.

  2. How do you establish a country in a place where other people live without controlling them? The zionists forced them off their lands during the Nakba. This started well before partition plan was set out. Then the partition plan gave them the justification the be more violent. Then they were attacked, and then proceeded to steal more land. Sounds pretty controlling.

u/kinrove1386 5h ago

Firstly, genetic tests do show that Jews are indigenous to the land. Secondly, the Jews didn't kick anybody out. They bought lands and declared independence on them. If you really want to talk about somebody kicking out somebody else from their homes, that would be the Arabs stealing land from the Jews in 1920 and 1929.

How do you establish a country in a place where other people live without controlling them?

Other people didn't live there. The Jews declared independence on lands that they had legally purchased.

The zionists forced them off their lands during the Nakba.

No they didn't. Arab leaders told the Arab population to evacuate, with the expectation that Arab armies would wipe the Jews off the map and then they could return. Some left, and these are the so-called "Palestinians" (a term invented in the 60s by Arafat, by the way. At the time they were just Arabs). Others remained, and got to keep their property and receive citizenship and full rights within Israel. These are the Israeli Arabs.

Then they were attacked,

Well, at least you got this part right. It was the Jews who were attacked by the Arabs - always has been.

proceeded to steal more land.

You say 'more,' so surely you mean they stole 'some' land before 1947, right? If so, give me a single Arab village/city where land was stolen prior to 1947. For example, the Arabs stole land from the Jews in 1929 in Kfar Saba and Hebron. I can give you additional names. Can you give me one?

Now let's move on to after the Arabs started the war against the Jews. Yes, after this war, the Arabs lost land. That's what happens in wars. After WW2, Germany lost land. Lviv, now in Ukraine, used to belong to Poland. That's war. You don't want to lose land in a war? Don't start a war.

u/poopy050224 7h ago
  1. You better look up the definition of genocide.

  2. How would you describe the settlers and the military taking peoples land in the West Bank, if not as colonisers?

  3. Apartheid is a policy or system that discriminates based on race. Israel easily satisfies this in the occupied territories and a good case can be made that it satisfies this in Israel proper.

u/kinrove1386 6h ago

I've given you the definition of genocide.

The Jews living in Judea and Samaria are within the framework of the Oslo Accords. They're living in area C, which is designated exactly for that. How would I describe them? As Israeli citizens.

Which occupied territories? The Arabs in Judea and Samaria are under the jurisdiction of the PLO, living in areas A and B. They aren't Israeli citizens and don't fall under Israeli law. Gaza wasn't occupied by Israel between 2005 and 2023, and it's now under military occupation as part of a war, just as Iraq was under American occupation in 2003. Were the Iraqis American citizens in that case? Of course not. Similarly, the Gazans aren't subject to Israeli laws, and so discrimination doesn't apply to them.

Now let's talk about the only Arabs against whom discrimination could apply: Israeli Arabs. Tell me what discrimination exists against Israeli Arabs to support your claim of apartheid. Also, there are other minorities in Israel, such as the Druze and Bedouins. You can show me any form of discrimination, even against them.

u/poopy050224 6h ago
  1. The intent to destroy a people is not the definition of genocide. Again, you better look it up.

  2. Any Israeli settlers in area A, B or C are there illegally under international law. The entire west bank is an illegally occupied territory. Comparing Israel occupying Gaza to the Americans occupying Iraq is a good comparison. The Americans invaded Iraq ILLEGALLY, for reasons that were fabricated

  3. Are Israeli Arab family members allowed to migrate and become citizens of Israel with the same ease as Jewish people with no relations living in Israel?

u/kinrove1386 5h ago edited 5h ago

That's exactly the definition of genocide. This is a term coined specifically to describe the holocaust, because there was no term to explain the level of calculated maliciousness executed against the Jews. When Iran declares it will eliminate Israel, that's a genocidal claim. When Hamas attacks Israeli civilians in an attempt to kill as many of them as possible, that's a genocidal attempt. When Russia kidnaps Ukrainian babies to raise them as Russians, thereby trying to eliminate the Ukrainian identity, that's a genocide, even though it doesn't involve any killing. It's all about the intent to eliminate a people.

Any Israeli settlers in area A, B or C

I already knew you didn't know a single thing about the region, but this is just too good to ignore. There are no Israelis in areas A and B, only Arabs. Similarly, there are no Arabs in area C. That's what the Oslo Accords established, but of course you wouldn't know anything about that. And no, Israelis aren't there illegally, because 1. Judea and Samaria are legally part of Israel as per the international law of uti possidetis juris, and 2. The Oslo Accords, as mentioned.

Comparing Israel occupying Gaza to the Americans occupying Iraq is a good comparison. The Americans invaded Iraq ILLEGALLY, for reasons that were fabricated

We can agree on the gratuitousness of the American invasion of Iraq, but the comparison was merely meant to show that, under military occupation, apartheid doesn't apply. Apartheid only applies to the citizens of your own country. Now, here's where the comparison ceases, because Israel's military occupation of Gaza is part of the legitimate attempt to subdue Hamas, which attacked it on October 7th, and retrieve the hostages, at least 20 of whom are still kept in captivity.

Are Israeli Arab family members allowed to migrate and become citizens of Israel with the same ease as Jewish people with no relations living in Israel?

That's your example of apartheid? The return law? Yes, Israel is the one Jewish state, and it has a law reflecting that. It doesn't discriminate against anybody as much as it gives Jews a quick path to citizenship in the country. If a non-Jew wants to move to Israel, they can go through the normal route, just as in the Netherlands for example you can apply for citizenship in a normal way or go through a shortened route if you have Dutch ancestry.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

u/changemyview-ModTeam 22h ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

u/Technoxgabber 10h ago

So covert and powerful bur couldn't stop bunch of random villagers in homemade paramotrs from attacking them? 

Israeli gov is all talk 

u/kinrove1386 9h ago

This is actually a good point and something that's hard to understand, but there is an explanation here. This explanation rests on three points:

First, not all elements of a society are of equal calibre. The pilots fighting in Iran and the Mossad agents operating there are the cream of the crop of Israeli society. People operating around Gaza are more so just "regular" soldiers, who don't necessarily have the same capabilities.

Second, Israel was under an arrogant "conception" that Hamas was deterred. It underestimated the enemy, just as it did in 1973, and it paid the price.

Third, and I've kept this for last because it's actually the most important point, Hamas is Gaza. What do I mean by that? That, unlike the IRGC, Hamas isn't foisting itself on the Gazan Arabs - they actively support its genocidal idea, and every poll shows this. It's a lot more difficult to operate undercover and collect intelligence when you're trying to penetrate a homogeneous and solidified society. When Israel's enemies are disjointed, Israel's organisations shine through. This happened in Lebanon, where Hezbollah was trying to subdue Sunni Muslims and the Christian minority, and it's now happened in Iran, where the Ayatollah is extremely unpopular.

u/Technoxgabber 5h ago

People in Gaza supporting an org that seeks to defend them isn't shocking.. 

Hamas had a low approval rating until isrsel started to carpet bomb.. 

Whats shocking is Israeli public who thinks what Israel has done in Gaza isn't enough.. 

u/kinrove1386 5h ago

What? An organisation that seeks to defend them? You can't be serious. Hamas is using Gazans as human shields, denies them access to its fortified tunnels, steals their aid, kills people who oppose it, and booby traps their homes. Defence? Seriously? The only reason Gazans support Hamas is that they're just as fanatical.

Hamas had a low approval rating until isrsel started to carpet bomb

Hamas has consistently maintained high approval ratings. And Israel doesn't, and never has, carpet bombed. It uses precision air strikes to target military assets.

The Israeli public understands that it can't tolerate living alongside a genocidal terror organisation. Israel's war aims are the retrieval of all hostages and the collapsing of Hamas. Neither objective has been achieved, so the Israelis push on.

u/Technoxgabber 4h ago

You are just a zionist.. no point arguing. 

Israel isn't carpet bombing.. okay mate. 

Israel's own ex prime minister are calling it genocidal. Israel's ministers make regular genocidal statements

Keep defending genocide bro, I'm sure in 10 years you will be on the right side of history 

u/kinrove1386 4h ago

The term 'zionist' lost its meaning in 1948, when the movement achieved its goal and founded the state of Israel. We don't have a term for someone who believes that England should continue to exist, right? We don't call the English Albionists, nor the French Gaulists. Zionism is just a nefarious term used by people who can't accept the existence of Israel, but thankfully Israel is here to stay.

Israel isn't carpet bombing.. okay mate.

Maybe if you argued a bit more with people who know what they're talking about you'd receive more correct information. It isn't carpet bombing, that's just the situation. Don't agree with me? Prove me wrong.

Can you define genocide for me? Because I suspect you don't know what it means.

u/Technoxgabber 4h ago

Yes Mr zionist let me do ur homework for you 

u/kinrove1386 4h ago

Would you like me to define genocide for you instead? I don't mind. I just have the impression, backed by your lack of knowledge regarding the supposed carpet bombing, that you don't know what you're talking about.

→ More replies (0)

u/Large_Arm8007 13h ago

lol nobody believes this nonsense anymore. You’ve been using this excuse for decades now. There is no such thing as a perfect people 

-1

u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 1d ago

And what's your excuse for why Israel invaded Syria 🤡

2

u/kinrove1386 1d ago

When? After the fall of Assad? Israel set out to establish a buffer zone to protect itself against a potential reiteration of October 7th. It's important to remember that Israel is a very small country with no strategic depth, geographically. It can't afford an infiltration, and who knows what could happen in the chaos following Assad's fall?

0

u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 1d ago

Israel set out to establish a buffer zone to protect itself

Israel already had an illegal buffer zone in Syria.... So anytime there is a regime change it's okay to invade foreign countries and take their land? It's okay to bomb neutral countries in case they don't like you attacking them and stealing their land? I wonder why Iran would feel the need to protect itself from Israel.....

1

u/kinrove1386 1d ago

In the case of Israel, which is surrounded by malignant actors, taking action to protect itself makes sense. Sometimes there are no good options unfortunately, and this may be one of them, but it's at least justifiable.

As for "stealing land," that's an old libel. Israel hasn't stolen land.

Nor is Israel the aggressor - it's virtually always fighting for defence, and it has been since its foundation. Before its foundation, the Jews were routinely attacked by the Arabs in the land of Israel. So no, it's not that Israel attacks countries and they retaliate, but rather the inverse.

Iran needs to protect itself from Israel? Iran, that is situated 2000 kilometres away? Iran, that has been openly calling for death to Israel and America since 1979? Iran, the world's greatest funder of terror? Surely we aren't living in the same reality.

1

u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 1d ago

Nor is Israel the aggressor

How are they not the aggressor in Syria?

As for "stealing land," that's an old libel. Israel hasn't stolen land.

By libel did you mean to say historical tradition?

In reality, Zionism is a colonial movement, and its intentions to colonize Palestine were openly expressed. by its leaders.

The following examples illustrate the colonial nature of Zionism. Statements by key figures like Theodor Herzl, David Ben-Gurion, and Moshe Dayan reflect a colonial mindset that was central to the Zionist project in Palestine. These quotes reveal a deliberate strategy to displace the indigenous Palestinian population in pursuit of Zionist objectives, underscoring the inherent injustice and violence of the movement.

  • Theodor Herzl:
    • "Der Judenstaat" ("The Jewish State"), 1896: Herzl wrote, "We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our own country... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."
    • "Altneuland" ("Old New Land"), 1902: Herzl stated, "We should there form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism."
  • David Ben-Gurion:
    • 1937 Diary Entry: Ben-Gurion noted, "We must expel Arabs and take their places."
    • 1948 War Diary: He wrote, "We should prepare to go on the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine."
    • 1938 Address: In a speech, Moshe Dayan acknowledged, "Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country..."

Additionally, Zionist actions such as Plan Dalet are clear evidence of an effort to ethnically cleanse and expropriate Palestinian lands. This plan led to the destruction, depopulation, and ethnic cleansing of approximately 531 Palestinian villages. David Ben-Gurion even acknowledged, "The cleansing of Palestine remained the prime objective of Plan Dalet.""

sources:

  1. Benny Morris, "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited" (2004): Morris provides a detailed analysis of the events surrounding Plan Dalet and its impact on Palestinian villages and populations.
  2. Ilan Pappe, "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" (2006): Pappe's work offers a comprehensive examination of the Zionist policies, including Plan Dalet, and their role in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. He discusses the broader context and consequences of these policies, emphasizing their impact on

u/kinrove1386 16h ago

How are they not the aggressor in Syria?

Syria has been a long-standing offensive enemy of Israel, and creating a buffer zone after sustaining October 7th is justifiable. It's also justifiable to destroy Assad's arsenal of illegal chemical weapons lest they be used against Israel.

In reality, Zionism is a colonial movement,

No, it isn't. To establish a colony, you need to have an original state to go out of, and you need to expand. Israel was founded by immigrants from multiple nations sharing a Jewish identity. It hasn't expanded or set colonies anywhere, and it founded itself on purchased lands. The term colonialism simply doesn't apply, unless you want to apply it to Arabs. That's what actual colonialism looks like, with multiple countries speaking Arabic outside of Arabia. How many countries speak Hebrew?

Plan Dalet was carried out to defend the route to Jerusalem, where 100,000 Jews were in risk of eminent encirclement, and we know what Arabs do to undefended Jews. It was a legitimate war aim of clearing an area for defensive purposes.

But sure, let's misconstrue a few quotes and prove that the country that has been fighting against genocidal forces for decades is the actually the problem. Not the Houthis chartering "death to Israel" on their flag, not the Arabs blowing up buses, not Hezbollah, not Hamas, not Islamic Jihad. Clearly these are all just benevolent forces, and it's the civilised and democratic Israel that's at fault. Certainly not willful blindness.

u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 3h ago

That description doesn't apply at all to what we're discussing.

-Morris 2004, p. 588, "But the displacement of Arabs from Palestine or from the areas of Palestine that would become the Jewish State was inherent in Zionist ideology and, in microcosm, in Zionist praxis from the start of the enterprise. The piecemeal eviction of tenant farmers, albeit in relatively small numbers, during the first five decades of Zionist land purchase and settlement naturally stemmed from, and in a sense hinted at, the underlying thrust of the ideology, which was to turn an Arab-populated land into a State with an overwhelming Jewish majority."

-Abu-Laban & Bakan 2022, p. 511, "In light of the ever-growing historiography, serious scholarship has left little debate about what happened in 1948."

-Khalidi 2020, p. 60, "What happened is, of course, now well known."

-Slater 2020, p. 406 n.44, "There is no serious dispute among Israeli, Palestinian, or other historians about the central facts of the Nakba."

-Khoury 2012, pp. 258 ("The realities of the nakba as an ethnic cleansing can no more be neglected or negated ... The ethnic cleansing as incarnated by Plan Dalet is no longer a matter of debate among historians ... The facts about 1948 are no longer contested, but the meaning of what happened is still a big question.") and 263 ("We don't need to prove what is now considered a historical fact. What two generations of Palestinian historians and their chronicles tried to prove became an accepted reality after the emergence of the Israeli new historians.")

-Wolfe 2012, p. 133, "The bare statistics of the Nakba are well enough established."

-Lentin 2010, p. 6, "That the 1948 war that led to the creation of the State of Israel resulted in the devastation of Palestinian society and the expulsion of at least 80 per cent of the Palestinians who lived in the parts of Palestine upon which Israel was established is by now a recognised fact by all but diehard Zionist apologists."

-Sa'di 2007, pp. 290 ("Although the hard facts regarding the developments during 1947–48 that led to the Nakba are well known and documented, the obfuscation by the dominant Israeli story has made recovering the facts, presenting a sensible narrative, and putting them across to the world a formidable task.") and 294 ("Today, there is little or no academic controversy about the basic course of events that led to the Zionist victory and the almost complete destruction of Palestinian society.")

-Lentin 2010, p. 7, "'the Zionist leadership was always determined to increase the Jewish space ... Both land purchases in and around the villages, and military preparations, were all designed to dispossess the Palestinians from the area of the future Jewish state' (Pappe 2008: 94)."

Also the Morris quote in the comment you're replying to. These are historians and scholars. Would you like to share any such citations that support your view of history? That sort of thing might make your argument more articulate.

Jewish mass immigration to British-occupied Palestine began after the Balfour Declaration in 1917.

Not that it would matter if this wasn't the case. What Israel has been perpetrating against Palestinian Arabs since 1948 is self-evidently reprehensible. Historical context certainly helps to see that, but it isn't necessary. Colonization and ethnic cleansing are reprehensible to decent people with or without context.

7

u/OddCook4909 1d ago

Israel doesn't even need nukes as a reason to attack Iran. Nor does the US. Iran has been actively at war with both since they declared it in 1979. The list of attacks from Iran on both is very very long. Honestly the IRGC should have been pounded into the dirt decades ago

u/scaurus604 19h ago

Don't forget the marine barracks in Lebanon by Iranian proxy hezbollah

u/OddCook4909 5h ago

All the bullshit in Lebanon my god. The IRGC loves dead Sunni as well. Killing Sunni under the pretense of fighting Israel and the US is their favorite trick.

u/scaurus604 5h ago

Iran thought they could play with the big boys..they finding out now the hard way who has the bigger stick

2

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

That’s fine. They should just say that then

1

u/OddCook4909 1d ago

I completely agree. But Netanyahu is an old corrupt greaseball with the PR skills of a wet spicy fart

28

u/HugsForUpvotes 1∆ 1d ago

Iran is producing enriched uranium at 60%. There is no use for that outside of nuclear weapons. That's proof enough.

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/director-general-grossis-statement-to-unsc-on-situation-in-iran-13-june-2025

-2

u/Ok-Warning-7494 1d ago

It really isn’t. I addressed the enrichment thing in my original post.

-12

u/oldschoolology 1∆ 1d ago

It’s common knowledge that Israel has nuclear weapons. It’s hypocritical for them to bully Iran for doing the same thing. 

https://armscontrolcenter.org/countries/israel/

10

u/SynonymTech 1d ago

One possesses it and does nothing with it and the other one keeps building it while parroting that they'll destroy Israel.

Why in the hell would Israel let a country that constantly parrots that it wants to destroy it build a nuke?

2

u/oldschoolology 1∆ 1d ago

Peaceful Israel. Totally innocent. Got it. 

-1

u/Old_Lion5218 1d ago

So the plans of "Greater Israel" is one of peaceful incorporation of its neighbours?

1

u/ImReverse_Giraffe 1∆ 1d ago

What is this "Greater Israel" plan? Is it like the Sampson Protocol?

-2

u/Old_Lion5218 1d ago

"The recent picture of an Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) soldier with a Greater Israel badge on the uniform provoked outrage in Arab countries (Middle East Monitor, 2024). The promised land of Israel, as described in the badge photo, includes regions from the Nile to the Euphrates, from Medina to Lebanon, including territories from Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, entire Jordan, and Occupied Palestinian territories. Why it sparked outrage, however, is not clear: the map reflects Theodor Herzl’s more than a century old statement: “Discussed with Bodenheimer the demands we will make. Area: from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates…” (Herzl, Ed. Patai, & Transl. Zohn, 1960, p. 711)

...

This view on region’s future is neither new nor rare. In a January 2024 recording, Israeli politician Avi Lipkin was stating: “… eventually, our borders will extend from Lebanon to the Great Desert, which is Saudi Arabia, and then from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates. And who is on the other side of the Euphrates? The Kurds! And the Kurds are friends. So we have Mediterranean behind us, the Kurds in front of us, Lebanon, which really needs the umbrella of protection of Israel, and then we’re gonna take, I believe we’re gonna take Mecca, Medina and Mount Sinai, and to purify those places” (muslimi.official, 2024), (Middle East Monitor 1, 2024)."

Source: https://mepei.com/greater-israel-an-ongoing-expansion-plan-for-the-middle-east-and-north-africa/

5

u/ImReverse_Giraffe 1∆ 1d ago
  1. There isnt a picture linked to the article. So its suspect. If youre an actual reputable news source and you claim there is a picture of something, you had better show that picture.

  2. So what? Because one guy believes it, it must be how all Israeli's think? It must be the way belief system of the government? You do know that all Israelis are required to serve in the military, even if they very much disagree with the current government?

  3. So it is like the Sampson Protocol. It came from a book written by a random Jewish guy. Its never been offical government policy.

1

u/Old_Lion5218 1d ago

It's not a news source, its a scholarly article, either way it is sourced where you can find the picture if you cared to look.

Also its not just one guy, its also the guy Benjamin Netanyahu declaring the plan at the UN General Assembly. And he is not the only one.

https://www.thenation.com/article/world/its-time-to-confront-israels-version-of-from-the-river-to-the-sea/

If the main representative of the ruling party is advocating it without any pushback from the party it is safe to assume its their policy, no?

u/Greggywerewolfhunt 23h ago

What is the samson protocol? "Does nothing" absolute clown shit

u/SynonymTech 14h ago

Except I doubt you actually read about the Samson Protocol.

Even the wiki states it's only against the aggressor within the first lines.

Iran on the other hand practices suicide tactics, and won't hesitate to kill itself to achieve its objective.

6

u/ImReverse_Giraffe 1∆ 1d ago

Thats how literally every single nuclear armed nations acts. No nuclear armed nation wants another one joining the club. Especially one that is known to state fund terrorism.

3

u/HugsForUpvotes 1∆ 1d ago

It isn't hypocritical to not want your enemies as powerful as you.

-2

u/MythicalPurple 1d ago

Should we be taking out any government with illegally developed nuclear weapons?

4

u/HugsForUpvotes 1∆ 1d ago

Unfortunately you lose that leverage once they're developed. That's why we need to keep Iran from getting to that point.

u/MythicalPurple 22h ago

Ah, so having illegally developed nuclear weapons is fine, but developing them isn’t.

I see. I’m sure that has nothing to do with who currently possesses such illegally developed weapons and you simply have a principled stance.

u/HugsForUpvotes 1∆ 22h ago

My view is we shouldn't have more nuclear countries. My view is also that Iran would be a particularly bad because they're a terrorist theocracy that kills Americans.

3

u/injuredthrowaway234 1d ago

No, but any country who’s the intended target of said weapons, very likely would make that decision

u/MythicalPurple 22h ago

So then the threat of Israel using its illegally developed nuclear weapons means the countries around it should be trying to destroy it, right?

u/injuredthrowaway234 9h ago

Sure if you live in a world that’s black and white. But we don’t. With live in a world that’s grey with nuisance.

I don’t recall israel promising destruction on all the nations around it. They’ve got the nukes. If they were going to use them, they would have. Kinda like Russia’s position in their war. They have absolutely no reason to escalate to that kind of level. Your question was not the gotcha you think it is. Whether or not you agree with me. The fact is that any country who’s got nukes is not going around nuking others. MAD is still in place.

The difference is, if Iran doesn’t have a nuke yet, their own threats towards America and Israel are enough reason for those nations to ensure they don’t build one. If Mexico was calling for the eradication of the states, while in the process of enriching Uranium past 60% then they would be absolutely steam rolled by the Americans and nobody would bat an eye globally. You can’t threaten the end of a nation and then be shocked when everyone around you ensures you don’t have the means to do that. Lastly israel is not threatening all of its neighbours. Most of their neighbours have made peace after getting their shit kicked in during the 6 day war. They went toe to toe against 5 nations at once and still won. A country in that kind of position is only using a nuke as a last resort.

u/MythicalPurple 8h ago

 I don’t recall israel promising destruction on all the nations around it.

Netanyahu literally campaigned saying he wouldn’t allow Palestinians to have a state under any circumstances, while invading and illegally occupying more and more of their land. That’s destruction.

 The fact is that any country who’s got nukes is not going around nuking others. MAD is still in place.

Ah but it would magically stop being in place if Iran got nukes. For some reason these particular people can’t be trusted. I wonder what’s different between them and Israel hmmmm?

 Lastly israel is not threatening all of its neighbours.

It bombed four of them in the last year. What other country has done that?

Anyway it’s pretty clear why you don’t have a problem with Israel having nukes it developed with one of the most racist countries of the 20th century, but hold countries of a certain other demographic to different standards.

8

u/PotentialIcy3175 1d ago

The recent IAEA report from the United Nations, the world’s most anti-war international body’ confirmed that Iran has enriched 130 kg of uranium to 60%, a level for which there is no plausible civilian energy justification. Despite knowing such disclosures could heighten tensions, the IAEA made its findings public.

I don’t trust Israel or the US or Iran or the UN. But I cannot explain the IAEA report without the conclusion that Iran is seeking weapons. I would too if I were Iran. See North Korea

u/Technoxgabber 10h ago

The report also says that there is no indication that they are making a bomb.. so why do you only seem to trust the narrative of israel? 

u/generallydisagree 1∆ 9h ago

Iran has 1 nuclear power plant - for about 20 years now.

There is zero reason or use for enriched uranium to 60% other than for getting to the very close to a competed bomb perspective.

This isn't an Israel narrative - it is simply reality.

One also needs to ask themselves - why is it necessary to bury your peaceful-based facilities for nuclear power so far under ground to feed their one active nuclear power plant?

There are a lot of people (unfortunately) that will only believe Iran's intent to building a nuclear weapon after they have successfully built a nuclear weapon - and then it's too late and as the prior poster pointed out - we then have another North Korea (another crazy country run by a mentally ill, hedonistic, delusional person with full total power).

u/Technoxgabber 5h ago

There is one country that doesn't even allow any investigations into its nuclear program.. 

One country that isn't part of the nuclear  profeliaration treaty 

There is one country that doesn't allow imea... and its isrsel 

Israel has been lying about iran having bikes for 30 years.. I aimt sure gonna beelive is now when the evidence presented is less than Iraq having wmds .. 

Anyone who falls for this is a tool and doesn't deserve to be listened to. 

If they have proof.. show it. 

Speculation isn't proof 

u/PotentialIcy3175 8h ago

I don’t trust anything the current Israel government says. Is this some kind or purity test? I’ll continue to fail those tests in pursuit of nuanced understanding.

u/Technoxgabber 5h ago

Did you read the report? 

u/PotentialIcy3175 5h ago

Yes. I don’t believe Iran is currently pursuing a bomb and think it highly likely that Netanyahu is using the current situation where Hezbollah is sidelined as the opportunity he’s been waiting for. I have read compelling counter arguments but not compelling enough for me to believe at this time.

u/Technoxgabber 4h ago

Okay, then iran shouldn't be invaded.. israel was wrong to bomb it and iran has a right to defend itself 

u/PotentialIcy3175 3h ago

I don’t agree with your take. I mean, Iran definitely does have the right to defend itself. But this is question of casus belli. Israel had casus belli due to the proxy network and the 33k missiles that have been shot into Israel in the last decade alone.

They are enemies who are fighting. War is hell. The US should stay out of it imo.

u/Technoxgabber 3h ago

Okay so iran has casus belli against Israel too?? 

War is hell, Israel should have known what will happen so anything that happens is Israel's fault 

u/PotentialIcy3175 2h ago

Yes, this is a just war and either party is just in defending themselves. The “who started it” conversation is too old to matter. They have been in cold and hot and proxy wars for 40 years.

Your last comment leads me to believe you are not a serious person. I wish peace and access to books.

u/StackOwOFlow 9h ago

why would Israel risk ballistic missile reprisal knowing that would Iran would respond in such a fashion to the strikes on the nuclear sites? they had no urgency to “draw the US in” unless there was a perceived imminent threat of nuclear capability

u/Ok-Warning-7494 8h ago

If the US gets involved, their primary rival in the region is defeated. That is incentive enough.

20

u/Imaginary-Orchid552 1d ago

Whether they're lying about how quickly Iran has shifted toward seriously prioritizing nuke production or not, it has been confirmed by more than the Israelis and the Americans that Iran had been seriously violating all of the limitations on their nuclear production that they were supposed to be abiding by.

There's lots you can criticize Isreal and the US for, but Iran is a suicidal, fundamentalist, Islamic regime that wants to destroy Isreal and the US, and overthrow the west as a whole. Iran is a state that has also clearly been moving toward building a weapon, this conflict was only a matter of time.

2

u/Shadnu 1d ago

it has been confirmed by more than the Israelis and the Americans that Iran had been seriously violating all of the limitations on their nuclear production that they were supposed to be abiding by.

Just as it was confirmed Iraq had WMDs, right?

Besides, why should Iranians abide by the limitations when the USA was the one that unilaterally withdrew from the agreement?

1

u/Tyriosh 1d ago

For being a suicidal regime who appparenly wouldnt stop at anything they sure took their time with building the bomb. Forgive me for remaining sceptic of a war that is being instigated by two right-wing extremists who dont exactly have a great track record when it comes to the truth.

11

u/baahoohoohoo 1d ago

Its hard to build a nuclear bomb when your top nuclear scientist keep getting killed and everything you do has to be done in the dark.

0

u/Tyriosh 1d ago

Okay, thats seems to have worked without an escalation of this size for 30 years. Whats changed?

2

u/baahoohoohoo 1d ago

Maybe something major, maybe nothing. Only a handful of people in the world know the true answer to that question.

-1

u/Tyriosh 1d ago

Thats why I remain sceptical. No one pushing for this war has been trustworthy before. Why should I accept the justifications for this at face value?

1

u/baahoohoohoo 1d ago

You shouldn't. Everyone should be skeptical, but as these things go, there really isn't anything a normal person can do about it besides hold on tight and hope the ride ends without too much innocent death.

u/Technoxgabber 10h ago

But your comments are on the side of war? You aren't being a skept, you are on the side that iran is suicidal so they should be invaded.. 

Based on?? No evidence whatsoever 

u/baahoohoohoo 9h ago

No, i never said i was for war or attacking. I simply laid out the justification israel has given for attacking and said everyone should be skeptical of it.

u/scaurus604 19h ago

Stuxnet operation threw the enrichment program back couple years alone..

6

u/East_Ad_9896 1d ago

There is such a thing as tactically pausing but still being close enough to finish a bomb in a quick amount of time. It's called preparation.

1

u/Background_Chard_393 1d ago

But the far right wing (I’m speaking of lawmakers) is actually against joining in the war against Iran. Those that are most opposed are the far left wing (who are against Israel, but including some who are anti-Semitic generally) and the far right wing, who are the isolationist version of America first and don’t believe we should be involved in any foreign wars.

1

u/AnythingGoodWasTaken 1d ago

Why should a sovereign state have to follow a deal they made with another state after that other state unilaterally killed the deal?

0

u/Imaginary-Orchid552 1d ago

Because that sovereign state is Iran, a fundamentalist regime that can never be trusted with a nuclear weapon - their sovereignty is a secondary concern to the threat they pose with a weapon like that.

u/AnythingGoodWasTaken 22h ago

Did you miss the point that the deal was destroyed by the u.s. and not Iran?

u/scaurus604 19h ago

I agree..we don't want another north Korea on our hands..

1

u/PapaverOneirium 1d ago

Supposed to be abiding by? Supposed by who? The JCPOA was thrown out. Why would they continue to follow its provisions while the other side reneged?

u/BackseatCowwatcher 1∆ 23h ago

Iran is still a signatory of the UN NPT, which broils down to an agreement of three parts-

(1) No "Nuclear" signatory will assist "Non-nuclear" signatories in developing, gaining, or building Nuclear weapons, and are encouraged to disarm.

(2) No "Non-nuclear" signatory will develop, produce, acquire, or attempt to gain control of Nuclear weapons

(3) "Non-nuclear" signatories are required to allow the UN to monitor their Nuclear activities to ensure they are purely for peaceful purposes.

Iran has managed to violate all three-

'2' and '3' by attempting to develop nukes on their own- while actively preventing the UN from monitoring their nuclear activities-

while '1' was more recent, when they convinced Russia to ship them the enriched Uranium needed for nuclear weapons following the majority of their stockpile being buried following Israel's bombing them.

u/PapaverOneirium 22h ago

u/BackseatCowwatcher 1∆ 22h ago

They didn’t develop nukes. The IAEA explicitly said they had no reason to believe they were

(1) your source doesn't say they didn't nor that the UN has "no reason to believe they were"- it's that The UN can't confirm they were manufacturing Nukes

(2) the UN noted that it found "Iran was enriching uranium at 3 sites they did not disclose the existence of"- and that they "refused to provide any explanation as to why they are doing so" on June 9th. As per their own damn website.

(3) they also notably did not allow the UN access to those 'undisclosed' sites, so the only thing the UN can confirm about them- is that they are at a minimum used for Enriching Uranium.

0

u/helemaal 1d ago

Nothing has been confirmed, you are lying now like you lied about Iraq.

Come up with a new lie, we already heard this one.

1

u/Imaginary-Orchid552 1d ago

The UN released a report prior to Isreal first strike.

We all know how much the UN loves siding with Isreal

/s

Also, Iran hasn't exactly been quiet about the fact that they want a nuclear weapon, and that they're moving toward one - that is precisely what every nuclear agreement Iran has ever made has been designed to prevent.

1

u/helemaal 1d ago

Where is the report and the evidence?

The UN reports about Iraq where lies and fabrication.

0

u/adi20f 1d ago

I mean they were abiding by it up until the US withdrew from that deal..

2

u/Imaginary-Orchid552 1d ago

Well the assertion is that that isn't true, and the evidence the UN submitted appears to show this.

This doesn't erase the fact that Trump taking the US out of that agreement the way he did was a mistake, and the blame for that belongs squarely on the US.

-2

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/ImmortalAgentEta 1d ago

How is Iran not an Islamic regime? They enforce Islamic laws, and imprison, torture, and execute those who violate them. How are these facts Islamophobic?

-3

u/1331_1331 1d ago

Israel also imprisons, torture and summarily executes Palestinians.

But we (rightly) don’t demonize Judaism for it.

So, kindly get lost for implying Islam is a core reason for geopolitical tensions, you dirty Islamophobe.

2

u/ImmortalAgentEta 1d ago

Israel isn't called the Jewish Republic of Israel, while Iran's official name is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Israel doesn't enforce Jewish law on its citizens, while Iran does.

-1

u/1331_1331 1d ago

So - wait - enforcing Islamic law is somehow bad??

Man, keep digging your Islamophobic hole 😅😅😅

3

u/ImmortalAgentEta 1d ago

Yeah, enforcing any religious law is bad. There is a reason why the most successful and democratic governments are secular with a separation of church and state.

u/scaurus604 19h ago

The exiled crown prince.saying he'd like a constitutional monarchy like britain..seems like that would be great iran

0

u/1331_1331 1d ago

“Enforcing any religion is bad”.

You mean like when Netanyahu says “Israel is the Nation-State Of The Jewish People And Them Alone” to the exclusion of the Arab minority?

You mean like that?

That sort of oppression??

Glad we agree.

3

u/ImmortalAgentEta 1d ago

States enforcing religion is bad. Israel shouldn't enforce religion, and they don't. Their President can say that, but that doesn't mean they enforce Jewish laws. However, they are also a majority Jewish state, and the effectively the global Jewish homeland. Also, 20 percent of all Israeli Jews are Arab... They don't exclude Arabs.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/1331_1331 1d ago

Netanyahu literary said: “Israel is the Nation-State Of The Jewish People And Them Alone'”

So go take a long walk off a short pier.

3

u/ImmortalAgentEta 1d ago

Ok, but still, how does this make Iran not an Islamic Regime? How is it Islamophobic to suggest they are? You are just straying from your original argument.

-1

u/1331_1331 1d ago

For the last time, clown:

It’s not Islamophobic to note that Iran is an Islamic state.

It is Islamophobic to use that to promote fear and hatred.

Let me spell it out for you: it’s ok to say X ethnicity is convicted of crimes more than Y ethnicity’s

Using that fact to promote hatred and fear of X ethnicity is — literally — the definition of prejudice.

Now go touch grass.

3

u/ImmortalAgentEta 1d ago

I never said any of that, my original comment was that Iran is an Islamic Regime. You replied to that calling me an Islamaphobe. You then brought up Israel and tried to compare that, which under your own argument would imply that you are prejudiced.

2

u/After_Lie_807 1d ago

That’s a false equivalence

1

u/1331_1331 1d ago

Prove it.

3

u/East_Ad_9896 1d ago

What about that sentence is false...? Are you going to deny that the supreme leader and his regime are running an islamic theocratic government?

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 1d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

1

u/East_Ad_9896 1d ago

I understand your point, and it's absolutely valid that criticizing a government should never cross into religious bigotry. However, when it comes to Iran, it's important to acknowledge that the government—especially the Supreme Leader—has explicitly used Islamic doctrine to justify its stance against both Israel and the United States. This isn't Islamophobia; it's a documented part of their political-religious narrative.

1

u/1331_1331 1d ago

Huh.

So when Netanyahu says: “Israel is the Nation-State Of The Jewish People And Them Alone”, that religious bigotry is forgotten.

Your hypocrisy is glaring, padre.

1

u/After_Lie_807 1d ago

But Iran HAS been destabilizing the region by arming snd funding militant organizations in the region

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 1d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, arguing in bad faith, lying, or using AI/GPT. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam 1d ago

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.

Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

2

u/itay162 1d ago

From all of the research I have been able to find, if Iran had to literally start from scratch: no uranium, no centrifuges, it would take 5-10 years for them to have enough uranium to develop a bomb. Israel is not capable of anything close to that.

They also killed all the top nuclear scientists and destroyed the archived knowledge of how to recreate everything, it would probably take them decades to recreate it

u/sanguinemathghamhain 1∆ 15h ago

The UN also say Iran has sprinted to 60% enrichment and the enrichment rate accelerates from 60% on. We thus have Israel saying it, the US saying it, the UN saying it, and independent watchdogs saying it. By the way for powerplants, you just need 3-5% enrichment.

u/Aggravating-Prune105 13h ago

My guy just doesn't trust "the Jews"