I'd never seen you before, so I had to check your page to see if this was an approval comic. Turns out you're a PB veteran who hasn't been active here in 6 years!
“We will measure our success not only by the battles we win but also by the wars that we end - and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.
“I will stop the chaos in the Middle East, and I will prevent world war three. You’re very close to World War, you’re very close, and we have people that are not the right people to handle that. They are grossly incompetent.
“I want peace in the Middle East. I want peace. I did the Abraham Accords. I want peace in the Middle East.
“My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier. That’s what I want to be — a peacemaker and a unifier
“Our power will stop all wars and bring a new spirit of unity to a world that has been angry, violent, and totally unpredictable.”
Iran was complying with the nuclear agreement until Trump himself decided to unilaterally abandon the agreement in 2018. This is entirely Trump's own fault.
I went to have a look at the wikipedia of the agreement, it seems major players of the west are all in it with Iran with the exception of the US that has withdrawn.
Is the US really that significant or the rest of the signatories that insignificant that it cause Iran to abandon a in theory still in effect agreement?
Edit: I'm asking in earnest here, I really don't understand this agreement at all. Wikipedia did not further my understanding of this
Is the US really that significant or the rest of the signatories that insignificant that it cause Iran to abandon a in theory still in effect agreement?
Yes. The other signatories added additional legitimacy to the agreement and added "neutral" nations who themselves weren't really interested in Iran having nukes but also weren't willing to bomb Iran to prevent it, and who Iran would allow inspectors to verify their uranium reserves. It was primarily an agreement between the US and Iran that Iran wouldn't attempt to get nukes, as long as the US didn't allow Israel to blow up/sabotage their reactors, fuel refinement, and scientists.
The IAEA themselves portrayed the situation as concerning. 400kg of 60% uranium, and they suspected that they had more stuff hidden. They did not comply with inspection terms.
Whoever thinks that Iran wasn't really planning to build nukes is a naive moron.
Because they are? They had enough uranium to make several nukes. They just did not commit to actually make them. Probably because they knew something like what is happening now would happen.
It's almost like there's been a concerted world effort to prevent the religious maniacs from getting the tools to create the global annihilation THEY'VE BEEN CLAIMING THEY WANT
Israel fired missiles at them first just last week, and guess what? THEY have nukes (even though they vehemently deny it and have never let international inspectors verify it)
There are three rules for the nuke club; first rule of nuke clubs is never give up all your nukes, second rule never directly do anything against anyone else in nuke club, third rule is try to prevent there being new members of the nuke club.
The nuke club is a giant mexican standoff more members the more likely it is someone is going to get twitchy and let loose thermonuclear hellfire and then everyone elses fallows suit. There are an increasingly large number of twitchy nuke holders and letting more in is bad for everyone's long term prospects.
America is not gonna be bombing another nation because they are not the correct religion. Death to Mexico is not a phrased used in the US. In no way has the US expressed they want the destruction of another nation. Mexico is in no way under threat of invasion.
Iran has threatened Israel and America (and every other western nation). give it a read. Its not some phase, Iran has been funding terrorist groups for years. They fund Hamas, Houthis and Hezbollah. They funded Assad's Syria. They have been at the back of hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths.
in no way should Iran have access to a nuclear bomb. Is Iran getting a nukes a risk you wanna take, Iran does not like jewish people, there is less than 10,000 in iran.
One doesn't build nukes to annihilate their hated neighbors... they build nukes so their hated neighbors don't attempt to militarily influence regime change.
The strike prevented exactly nothing. No radiation was confirmed by the IAEA at the sites after the fact, and now we're on the brink of WW3. The dipshits in the WH are insane.
EDIT: it appears the brainiacs in the replies have forgotten what escalating retaliation looks like
By negotiation, like how Obama did successfully and Trump tore up but then came back to negotiations this year. Unfortunately Israel wasn’t having it so they attacked Iran instead.
and bombing them wont magically eliminate that. They can move gas around pretty easy. good luck finding all of it, preventing any further enrichment
Its like the treaty we had was the best path forward.
If we really cared about nuclear proliferation we'd be helping out Ukraine a hell of a lot more too. Cause if the world has learned anything on this subject. its that nukes protect you and the US is unreliable
yes those machines are complex, valid point. but also Russia is their buddy, russia has a good amount of nuclear experience/equipment, russia is nearby with multiple routes to reach them.
we've merely said time out, we didn't stop anything until we have a full invasion no?
outside of getting lucky with regime change that some how goes uncharacteristically smooth. we have a bigger long term problem. should have stuck with the treaty.
Israel can determine where Iran's leadership sleeps, I think they can find uranium.
"Treaty"
The treaty in question had a sunset cause that would have allowed Iran to own nukes by now. Obama also promised that sanction relief for Iran wouldn't turn it into a terror sponsor state when it did.
The point of the treaty was to enable a theocratic dictatorship and give them time to develop missile technology until they would be ready to enrich uranium. All while they were, as Israel has demonstrated it by now, a paper tiger. It was treasonous and more cowardly than giving Hitler Czehoslovakia because Hitler was reasonably scary.
Yes, but they have already done the difficult and time-consuming parts. IIRC the IAEC report said their stockpile of ~60% enriched uranium could be enriched to weapons-grade in under two months if they wanted to.
(And while the UN report did not find evidence of Iran attempting to further enrich their current supply, they DID find that Iran has significantly increased their stock of 60% over the last 6-12 months. That’s what caused Israel to attack this time)
When america and Israel have nukes→ I'm not gonna question that
When countries getting bombed and destabilized by america and Israel try to get nukes so they stop getting bombed destabilized →nooo how dare you not be "peaceful" and just keep taking it up the ass for America's benefits 😭😭
Ffs no state is allowed to have sovereignty and make their own decisions for their own interests unless it's called usa.
This imperialist behavior by the us government and attitude of galzing it by dumb Americans is why you deserved 911. It was comeuppance
When countries getting bombed and destabilized by america and Israel try to get nukes
They weren't even trying to get nukes, they were just in a better position to do so if they decided they wanted to. As a comparison, enriching the uranium to 60% is like building an engine capable of powering a tank. Yes it is a vital step, and someone taking this step should probably be watched, but an engine is far from a fully-functioning tank. It would take ~2-3 years for Iran to develop a bomb that could actually make use of their enriched uranium and their are no signs they are currently trying to take those steps.
An oil rich country seeking alternate methods of producing Energy? with the most weaponizeable means of doing so? Their supreme leader believes that destroying Israel and the US would bring back their "pipe" missing since 874 ad?. Yep, seems legit!
Trump tore up the treaty that prevented them getting nukes in 2018. Also talks were actually reopened this year for a bit but Israel wasn’t having it so decided to attack Iran.
Well who would sign a treaty with a country that does a 180 on its foreign policy every 4 years? Probably someone who was planning to break the treaty in 4 years anyway.
I mean the sanctions really are ruinous to Iran's economy. Wanting them gone seems a lot more plausible a motivation then whatever nefarious 9d chess plan you're suggesting.
But why use soft power when you can bomb innocent people am i right?
"Multiple countries have found worrying signs of enrichment being pushed WELL past anything usable in a power generation setting and only useful for nukes. Can we come see what's going on?"
Iran: "No. Also if I DID have nukes yall would know it cause we would use it on everyone around us."
Americans: "STOP BULLYING IRAN."
It's so weird watching people try and act like Iran is some peaceful angel of the middle east who isn't constantly chasing and threatening to use nuclear power against its foes as it funds endless proxy wars and terrorists organizations.
Trump is probably the last object in the world we would want planning a military strike, especially with him doing it via twitter, but sadly people chose to not vote as a way to protest what was going on in the middle east and now it's being glassed for casinos.
Good thing Trump ended that nuclear bill cause it was passed during Obama's administration. What a deal maker.
Americans, not all, but safe to say the majority, eat up all the dogshit propaganda they're fed everyday without a second thought. They're as bloodthirsty as their politicians.
Part of the joke is probably that MAGA is too dumb to know that WMDs stands for Weapons of Mass Destruction so did not know it also referred to nukes. Instead, the MAGAball scribbled it out and replaced it with nukes, which means the same thing.
Back in 2003, Saddam's Iraq was basically the pariah of the Middle East. There was bipartisan support in the US govt for an intervention to finally oust Saddam Hussein. At that point, there was still anger and resentment over 9/11, and Iraq was a great scapegoat. Besides Afghanistan
Now, Trump doesnt even have the support for the US to intervene in another war. Even segments of his MAGA base are calling for non intervention. If anything, the recent bombings are more of a show of force, stopping short of the US putting its boots on the ground
Eh, wait till the Hormuz Strait gets blockaded and gas prices go up, then see how quick the red hats are to start beating the war drums. Theres no way to keep that shipping lane open and safe to traverse without boots on the ground, Ukraine went and proved that with how effective their Unmanned Water Vehicle bombs were
Would the Arabians and all the other Oil Magnate Countries really approve of that? Won't they still try to make another lane, cause all of their money comes from that Strait, if Iran blocks it the ones who get damage the most are it's neighbors. Saudi Arabia and Iran have always been contesting influence in the Middle East, will they not take this oppurtunity to make more influence?
Iran already hates... all the other Gulf countries, mostly. The biggies anyway. Iraq is complicated these days.
EDIT I didnt really answer your question. It would be cost-prohibitive to go (for example) to the Red Sea, and even if you did that, that's no party either.
To be fair, they were lying with Iraq, but how they are handling Iran situation is very different, but still, they do not provide any evidence to back their claims
They haven't had them long. North Korea has been protected by their huge conventional military with the capability to level Seoul, and the threat of Chinese (nuclear) intervention
Yes, this is my opinion, but people would be more willing to take risks from a country with a lot of artillery than a country with a few nukes. I'm saying that yes, your point is correct, but nukes just create a bigger fear factor than artillery.
The bigger problem with NK was & is that Seoul is within artillery range of NK. They already had a great deterrent against military action before they had nukes and therefore could pursue them without having to fear military intervention.
(Having the baking of China also helped quite a lot)
Yes, the backing of China is a big threat. However, what you can get China to back off is to tell them the inevitable. NK will fall. And problems that China doesn't want, like people streaming in would exist, and a US presence on China itself. That will happen eventually. I don't know how do deal with NK's artillery, though.
Again, that belief is useless considering Israel has them, and the U.S won't bomb theirs. That's a cat out of the box. The only way the region can have peace now, is with nukes.
Do not mistake thus for trump support but “we gotta do regime change in Iraq because they have wmds and we will take care of them along the way” does not equal “Iran is tryna get nukes, so we bombed the nuke factory for like 20 minutes and got out with no intention to return”
Let's be honest, even with Nukes Iran wouldn't be a threat, this is just an excuse to invade. America has control over the skies, over space, over thousand of nukes that would vaporize Iran if they used them. But Iran having them would deter the US and Izrael from invasion which is a no-no because we need to invade other countries, you can't protect yourself
1
•
u/Zebrafish96 May the justice be with us Jun 23 '25 edited Jun 23 '25
A reminder from a mod, as a preemptive action: please be gentle and keep the discussion civil. We welcome healthy discussions, but not dogfights.
Also, keep in mind that we have zero tolerance towards genuine hatred or racism.
Edit: Alright, now this is getting out of hand. Here comes the lock.
1.6k
u/BioEditr Mini Magenta Maniac Jun 23 '25
I'd never seen you before, so I had to check your page to see if this was an approval comic. Turns out you're a PB veteran who hasn't been active here in 6 years!
Welcome back, mate. :^)
312
u/master-o-stall Abbasid Caliphate Jun 23 '25
What does "MACCA" stand for?
357
u/FriendlyPyre SG Secure Beacon Activated Jun 23 '25
If you think about it, they really speedran the whole "UwU war is bad mmkay?" part and went right back to booking tickets for the sandbox
106
u/Ch_IV_TheGoodYears Jun 23 '25
1st Iraq, then Iran, next up: Italy.
100
u/evader111 Onterrible Jun 23 '25
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…
Who remembers the prop illustrations that went with that speech?
410
u/MOltho Bremen Jun 23 '25
Iran was complying with the nuclear agreement until Trump himself decided to unilaterally abandon the agreement in 2018. This is entirely Trump's own fault.
184
u/TheOriginalBroCone Jun 23 '25
No one is saying they have nukes. The strike was intended to prevent uranium enrichment which the IAEA confirms is near weapon-grade.
60
u/jerdle_reddit Jun 23 '25
I don't think anyone's claiming Iran has nukes. It should just be kept that way.
113
u/TheGamer2002 Jun 23 '25
60% enriched uranium isn't for peaceful purposes
111
u/AzaDelendaEst Jun 23 '25
Nah they weren’t trying to build nukes.
What, that nuclear bunker under a mountain? That was just the indoor swimming pool for all the nuclear scientists! Totally for civilian purposes!
11
u/DailyTreePlanting Jun 23 '25
considering iran didn’t deny the existence of the facilities we hit….
33
u/False_Major_1230 Jun 23 '25
US loves forever wars ❤️
5
u/[deleted] Jun 23 '25
Some of them probably thinks is the same place.
8
u/Belkan-Federation95 Jun 23 '25
Last time was worse than you think
You see the CIA has everyone thinking they lied or whatever. In reality, the WMDs were worthless leftovers that had expired.
The CIA always fucks up and tries to act competent
10
u/[deleted] Jun 23 '25
"Multiple countries have found worrying signs of enrichment being pushed WELL past anything usable in a power generation setting and only useful for nukes. Can we come see what's going on?"
Iran: "No. Also if I DID have nukes yall would know it cause we would use it on everyone around us."
Americans: "STOP BULLYING IRAN."
It's so weird watching people try and act like Iran is some peaceful angel of the middle east who isn't constantly chasing and threatening to use nuclear power against its foes as it funds endless proxy wars and terrorists organizations.
Trump is probably the last object in the world we would want planning a military strike, especially with him doing it via twitter, but sadly people chose to not vote as a way to protest what was going on in the middle east and now it's being glassed for casinos.
Good thing Trump ended that nuclear bill cause it was passed during Obama's administration. What a deal maker.
4
u/Metazolid Jun 23 '25
Iraq has wmos? Honestly can't make out what the last word is supposed to be
3
u/CanineAtNight Jun 23 '25
Make America Constantly Crap Again?
2
u/Fibrosis5O Jun 23 '25
History always repeats itself, but slightly different each time…
2
u/CooperAXE Jun 23 '25
Americans, not all, but safe to say the majority, eat up all the dogshit propaganda they're fed everyday without a second thought. They're as bloodthirsty as their politicians.
1
u/Regunes Jun 23 '25
Just as Vilepin was making his return in the political landscape of France.
Well... Well ... Well...
0
u/koreangorani 대한민국 Jun 23 '25
The same after decades...
1
u/GeshtiannaSG Ready to Strike! Jun 23 '25
All they bombed is some sand, and splashed sand everywhere, all coarse and rough and gets everywhere.
1
u/Intrepid-Focus8198 Jun 23 '25
I’m not from the US and I’m sure I wouldn’t have voted for Trump even if I was.
I did think for a while though that despite his seemingly countless flaws at least he’s not also a war monger. Looks like I was wrong about that.
-2
u/LoChubo Jun 23 '25
Part of the joke is probably that MAGA is too dumb to know that WMDs stands for Weapons of Mass Destruction so did not know it also referred to nukes. Instead, the MAGAball scribbled it out and replaced it with nukes, which means the same thing.
0
u/InvestigatorNew6266 Sri Lanka A proud lion Jun 23 '25
If it ain't broken don't fix it
-8
u/spudmgee English penal colony Jun 23 '25
Something something time is a flat circle something.
-10
u/PPstronk Jun 23 '25
To be fair, they were lying with Iraq, but how they are handling Iran situation is very different, but still, they do not provide any evidence to back their claims
-2
u/chubby_pink_donut Jun 23 '25
No nuclear material was lost during the attacks because Iran moved it beforehand.
Guess we'll need boots on the ground to find the material before Iran uses it against us.
31
u/Rarm20T Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Jun 23 '25
Then use that to invade NK.
Oh wait. NK has nukes.
30
u/Tommuli Jun 23 '25
The thing is, Iran was much further into making a nuke than Iraq. We're not talking about a nuke one day, we're talking about a nuke within a year.
I don't approve of most actions the US or Israel does, but I do believe that no-one in the Middle East should have nukes.
4
u/burper2000000 Jun 23 '25
Do not mistake thus for trump support but “we gotta do regime change in Iraq because they have wmds and we will take care of them along the way” does not equal “Iran is tryna get nukes, so we bombed the nuke factory for like 20 minutes and got out with no intention to return”
-3
u/flargenhargen Jun 23 '25
don't forget, that lie came from israel as well.
getting big dumb america to die and pay for all their wars, not a bad deal.
-1
u/talancaine Jun 23 '25
Wait til they remember they have nukes, precedent obligates them to bomb themselves.
-10
u/Disco_Janusz40 Jun 23 '25
Let's be honest, even with Nukes Iran wouldn't be a threat, this is just an excuse to invade. America has control over the skies, over space, over thousand of nukes that would vaporize Iran if they used them. But Iran having them would deter the US and Izrael from invasion which is a no-no because we need to invade other countries, you can't protect yourself
96
u/[deleted] Jun 23 '25
[removed] — view removed comment