News Is the US Prepared to Militarily Engage Iran?

[ThomasT]

I'm no Middle East expert but what worries me is that once they get them, if ever, there's no going back. If they get them, 20, 30, 40 years down the road some lunatic might get into power there and start launching ...

I don't think that's even remotely likely.

... just as Saddam would have done had he had them.

I don't think he would have.

The internal power struggles in the Mid-East strike me as more extreme and there's much greater potential for an unstable person to take power.

I don't think that's necessarily true. People who are granted power are generally people who are more emotionally stable than the average person, imo.

Or, suppose Iran had had them during the Iran/Iraq war. Might they have been tempted to take Baghdad out with a nuke at some point during that struggle when they were really hurting?

Tempted maybe, but they wouldn't have done it, imho.

I think there's an excellent chance Saddam would have nuked Teheran if he could have during that war. He was not a very reasonable person.

Saddam was both reasonable and emotionally strong. That's part of why he became the boss. Imho, he wouldn't have used nuclear weapons had he had them.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Saddam was both reasonable and emotionally strong. That's part of why he became the boss. Imho, he wouldn't have used nuclear weapons had he had them.

I don't see how you figure he was reasonable. Strong, obviously, but reasonable?

 

[ThomasT]

I don't see how you figure he was reasonable. Strong, obviously, but reasonable?

Well, thankfully, it's off-topic. So, we needn't consider it.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Well, thankfully, it's off-topic. So, we needn't consider it.

You were just yankin' my chain.

 

[ThomasT]

You were just yankin' my chain.

I do that sometimes, but not wrt the considerations presented in this thread. The questions associated with the OP are difficult. I have certain ideas, but can't say that I know the answers.

 

[mheslep]

...

Saddam was both reasonable and emotionally strong...

Saddam was not insane as I understand the term. But reasonable? His reason for gassing a ~peaceful town of thousands? For attacking Iran? For genocide on the Marsh Arabs? For trying to kill a US president between the wars?

Edit: nevermind - see above posts from Zooby

 

[tiny-tim]

Judaism is a theistic religion. Jewishness is associated with that religion. It isn't a race.

jews aren't a race?

antisemitism (meaning hatred of jews) is universally recognised as a form of racism

(why are you denying this?? )

One might disagree with the establishment of the Jewish state of Israel … without being in any way a racist.

"in any way"?

that's very difficult … to call for the elimination of the only jewish state in the world and not to call for the elimination of any other state, is obviously antisemitic

You're confounding race with nationality.

anti-israeli racists sometimes like to claim

"israelis aren't a race, so i can't be accused of anti-israeli racism, becaue it doesn't exist!" ​

And I'm not criticizing the population of Israel, I'm just criticizing their government actions and political ideology behind it (zionism).

but which israeli government?

you're being very disingenuous

if you mean you were criticising the present israeli government, then you did so on the basis of things done over 60 years ago

if you mean you were criticising every israeli government, both left-wing and right-wing, then you were criticising most of the population of israel

 

[Evo]

This thread has continued a bit too long.