Hi AC,

Iran had enough highly enriched U for ten nuclear weapons, all with approval from Khamenei. I don't see that as being consistent with an opposition to developing nuclear weapons.

Regime simply refers to an authoritarian government: I think this consistent with having school kids chant "Death to America", "Death to Israel" etc, along with people hanged from cranes in streets in many cities. I'd imagine that in such an environment, you or I would look much like Albo did at the mosque the other day.

Peace is bipartisan and unconditional. What we have had with Iran for the past 47 years is appeasement. I have no idea whether the US and Israel will succeed or not, but I do believe a peaceful Iran a great benefit for the world.

Also, you keep mentioning the murdered school kids, but was the action of the US and Israel a deliberate murder of children or a horrible mistake? The Australian gave accounts of some of the tens of thousands of murders by the Iranian regime recently. Those murders were deliberate, which is why Mossad is having trouble getting the murderers to lose their weapons and join the people. And here's you thinking that the Jews want to kill people: They don't.

HI Fester,

"Iran had enough highly enriched U for ten nuclear weapons, all with approval from Khamenei. I don't see that as being consistent with an opposition to developing nuclear weapons."

Yes apparently so.
I think 60% was the non-weapons grade accepted limit before Netanyahu started spakking it though. You could argue that it's too close a time-frame to full weapons grade and I'd probably agree.

I'm not entirely opposed to Iran having nukes, I'm just not sure I support a religious theocracy having them either.

But I have no more or less reservations than I do about Israel having them, especially when Israel is a nation under constant conflict because of territorial ambitions.
I could see a valid argument that says Iran having a nuke would hold the Israeli's in check and has as much a chance of ensuring peace across the region than the current situation that has instead emboldened the Israelis to engage in hostile actions against neighbours without reproach..
- It'd be similar to the kind of discussion that argued it's good the Russians have nukes simply to prevent the Americans from doing whatever they wanted.

I'm not entire sure what you mean by Albo at the mosque.
If I was a Muslim, I'd be offended at him showing his face in my mosque, after he just cheered on the killing of the Ayatollah.

That'd be like expecting pats on the back down at the local parish after you just publicly cheered on assassinating the pope and we're discussing sending troops to march on the Vatican.

"What we have had with Iran for the past 47 years is appeasement."
- I'm not sure they feel that way.

"I do believe a peaceful Iran a great benefit for the world."
Me too, but the realist in me thinks it's a fantasy right now.
What are they going to do after killing Khomeini?
Kill the next appointed Ayatollah that takes his place, and the next and the next etc. until they get every last one?
Unrealistic.

Ultimately Israel would never actually allow a prosperous Iran I don't think.

That country will be destroyed just like they did in all the others.

The sad fact really I think, is that if we really want Iran to change, we need to change what we're doing.

There's one thing both Iran and Russia want.
They both want to deal with the root causes of these conflicts, but the U.S. doesn't do diplomacy.
It knows only threats, blackmail, regime change and military intervention.

"Also, you keep mentioning the murdered school kids, but was the action of the US and Israel a deliberate murder of children or a horrible mistake?"

- I think it's likely to be a horrible mistake.
Even if you deliberately wanted to attack civilians, it wouldn't be advisable on the day you launched your opening attack.

Here's what I do know.
Targeting packages are not generated by humans, they're generated by AI.
Pete Hegseth took away some of the checks and balances that may have identified the building as a school. (So even if it was a mistake, it's one that could've been prevented if they didn't throw the rule book out and act like Israel does)
Next is what happened.

They fired at least 5 Tomahawk Block IV missiles at that group of buildings. The block IV have the ability to circle and loiter over a target and send back live video, so what they did was use 4 of those missiles to hit those IRGC buildings and the school, while the 5th missile circled overhead sending back the live feed Battle Damage Assessment.
Then, they saw movement at the school after the first missile hit.
It was kids, teachers, parents and other rescuers running around.
Those missiles also allow remaining fuel to be dispersed and act as a fuel-air explosive (thermobaric/vacuum weapon) upon impact.
The ignited cloud of fuel generates a powerful blast wave, which can be more potent than the main warhead itself in the case of a close-range target.
And so they saw people running around, may have considered it an active IRGC base and they hit it again.

That's what happened.

The proliferation of nuclear weapons, has not prevented war, it may have prevented the use of such weapons. When one power (USA) alone had a nuclear bomb it quickly used it, knowing there was no possibility of retaliation in kind against America. The USSR developed nuclear weapons in response, as a deterrent to any American preemptive strike against it, which the Soviets believed was inevitable if they didn't have a deterrent.

"The USSR developed nuclear weapons in response, as a deterrent to any American preemptive strike against it, which the Soviets believed was inevitable if they didn't have a deterrent."

The Soviets had their first test of an A-Bomb in August 1949, more than 4 years AFTER the US had dropped their first bomb. If the US was going to use their technological advantage pre-emptively they had plenty of time do do so.

But they didn't do that because they never had any intention of doing so. They used two bombs to bring a war to a close, saving millions of lives in the process. But they had no reason to use the bomb on the Soviets and therefore didn't. It was just Stalinist paranoia that caused the Soviets to think the bomb would be used against them, since, if they had that advantage they would most definitely have used it and couldn't imagine the US wouldn't do likewise.

(An interesting aside....the first Soviet bombs were almost identical to the first US bombs because most of it was designed from plans and information stolen from the US by Russian spies).

It should be noted that Israel has had a bomb since 1967 and never used it, even in the dark days of the 6 Day War and the Yom Kippur War. They hold the bombs as a final desperate option if the state is about to be overrun. The mad Mullahs on the other hand were open in saying they saw the bomb, if they could get it, as a means to destroy Israel ie as a first resort, not a last resort. Hence the current war.

Of course, the mullahs knew that if they used the bomb Israel would retaliate. But for them, death in war is a promotion and guarantees them a place in Paradise with their 72 virgins. (BTW, since the current Supreme Leader is gay, does that mean he gets 72 male slaves when he goes to meet Allah?.)

Trumpster,

"If the US was going to use their technological advantage pre-emptively they had plenty of time do do so. But they didn't do that because they never had any intention of doing so."

Have you been channelling that hay seed American president Harry Truman, YOU wouldn't have a clue. When the Americans alone had nuclear weapons, they quickly used them to their advantage. The "millions of lives saved" is nonsense, the reality is 250,000 innocent people were murdered.
A small fact that escapes you, is the second bomb on Nagasaki, 80,000 murdered, was simply to determine what atomic bomb type was most effective in murdering innocent people.

BTW, How is your claimed great peacemaker (what a joke) Trump doing as he and his cronies are profiteering from the stock market with their insider trading, they made $400 million in a couple of hours. And their gambling on America's war of aggression on Iran? Making Trump and his cronies even richer. Do you support this? Me thinks so!

When Trump blabs on about wars and cowards, note this;

Donald Trump did not serve in the military. He received four student deferments while in college and a 1968 medical deferment (4-F) for "bone spurs" (made up rubbish) in his heels during the Vietnam War, allowing him to avoid military service. TRUMP WAS HIMSELF WAS A WARMONGERING SNIVELLING COWARD.