@AverageJoe1 saidCurious why Americans like yourself are always quick with the "shut up," while simultaneously hammering the free speech drum.
Shut up Ghost. We don't need to hear from a brit about the war,
Do you only value free speech if it aligns with your own?
@mike69 saidAre tactical nukes something you are unaware of?
Yep great idea, NK is going to attack the south with nukes and in doing so nuke themselves. Who needs enemies with a leader like that. You did give many points, I disagree with you, and think you’re wrong with pointless points. So your final answer is NK is more of a threat than Iran, I disagree because of the information I gave you.
From out AI friend:
Tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs), or non-strategic nukes, are lower-yield, short-range nuclear devices designed for battlefield use against troops or specific military targets rather than widespread city destruction. Ranging from 1 kiloton or less to 100 kilotons, these weapons are delivered via missiles, aircraft, or artillery. They differ from strategic weapons by their intended, localized battlefield deployment and are not constrained by typical arms control treaties
3 edits
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidGhost, if something breaks out between them they will not use nukes. I feel this way for the many points I gave you while you debated none. Look up first day death tolls between them and tell me the hermit kingdom is going to attack them, it’s destruction for both. Huge grouped populations side by side, they wouldn’t need nukes and already have a ton of firepower pointed back and forth.
Are tactical nukes something you are unaware of?
From out AI friend:
Tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs), or non-strategic nukes, are lower-yield, short-range nuclear devices designed for battlefield use against troops or specific military targets rather than widespread city destruction. Ranging from 1 kiloton or less to 100 kilotons, these weapons are delivered v ...[text shortened]... intended, localized battlefield deployment and are not constrained by typical arms control treaties
This would also take things to a world level, won’t happen, if handlers don’t want it to. Nuking the South is also nuking us, how would that change things?
Iran is just being the same as it always has been, allies knew what they were getting when they created alliances.
@mike69 saidI hope you are right.
Ghost, if something breaks out between them they will not use nukes. I feel this way for the many points I gave you while you debated none. Look up first day death tolls between them and tell me the hermit kingdom is going to attack them, it’s destruction for both. Huge grouped populations side by side, they wouldn’t need nukes and already have a ton of firepower pointed back and forth.
In the meantime, would you consider the actions by America and Israel in Iran a failure if they end the conflict with the Iranian regime still in power? (Irrespective of how much destruction has been caused or the regime weakened).
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidAww man you miss the issue. Waste time telling me I do not like free speech, type away Sonhouse.
Curious why Americans like yourself are always quick with the "shut up," while simultaneously hammering the free speech drum.
Do you only value free speech if it aligns with your own?
I was saying that you have nothing to say about the war, so don't be tiresome. You send 2 ships a week after Trump goes solo on saving the world from Nukes. You and Starmer are total losers. There are no leaders except for Trump, and the dictators, who, by definition, lead.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidIt’s a loaded question, but no, what is the main reason we’re there?
I hope you are right.
In the meantime, would you consider the actions by America and Israel in Iran a failure if they end the conflict with the Iranian regime still in power? (Irrespective of how much destruction has been caused or the regime weakened).
@AverageJoe1 saidWay to miss the point. You're right, Trump did go it alone. Had he made allies fully aware of the madness he was going to unleash we would undoubtedly have had more ships already in place around Cyprus and the like to protect our assets.
Aww man you miss the issue. Waste time telling me I do not like free speech, type away Sonhouse.
I was saying that you have nothing to say about the war, so don't be tiresome. You send 2 ships a week after Trump goes solo on saving the world from Nukes. You and Starmer are total losers. There are no leaders except for Trump, and the dictators, who, by definition, lead.
And we do have something to say about the war. It was illegal, poorly timed and with no long term plan to manage the chaos it would cause (is causing) across the middle east. - It will probably leave the Iranian regime still in power and an ongoing threat to the region and its own civilians.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke said???? Is this Suzianne!?!?!??
Way to miss the point. You're right, Trump did go it alone. Had he made allies fully aware of the madness he was going to unleash we would undoubtedly have had more ships already in place around Cyprus and the like to protect our assets.
And we do have something to say about the war. It was illegal, poorly timed and with no long term plan to manage the chaos it wou ...[text shortened]... y leave the Iranian regime still in power and an ongoing threat to the region and its own civilians.
So, you think allies should have known what he was going to do.... (so they'd sit in front of TV and watch the action?)
Surprise is critical to the success of strikes. The more governments that are informed beforehand the greater of the risk of leaks. And the allies may oppose the operation and try to get Trump to cancel it. That is all he would need ...Jesus. Aren't you glad he got it done?
Answer this....no one including you and Marauder and Sue and Sonhouse ever said a word about how Obama didn't tell a soul that he was giong after Bin Laden. Was it OK for Obama to keep a secret? Why are you not in favor of Trump keeping a secret???? Riiiiiiiggggghhhht.....you are conflicted, little feller. All of you are. go chew your pillow
You will not respond to this.
@AverageJoe1 saidI will respond sir, but only to point to the fact that the hamster is missing from you wheel.
???? Is this Suzianne!?!?!??
So, you think allies should have known what he was going to do.... (so they'd sit in front of TV and watch the action?)
Surprise is critical to the success of strikes. The more governments that are informed beforehand the greater of the risk of leaks. And the allies may oppose the operation and try to get Trump to cancel it. That ...[text shortened]... re conflicted, little feller. All of you are. go chew your pillow
You will not respond to this.
@mike69 saidThe question isn't loaded, it's pertinent.
It’s a loaded question, but no, what is the main reason we’re there?
If Trump declares the conflict over and the Iranian regime is still in power the whole episode has been a complete failure. Worst than that, it has caused long term damage to the middle east.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidIran certainly does not need any encouragement but they have yet to test a nuke bomb
Obama=$250 billion cash
Biden” 46 billion cash
H clinton gave iran ability to enrich uranium
You think this played a part in creating?
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidI also answered you, shouldn’t your question be why do you feel this way, of course you already know the answer to that don’t you? It depends on what your goals are, clearly yours are liberal, directed away from reality. Isn’t it funny how all of that terrorism and death from Iran over 47 years and its proxies they fund and train doesn’t disturb anyone? Gosh why don’t we wait until they actually have nukes instead of just uranium at 60% that has no other use, that way they can and will fire them if we attacked at some point in the war and their destruction.
The question isn't loaded, it's pertinent.
If Trump declares the conflict over and the Iranian regime is still in power the whole episode has been a complete failure. Worst than that, it has caused long term damage to the middle east.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidWhy
Iran certainly does not need any encouragement but they have yet to test a nuke bomb