Ed Israel/US Attacks Iran /Yet Another Country/Iran

[Steve]

Tell me you don't understand sarcasm without telling me you don't understand sarcasm.

Well I did say "/s" notwithstanding. But I'm sure you missed that in your rush to make some sort of a point.

 

[Ziggurat]

Well I did say "/s" notwithstanding.

But then proceeded to ignore it.

 

[Steve]

But then proceeded to ignore it.

 

[The Atheist]

He now says it's just Iranian ports that are blockaded, not the straits.

We need a chicken emoji for Trump.

Israel isn't a rogue nation. And North Korea is very dangerous.

Yet out of the leaders of those two nations only one has been charged by the ICC.

Do you know which one it is?

 

[Ziggurat]

Yet out of the leaders of those two nations only one has been charged by the ICC.

Do you know which one it is?

The list of who hasn't been charged by the ICC gives lie to the notion that they're any sort of moral or legal arbiter of right and wrong.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

The list of who hasn't been charged by the ICC gives lie to the notion that they're any sort of moral or legal arbiter of right and wrong.

The list of who has or has not been maligned by pseudonymous individuals on this or any other forum is not evidence that those individuals are any sort of moral or legal arbiter of right and wrong.

The ICC, on the other hand, has been recognized by the 139 countries that signed the Rome Statute. Of those 139, 29 have not ratified the treaty. Of those 29, four have given formal notice of their intention not to ratify the treaty:

• Israel
• Russia
• Sudan
• United States

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

So has Saudi Arabia. In fact, the terrorist cell they sponsored directly hit the US.

But somehow they are still good allies?

To be fair, that cell was also sponsored by the patron saint of the republitraitor party, Ray-Gun himself.

 

[jeremyp]

Yeah, that’s not going to happen.

You seem far too certain about something that might happen in the future.

Iran isn’t capable of escalating. Is someone going to join the fight on Iran’s side? Who?

The USA is though and so is Israel.

Yeah, the hit to global economy isn’t great, but we’ll survive.

So all those people in Iran who Tr*mp is killing with his vanity war don't matter. Gotcha.

 

[dirtywick]

as for escalation, the chinese, primary purchaser of iranian oil, already warned not to disrupt their iranian oil shipments. something else to keep an eye on.

 

[jeremyp]

I'm also not sure where this idea that you can never attack someone if you're negotiating comes from. It doesn't actually make any sense. Negotiations aren't magic, they aren't some holy ritual. If someone is negotiating with you but the negotiations aren't working, you aren't obliged to keep trying endlessly.

No you are right. They are not magic. That's why, when you negotiate with somebody, it's better to convince them you can be trusted when you say you'll do something as part of the negotiations. Nothing breeds distrust like killing the negotiators while they are negotiating.

Do you know that nobody trusts the USA to ever keep its word while Tr*mp is the president. It consistently breaks agreements and treaties if Tr*mp doesn't like them. I don't think you understand how poor America's reputation is with the rest of the world. Your collective word is worth nothing.

Oh, and lastly, I note that the simplest counter-argument to my prior post would be to simply point out a way in which Iran could escalate. But you didn't even try to do that. I wonder why.

This isn't a board game. You don't have to take turns. The USA is perfectly capable of escalating the situation without Iran doing anything.

 

[jeremyp]

as for escalation, the chinese, primary purchaser of iranian oil, already warned not to disrupt their iranian oil shipments. something else to keep an eye on.

Good point. Ziggurat seems unable to comprehend that there are several nations other than Iran that can escalate the situation.

 

[The Atheist]

The list of who hasn't been charged by the ICC gives lie to the notion that they're any sort of moral or legal arbiter of right and wrong.

Avoidance noted.

 

[Ziggurat]

No you are right. They are not magic. That's why, when you negotiate with somebody, it's better to convince them you can be trusted when you say you'll do something as part of the negotiations.

And what exactly did Trump say he would do as part of the negotiations?

Nothing breeds distrust like killing the negotiators while they are negotiating.

We didn't kill the February negotiators. I'm not sure where you got that from.

This isn't a board game. You don't have to take turns. The USA is perfectly capable of escalating the situation without Iran doing anything.

Indeed we are. So why is there this idea that we have to notify Iran that we're going to attack before we attack? We don't.

 

[Ziggurat]

as for escalation, the chinese, primary purchaser of iranian oil, already warned not to disrupt their iranian oil shipments. something else to keep an eye on.

If we do disrupt Iranian oil shipments, how do you think China will respond? How do you think they can respond?

 

[The Atheist]

as for escalation, the chinese, primary purchaser of iranian oil, already warned not to disrupt their iranian oil shipments. something else to keep an eye on.

Considering he's chickened out half a dozen times on Iran, multiple times on tariffs, Greenland and Canada, I rate the chance of him threatening China at 0.0000%.

Even that thicko fat ◊◊◊◊ must be aware of the thousands of silos China has built. I wonder where they're aimed?

 

[The Atheist]

If we do disrupt Iranian oil shipments, how do you think China will respond? How do you think they can respond?

FAFO

 

[Ziggurat]

So all those people in Iran who Tr*mp is killing with his vanity war don't matter. Gotcha.

I'm not in the least bit sorry for IRGC members who get killed. As for civilians, Iran killed something like 40,000 of their own civilians just this year. If you actually care about Iranian civilian deaths, you should want this evil regime toppled as soon as possible.

 

[Ziggurat]

Considering he's chickened out half a dozen times on Iran, multiple times on tariffs, Greenland and Canada, I rate the chance of him threatening China at 0.0000%.

We aren't talking about Trump threatening China, we're talking about China threatening the US.

Even that thicko fat ◊◊◊◊ must be aware of the thousands of silos China has built. I wonder where they're aimed?

Do you think China will launch nukes in defense of Iran?

I don't.

 

[Planigale]

If we do disrupt Iranian oil shipments, how do you think China will respond? How do you think they can respond?

Chinese minerals, rare earths are needed for the US to replace all the missiles etc. they have lost. China could say if US blockades oil coming to China, then China will blockade essential minerals for the US.

If China flagged, owned, crewed tankers take on oil from Iran is Trump really going to escalate by boarding, kidnapping stealing Chinese ships and citizens and oil? We have seen how China will respond. They didn't blink at tariff escalation.

 

[dirtywick]

Good point. Ziggurat seems unable to comprehend that there are several nations other than Iran that can escalate the situation.

i don’t really know what he’s doing by trying to rationalize some kind of defense for how this war is going. they were clearly unprepared, it didn’t go how they expected, and now they don’t know what to do.

it seems to me that an actively hostile iran controls the straight and trump is standing there making threats that aren’t working with egg on his face. us escalation seems inevitable. and it also seems to me it’s a matter of when he’ll cross too many lines rather than if