• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why is it ok for USA

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
My helper today said that Trump knows more than we do.
We should trust him in his using war with Iran as a political tool.

Oh, dear.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
And we have such a good record of regime change there & elsewhere.
Every nation does what it is able to do to further itś national interest.

I am not saying it is moral, I am saying what has always happened.

The more powerful do more.

Machiavelli´s ¨ The Prince" gives startling insight into this.

By my moral values, and no doubt yours, there has never been a truly moral nation, and there will never be one.

Survival in todayś world of nations means the strong dominate the weak, again, as always has been.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Every nation does what it is able to do to further itś national interest.
I am not saying it is moral, I am saying what has always happened.
The more powerful do more.
Machiavelli´s ¨ The Prince" gives startling insight into this.
I've read it.
By my moral values, and no doubt yours, there has never been a truly moral nation, and there will never be one.
Survival in todayś world of nations means the strong dominate the weak, again, as always has been.
I know that things will proceed thus.
But I'll object to what I see as bad policy when I see it.
And in the case of threatening war with Iran, we can set aside the immorality
to examine the national interest. I've made the case before that we've little
to gain, but much to lose. I don't like those odds. This smacks of his personal
animosity towards Iran governing his actions.
So much for his "America First" campaign promise.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
Here is a list of most dangerous countries in the world. Strange but Iran is actually not the most dangerous country to visit, they are at place nr 25. and America is at place nr 36,
Russia is more dangerous Iran at nr 10.
The other thing is the most dangerous countries on the list have all been "controlled by war" by America in some way. Maybe America did not make those countries better?

Most dangerous countries in the world 2019 – ranked
 

sooda

Veteran Member
most-dangerous-countries-in-the-world-2019.jpg
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
The Saudi track record shows they are our oldest and staunchest ally in the region since the late 1930s.
That's what appears to make them the good guys in your opinion. They are dependent on the USA to maintain the status quo. Kinda like Israel.
Tom
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Do you realize that you have decisively avoided answering the question in the OP?
Because IMO, the question is based on what is likely a false premise. The premise that the US government really cares if Iran has nukes or not. I suspect that this is not relevant and all the talk about denying Iran nukes is just pretext for anti-Iranian aggression.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Why is it ok for USA to have nuclear weapons but they tell everyone else it is not ok?
Example with Iran, Why can USA keep their weapons but Iran can become nuked by USA if they do not get rid of their nuclear weapon? where is the logic?

The "logic" (which can be debated) is that since Russia, China, and and North Korea have them, it is a deterrent against aggression by them. Of course, that is their logic as well.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Well the Saudis have never been on the dole.
What?
The Saudis have oil money, so the therefore they're good guys? Perhaps you're mistaking the US government giving the Iranians back their money for being on the dole?
What?
Tom
 

sooda

Veteran Member
What?
The Saudis have oil money, so the therefore they're good guys? Perhaps you're mistaking the US government giving the Iranians back their money for being on the dole?
What?
Tom

No. The Saudis are good guys because they have always been good guys and pro-American.

The Iranians were never on the dole either.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
The Saudis are good guys because they have always been good guys and pro-American.
The Saudis execute people for advocating for democracy. Etc. Osama bin Laden was a rich Saudi. Etc.
They are reliable business partners for USA oil companies and are happy to use us to defend their fat ugly monarchy. But that doesn't make them good guys. They aren't.
And just to be clear, I'm not talking about the Saudi people. I don't have a problem with them. Heck, they don't even get to vote. I don't really know what most of them think about much of anything.
I'm talking about the theocratic tyrannical government that runs the place.

Tom
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The Saudis execute people for advocating for democracy. Etc. Osama bin Laden was a rich Saudi. Etc.
They are reliable business partners for USA oil companies and are happy to use us to defend their fat ugly monarchy. But that doesn't make them good guys. They aren't.
And just to be clear, I'm not talking about the Saudi people. I don't have a problem with them. Heck, they don't even get to vote. I don't really know what most of them think about much of anything.
I'm talking about the theocratic tyrannical government that runs the place.

Tom

Osama Bin Laden was a black sheep. He was a Deobandi who followed the teachings of Sayeed Qutb and Hassan al Banna. That has been outlawed in Arabia since Faisel was king in the early 1970s.

If you recall the Saudis revoked his citizenship in 1994 at the same time they declared AQ a terrorist outfit.

The Saudis were offered the vote in the 1950sat Hofuf.. They were disinterested.

The SAG have a sacred obligation to develop the citizens and insure their social and financial progress in the future. I know, or knew, Saud, Abdullah, Fahd and Salman since they were in their late teens and early 20s. They are extraordinary men.

I haven't spent any time around young MBS since he was about 16 ...
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
So all the wars and aggression USA have done from 2001until now, 18 years is ok? but as soon as an "enemy" of USA have some strong weapons it is forbidden?

Well, short answer: since it would go against our own interests to actually use nuclear weapons in the h Middle East, if only one side gets to have them it's probably better for the world if it's us.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Well, short answer: since it would go against our own interests to actually use nuclear weapons in the h Middle East, if only one side gets to have them it's probably better for the world if it's us.

The ME needs to be investing in healthcare, education, jobs and infrastructure, not nukes.
 
Top