The Real Reasons For The Iran Agreement

[Steve781]

Iranian gas is a great way of undermining Russia.

 

[salarsikander]

Your rant born of personal prejudice is your entitlement, but pretty ineffective. My words, callous as they might seem to you, are absolutely correct.

Hi,

That's according you, that what you're saying is ABSOLUTELY correct. But not according to people who have lost their home, their livelihood, their entire generation and a nation as a whole !

God Forbid If something like that happens to your sons and daughters, then if someone asks you, Oh dear this was in our national interest, that they died in collateral damage in an unjust war.

What is wrong and cannot be justified, even after a millenia will remain wrong! no matter how artfully you try to twist the words and statements.

I wonder how, if We go by your logic, it is any different to what ISIS or any other terrorist organization is doing to what US does with other nations. Perhaps then it is in the interest of terrorist supporting countries to continue to do so, would you justify that? Ofc not ! then why have double standards here ?

The only difference here is that, they don't have technological, diplomatic or academia prowess behind them. And USA even with having all that is no different either, actually more dangerous with double standards

 

[VCheng]

I wonder how, if We go by your logic, it is any different to what ISIS or any other terrorist organization is doing to what US does with other nations. Perhaps then it is in the interest of terrorist supporting countries to continue to do so, would you justify that? Ofc not ! then why have double standards here ?

What double standards? Each country has equal right to pursue their national interests, and terrorist organizations try to attack as best they can while nations respond as best as they can. Sounds pretty fair to me.

 

[salarsikander]

Your rant born of personal prejudice is your entitlement, but pretty ineffective. My words, callous as they might seem to you, are absolutely correct.

What double standards? Each country has equal right to pursue their national interests, and terrorist organizations try to attack as best they can while nations respond as best as they can. Sounds pretty fair to me.

Hi,

don't remember Iraq being a terrorist nation. or whole afghanistan for that matter .

Or Hirsoshima, nagasaki who died with the fault of their own

 

[VCheng]

Hi,

don't remember Iraq being a terrorist nation. or whole afghanistan for that matter .

Or Hirsoshima, nagasaki who died with the fault of their own

So Japan attacking first at Pearl Harbor or Iraq invading Kuwait first, or Afghanistan harboring OBL is mere amnesia on your part. Pretty selective memory, Sir.

 

[salarsikander]

So Japan attacking first at Pearl Harbor or Iraq invading Kuwait is mere amnesia on your part. Pretty selective memory, Sir.

Hi,
No I never discount that fact, What i meant that non military people paid more and terribly high price than military people.

I am sure not all and every child was combatant in Iraq or hiroshima for that matter. Nor Iraq Invaded kuwait back in 2003

 

[VCheng]

Hi,
No I never discount that fact, What i meant that non military people paid more and terribly high price than military people.

I am sure not all and every child was combatant in Iraq or hiroshima for that matter. Nor Iraq Invaded kuwait back in 2003

When nations are at war, everybody suffers. That is war.

 

[salarsikander]

When nations are at war, everybody suffers. That is war.

Oh dear, sir you and your logic. pretty prejudiced i must confess.

Timeline of United States military operations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ever since its inception the land of freedom has been involved in so many wars. If i am saying this right after every 10 years or so. With this culture in Administration and to support such huge deceptive commitments, we have what is known as Military complex . Obviously production of guns and ammunitions is very profitable, so US had to look forward to these engagements not only to maintain and sustain its domination either through subjugation, forced diplomacy and total annihilation and to sustain its huge war industries.

 

[VCheng]

Oh dear, sir you and your logic. pretty prejudiced i must confess.

Timeline of United States military operations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ever since its inception the land of freedom has been involved in so many wars. If i am saying this right after every 10 years or so. With this culture in Administration and to support such huge deceptive commitments, we have what is known as Military complex . Obviously production of guns and ammunitions is very profitable, so US had to look forward to these engagements not only to maintain and sustain its domination either through subjugation, forced diplomacy and total annihilation and to sustain its huge war industries.

My logic is impeccably fair and truthful.

 

[salarsikander]

My logic is impeccably fair and truthful.

That killing in the name of Pursuit of national interest is justified ?

My logic is impeccably fair and truthful.

Self praising is very weak form of counter argument

 

[VCheng]

That killing in the name of Pursuit of national interest is justified ?

That all nations have an equal right to pursue their national interests.

 

[Nicky G]

Is it now?
So USA retaliated by using the same which was applied on nagasaki and hiroshima, this time minus nukes on Afghanistan and Iraq.
I am sure Iraq had nothing to do with WOT, right?

The issue is the very core hypocrisy that is used and justified when US mounts an invasion on another country on the pretext of freedom and shi* or national interest

Do you oppose your country's nuke doctrine which allows a first use? You argue that if you are attacked, you reserve the right to retaliate with nukes - even if you have not been attacked by them. Why is that justified and not US's use of them in WWII. Will your nuke attacks not kill millions?

Also, not to derail this thread, but do study what went into dropping nukes onto the two Japanese cities. I assure it was not an easy decision and a lot of factors were considered. More people died in other conventional attacks in Japan than they did in those nuke attacks.

 

[salarsikander]

That all nations have an equal right to pursue their national interests.

Nope, what you means amounts to gain upper hand through force and subjugation, which has actually never worked if you looked at history, the more force you will apply the equal opposing force you will get.

US has learned this the hard way after soviets collapse and the rise of other regional powers.

The only reason why Iran wasn't treated like iraq back in 2003, even though Iran had more concrete evidence of nuclear activity, is because they had already reached that threshold level to force US to change its stance and this is what we are seeing

 

[VCheng]

Do you oppose your country's nuke doctrine which allows a first use? You argue that if you are attacked, you reserve the right to retaliate with nukes - even if you have not been attacked by them?

Also, not to derail this thread, but do study what went into dropping nukes onto the two Japanese cities. I assure it was not an easy decision and a lot of factors were considered. More people died in other conventional attacks in Japan than they did in those nuke attacks.

Forget nukes, what the Pakistan Army is doing in FATA and Baluchistan is what serves Pakistani national interests, just as much as the actions of any other Army as ordered by their respective leaders.

Nope, what you means amounts to gain upper hand through force and subjugation, which has actually never worked if you looked at history, the more force you will apply the equal opposing force you will get.

US has learned this the hard way after soviets collapse and the rise of other regional powers.

The only reason why Iran wasn't treated like iraq back in 2003, even though Iran had more concrete evidence of nuclear activity, is because they had already reached that threshold level to force US to change its stance and this is what we are seeing

Every nation tries to gain the upper hand as best as it, just like what Iran did, and what USA did, in negotiating the nuclear deal. That is how international geopolitics always work.

 

[salarsikander]

Do you oppose your country's nuke doctrine which allows a first use? You argue that if you are attacked, you reserve the right to retaliate with nukes - even if you have not been attacked by them?

Also, not to derail this thread, but do study what went into dropping nukes onto the two Japanese cities. I assure it was not an easy decision and a lot of factors were considered. More people died in other conventional attacks in Japan than they did in those nuke attacks.

Hi,

That still doesn't justify the barbarity, does it ?

My country is not super power like US not it is heavy industrial nation like US. My country faces a constant threat from its neighbour which is 6 times bigger than itself.

Nor my country has illegally occupied any country for that matter.

The policy of first-use will only be activated when, large part of PAkistan is threatened or blockaded. Please do give a good read of Pakistan first use ambiguous policy

Every nation tries to gain the upper hand as best as it, just like what Iran did, and what USA did, in negotiating the nuclear deal. That is how international geopolitics always work.

Nope it was Irani nukes and threshold level and their resilience that forced US to work with them,

Forget nukes, what the Pakistan Army is doing in FATA and Baluchistan is what serves Pakistani national interests, just as much as the actions of any other Army as ordered by their respective leaders.

Hi,
exactly, but that after reaction from rag tag terrorist. That too in our soil. Thanks to US Of A were imposed with their war legacy