When Trump first attacked Iran Carney practically ran to the nearest microphone to tell us all how he thought it was just dandy. The guy has repeatedly expressed support for the war because that's how he feels.

[+] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

He's been consistent about not talking about the world how people want it to be, but how it actually is.

Iran has a nuclear program. If Iran builds a nuke it would be very bad. They also support a lot of terrorism. Terrorism is bad.

If you strip away all of the ideological bullshit, the vibes about who's a good guy and who's a bad guy, all of the rationalizations about who's historically justified in attacking who, what you're left with is Iran being weakened means less terrorism, less terrorism means less war. It's imperative that they are prevented from building nuclear weapons since that represents the potential for millions of people getting killed.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Iran does not want nuclear weapons. If they do end up with a nuke it is entirely due to the threat it faces from Israel.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is Trumpian logic. We don't do X, but if we do X it's because of our enemies.

Stated intentions are meaningless, because everyone is lying. The fact that they are purifying uranium is what matters, not what they say.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They have made it clear they do not want weapons. You NEED purified and enriched uranium (to a point) for fuel grade stuff, and there has not been the slightest shred of evidence that they ate going further than that AND no evidence whatsoever of them doing all the other shit you need for a nuclear weapon. You need a lot more than enriched uranium to make a bomb or missile warhead, even if they were going that far.

The states purpose of this is that after 1979 Israel wanted Iran to be a failed stated like they did to Iraq and Syria.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 day ago

They have made it clear they do not want weapons.

Yes they've SAID that, but do you make it a habit to believe what authoritarians say?

You NEED purified and enriched uranium (to a point) for fuel grade stuff,

No civilian reactor needs uranium purified to more than 5%. They've purified uranium to 60%. Also the uranium they import from Russia is already purified to the level needed by their one civilian nuclear reactor. Any uranium purification happening in Iran is for a nuclear weapons program.

I hate Trump and Netanyahu too, but if they say the sky is blue, do you automatically have to agree with someone that says the sky is green?

The states purpose of this is that after 1979 Israel wanted Iran to be a failed stated like they did to Iraq and Syria.

Yeah no shit. Just as Iran wants Israel to be a failed state. That's how shit works with adversaries.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"The way I see the world is the truth. The way others see it is wrong. We must do things my way because what I say is true and what they say is wrong."

People with any critical thinking dismiss that kind of bs and evaluate for themselves. It is meaningless, empty rhetoric.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The truth isn't something you get from "evaluating" a bunch of "alt-media" websites. That's just doing the "I did my own research on the internet".

Nuclear physics is science. Iran's uranium purification project is not for civilian use, it's a nuclear weapons program. Denying this is like denying the world is flat because you choose to ignore science because you want to go along with your political allies.

The truth isn't convenient, it's not always going to conform to what your politcal group says.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"We take the world as it is, not as we wish it to be" is a totally empty slogan. Who do you think isn't dealing with the world as they think it is? You think people who disagree are all just going around in willful fantasy? No. Of course not. Everybody is dealing with the world as they think it is. Reasonable people disagree on how the world is. The slogan tries to make an authoritative claim on having the only true worldview, which may sound great to people who don't think critically for even a second about it, or who simply share his biases about how the world is, but it's no more material than saying "We make sensible choices, not insane choices."

So, the only thing your initial comment and your subsequent reply really indicate is that you haven't actually thought about what that rhetoric means at all and you're just leaning into confirmation bias on your worldview because it feels nice to invalidate other worldviews as false while confirming your own as the one true way of seeing the world. Sorry, that's just uncritically accepting authority based on an empty feel good slogan. It's a stupid thing to do and to advocate for.

Of course, you could consider how Iran was previously subject to a nuclear agreement that they abided by, had not attempted to build nuclear weapons, had a fatwa against building nuclear weapons, repeatedly attempted to sign deals that would have included prevention of them building nuclear weapons, and even after facing existential threat have still not built nuclear weapons despite strong expert arguments that they could if they wanted to.

You want to condescendingly dismiss other people's viewpoints as just uneducated "alt-media" "I did my own research" nonsense, and yet you're not even demonstrating the capacity to see through the most basic of political rhetoric and are swallowing it down like it's your gospel.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

“We take the world as it is, not as we wish it to be” is a totally empty slogan. Who do you think isn’t dealing with the world as they think it is? You think people who disagree are all just going around in willful fantasy?

People that choose to believe that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program just because they hate Israel and will believe anything that anyone that opposes Israel says. It's insane really... if they had no nuclear weapons program, why would they be opposed to the IAEA doing inspections?

Hard not to be condescending when talking to people that hang on to willful ignorance in the face of science and basic logic. I've had a lot of discussions with various groups, this is the same as the "plandemic" crowd. What do you say to people that refuse to learn science, have huge gaps in their logic, and default to "alternative facts" from dodgy websites whenever discussing anything?

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The irony in the depth of your lack of intellectual self-awareness is something to behold.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You have no real answer so you hit up a thesaurus to try to come up with an insult that would make you sound clever.

[–] AGM@lemmy.ca 3 points 23 hours ago

Did you answer any of the points I raised about Iran? No. Did you double down on ideological blind loyalty to an empty slogan? Yes.

But, do go on.

As an aside, I'm also kind of surprised that anything I've written would make you have the thought of anyone turning to a thesaurus, but I'll happily simplify the vocabulary further if you would like.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago

Except he doesn't seem to really want to commit to that. He is still making massive deals with US corporations and sharing massive data with the US, not to mention pushing through massive surveillance bills that only will benefit them.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 10 points 2 days ago

"Nice doggy — go ahead and tear apart that stranger, it's totally worth it. Would you like to buy some rocks?"

[–] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wow. What a great metaphor.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

Would be nice if it was true.