>

The regime leading the nation is obsessed with eradicating Israel and specifically all Jews. They state it as their goal multiple times a year every year. It funds terrorists in Palestine and Syria specifically to attack Israel. I can’t imagine why Israel is so keen on not letting them have nukes.
Could be.  But its not like they will ever give them up after seeing what happened to Ukraine after they gave up theirs. >

It’s more about destroying them before they can be used. >

"That was only 3...where's the fourth one? where's the fourth one?!" >

A man of class >

What’s the point of this announcement? Is he going to hit Iran? Is he looking for military support? Or international approval? Can someone explain to me why this is a strategic press release >

Maybe it's to remind people that this wouldn't be the case had they kept the previous agreement in place made under the Obama administration? >

I’m a big fan of Obama but It would definitely still have happened >

Bullshit, just like Iraq, the inspectors aren't stupid and do their job. >

Yeah but Iraq had all those WMD!!!11!!! >

No. They had Colin Powell talk about it. Saddam caused 9/11 and it was mission accomplished in like a couple of weeks.
Are you saying FoxNews and American media lied to us?????? >

Oh. Nentenyaho is back I see. P >

4 nuclear bombs! 
Do I hear 5 nuclear bombs?
5 nuclear bombs for the chubby gentleman in black! >

You joke, but Israel is particularly vulnerable to a nuclear bomb. A 100kt bomb, one of the most common yields in nuclear arsenals, would kill over 200,000 in an instant and irradiate half a million more. Their economy would be effectively cut in half. For a population of only 9M, just one bomb is a knockout blow, and several is the removal of the state entirely. And when you’re dealing with adversaries that use religion as their justification for geopolitical stances, you can’t necessarily count on rational decision-making.
So Israel is right to be concerned. Whether their fears are accurate is a separate debate. >

Iran has said that its one of their main goals on this Earth to wipe out Israel... >

Someone nuking the holy land is an insane thought. >

It's true. Iran has had the ability to build nuclear bombs for about 10 years now.
Part of the nuclear deal was that Iran would send their enriched uranium away to other countries so that they couldn't use it in nuclear weapons. When the deal ended, Iran continued under the arrangement for some time as a show of good faith. After about 2 years though they ended the exporting of enriched uranium.
If the rest of the world is interested in Iran shipping away their enriched uranium again, the easiest way would be to rejoin the nuclear deal. As of right now Iran can build a nuclear weapon anytime they want, although their nuclear facilities are still under surveillance by the IAEA, so we would know if they did that.
At this point the Iran nuclear bomb issue is a complete red herring, and unless threatened militarily, they will never build one. That's why the Trump Administration felt comfortable enough to leave the deal, and Biden despite his campaign promises has never returned to it. >

Biden campaigned on bringing back the JCPOA. He and the EU have tried to rejoin it but the negotiations with the newer Iranian government just haven't worked out. Just offering that as a clarification because I read your comment to mean Biden's administration hasn't been trying >

Unsurprisingly, when you unilaterally leave a deal, getting a second one is harder now that the other side can more easily call shots more relevant to their current interests.
​
Would you look at that, Republicans ruin everything again and proclaim themselves the winner - while the Democrats are forced to pick up the pieces, all the while on the back foot. >

Yeah I hold no sympathy for the Iranian regime, but I mean...I kinda don't blame them for not wanting to restart the agreement after trump's pull out >

Also, Biden Admin tried to add stipulations that Iran needs to limit there Ballistic missle development. >

Many threads in this discussion 
The bottom line is very simple 
Iran threatened to wipe Israel from the face of the earth and is actively trying to get nuclear arms
Israeli army chief says they know what is going on and israeli army can defend Israel 
Simple >

May I introduce you to commas and periods? >

Let’s hope they don’t make it to Yemen >

I remember when Reagan warned me about this happening. Forty years ago >

Maybe you should not have pushed to scuttle the deal we had with Iran. >

Iran was still making them >

Abandoning our nuclear deal with them sure worked out great. /s >

Yeah, I’m sure they were following it, ahaha >

It wasn’t built on trust. There were monitoring provisions built into the deal. >

And throw the state into turmoil in the ensuing power vacuum, millions flee the ensuing violence as terrorists start cutting up the pieces, Europe is once again flooded by a deluge of refugees, sending the entire EU into another tizzy and empowering the fascists who you're happily giving ammunition to, crippling Europe's ability to help Ukraine - all the while the US sits happy and unharmed.
​
10/10, you should try getting elected. >

I mean, he's right unfortunately >

Why does Israel get to have nukes and Iran doesn’t? >

Because Israel needs them for self defense and is run by rational people who are just trying to defend the nation from terrorists and war criminals.  Iran, on the other hand, is run by violent lunatics and terrorists who have repeatedly threatened to destroy Israel and Arab nations.  Obviously, Israel is responsible enough to handle such weapons, and Iran is not. >

No one needs nukes, they have the best army. >

My guy. The country is the size of fucking New Jersey. Every Arab nation was expelling Jews and trying to invade Israel until they got nukes. >

Other arab countries are doing deals with Israel or have outrighy trash military. >

Okay, so if Egypt, Jordan, Syria, or anyone else in the middle east stops having an incompetent military, what should Israel's defense plan be?
There's no depth for an elastic defense,  iron dome can be degraded or depleted, they are outnumbered by millions, and there was 5 demonstrated attempts to wipe them out in the the last century, 3 of which actually came pretty close ('48, '67, and '73). >

You have too many what if scenarios.
By your logic many countries should own nuclear weapons, because Israel can pose a danger to them. >

My only "What if" was pointing out relying on people who have stated they want to genocide you to continue being incompetent isn't a plan, its a death wish.
Also, Israel hasn't tried to wipe out other countries 3 times. Those are 3 very real events in history. The names you are looking for are the 1948 arab-israeli war, the six day war, and the yom kippur war.
Finally, those other countries have significantly more terrain for elastic defense. This is significant because it gives time for mobilization and regrouping. Consider Ukraine, which had the enemy drive to within ~40km of Kiev before stopping them. Israel is roughly 300km by 75km, including the west bank and Gaza. One good armored thrust and Israel doesn't exist. >

All this talk about genocide is propaganda by far right Israelis. The truth is the opposite. >

Uh huh. And when the song goes "From the river to the sea" which river, which sea, and where exactly does that leave the Israelis living?
Were those tanks of peace in 1948? Bombers of friendship in 1967? Did the combined militaries of their arab neighbors just want to come over for holiday dinner on Yom Kippur in 1973? >

How many does Israel have and where did they get the plutonium? >

Why does it matter? They never proudly proclaim their intent to wipe a rival off the face of the Earth with wmds every other week. >

I can't believe a man telling me about another country's assets if he cannot tell me about his own country's assets. 
You can tell that second thought to the Palestinians who are currently being ghettoized and slowly being genocided, by people who claim racial superiority and educate their children to be racist. They also subvert international law for their own benefit on a regular basis. >

the fact you had to go back 10+ years to find an article proving your point has the opposite effect of what you think. >

No, it really doesn’t.
In fact, what is to say the Palestinian racism wasn’t a response to the Israeli racism? >

Reality is saying that >

Prove it then. >

You're suggesting that the Palestinians were fine with the Jews until the Jews were racist towards them. That is insane.
The Palestinians have a fund dedicated to funding and rewarding those that kill Israelis. >

I bet Israel has more than four. 
Not that we will ever know 🙄 >

I mean, sure, it's all but guaranteed. I don't see how the situations are related. Israel is not calling this an issue by virtue of nuclear proliferation being wrong, but by virtue of a possibly unassailable, even more aggressive, better-armed Iran being a bad thing. >

They've been saying this for decades. If the boy cries wolf but the wolf never comes, at some point you just have to stop believing him. >

In this case, the wolf has been coming for decades, was sent away for a little bit, but is coming again even though the wolf would really rather not come at all, it just wants some sheep. >

The U.S. and the UN have had inspectors inside Iranian enrichment facilities, their capability to eventually enrich enough Uranium and Plutonium for nuclear weapons is not in question. >

Just because they have the capability to enrich does not mean they are trying to develop nuclear weapons. You have to enrich uranium, whether it is for power generation or a weapon.
And before you suggest that they're enriching beyond the 5 percent necessary for nuclear power, the US intelligence sector that constantly scaremongers about Iranian nukes has repeatedly said there's no indication the Iranian regime has made the decision to develop them. >

They are way beyond 5% enrichment, closing in on 90%.
Iran absolutely has a nuclear weapons program. They have also continuously indicated they would rather just have a domestic nuclear industry for peaceful reasons, but the nuclear capability angle is just one of their playing cards in a very dangerous game. >

Apartheid Israel is not a reliable source of information. >

Lots of anti-semites in here. Not surprised. God bless Israel! >

Israel is a country, not a religion.
FYI >

LOL @ downvoting a literal fact. >

They have been saying the same thing since 1980 >

Patently false. And the IAEA announced about 6 months ago that Iran had enough fissile material for one nuclear weapon in addition to previously disposing multiple undeclared Iranian nuclear sites and suspicious activity consistent with an illegal arms program going back decades. >

Liar. 
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU’S LONG HISTORY OF CRYING WOLF ABOUT IRAN’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS
The Israeli Prime Minister is expected to warn the U.S. Congress an Iranian bomb is imminent — just as he warned in 1992, 1995, 2002, 2009, and 2012.
Are you one of those people that the Iraeli government pays to post on social media? >

Liar >

Destroy Iran Now, we can not aloud Iran with nukes >

Israel cooperated with apartheid era South Africa to build their own nukes, like birds of a feather. >

How many nukes does Israel have? >

Sovereign nations, even really awful ones, are allowed to make nuclear weapons. And Israel isn't one to talk considering they are bristling with their own arsenal. >

Ah yes, awful nations should have the weapons most likely to end human civilization. Perfectly reasonable take. >

curious about what makes a nation awful >

Shooting women in the face and genitals for protesting the right to not hide their face is a factor for sure.
Edit: to be clear I don't care about points. But please have the courage to respond on why you think this doesn't make a nation terrible. >

Or shooting journalists and trying to cover it up. >

Iran doesn't care about covering it up silly. They are literally shooting little girls to permanently disfigure them as a way of making them hide their bodies. >

Just ignore all the dead Palestinian children, right? >

Do you think that the Palestinians who die in Israeli strikes against Hamas (a terrorist group firing rockets at them) is the same as Iran intentionally targeting and killing civilians? >

Why are they talking about it? 
Isn't it 'secret' strike on Iranian nuclear installations time?
We promise to act all surprised and angry for the required two weeks and than forget all about it. >

Do you know people who act surprised and angry about Israeli strikes on Iran? Like in real life? I can't recall the topic ever even coming up. >

And so. I keep saying so what. Think Israel or the US IS TRUST worthy with nukes?  Don’t kid your self. I wish there were no nukes at all. But as long and the US, the only country that has actually used against another country, has them then it is free for all for everyone else.  Sorry for your feelings. >


But as long and the US, the only country that has actually used against another country, has them then it is free for all for everyone else.  

Nobody is concerned with the US using nukes, nor do they go around threatening everyone else with them lol. >

Liar. >

They keep saying this shit for the last twenty years. I’m not believing this wild speculation based on snowflake feelings >

They’ve been saying “they have the capability to build nukes within x years time.” The number changes every time with updated capabilities. That’s what you’ve been reading this entire time and that’s why the Iran Nuclear deal was so important- it halted any progress. What you’re reading now is “they are capable right now.” >

Israel’s obsession with Iran is just plain creepy