omega3111


























  1. Except that everyone has been saying it's a nuclear weapons program for four decades, and yet not a single nuclear weapon has been produced.

  2. It wasn't produced because it was stopped. The documents that were stolen from Iran clearly stated the intent and showed the research progress into a nuclear weapon. No one, not Europe, the US, the IAEA, KSA, Egypt, Turkey..., not a single country does not know that Iran hasn't and isn't going for nukes.

  3. Then why has every single prediction and warning about when Iran will obtain a nuclear weapon, ended up being wrong? We're talking four decades of warnings, with them varying from 5 weeks to 5 years. It doesn't take 40 years to develop a nuclear weapon. The only conclusion is that they haven't been trying, nor are they.

  4. Heads of countries went on record saying they are real, including the head of the IAEA. No one buys your conspiracy theory.

  5. The Arab armies intruded after pleas from the Arab people to intrude and stop the massacres before it was too late, and it was too late

  6. There was no massacre. It was reported in the Arab radio stations during the war that Jews are massacring Arabs in order to portray Israel as a vile enemy. The result was that more Arabs fled their homes in fear. Arab historians today say that this radio report increased the number of refugees by several factors.

  7. Does that definition include kids with rocks?

  8. I don't know what happened in each case. Attacking people (civilians or soldiers) with any weapon - knife, axe, sling, gun, incendiary devices etc. - makes the attacker a legal target. If they threw the rocks and injured soldiers then it might just not include them in this bracket since the brackets sometimes split militants and non-militants.

  9. But I don't think that if bad guys use human sheilds we should just bomb the hospitals anyway regardless of the women and children that will die.

  10. International law specifically allows the opposing army to bomb any installations/facilities that were militarized. Even if there are human shields, or a hospital, if they are being used for military purposes, international law deems them valid targets.

  11. I'd happily debate anyone who tried to defend hamas terrorist attacks on isreali civilians.

  12. Then we are talking about the same thing. Said innocent people die because Hamas uses their homes, schools, hospitals, roads, basements, offices etc. as military installations. Israel attacks them within its rights (though many many times it doesn't do so if there will be too many casualties). Also, Israel only attacks after Hamas does so, so it's a legal state of war brought on by Hamas against Israel's will, so that damage is self-inflicted.

  13. How many homes has each side destroyed of the others?

  14. 90% for an easily deliverable warhead. The less enriched it is the more material you need, which makes it harder to deliver (via a missile for example).

  15. The US doesn't give money to Israel, it gives them "vouchers" with which they buy US products. The money stays within the US.

  16. The two are completely different. It will always lead you to the wrong conclusions to do such comparisons. For example, tell us when Turkey has offered the Kurds their own state. Tell us also when the Kurds dried to genocide the Turks. You'll find little resemblance between the two.

  17. I assume that you are not from a democratic country judging by the comment. In Israel, the US, Canada, Europe, Japan, SK etc. the process is as follows.

  18. I am very well aware of the principle of presumption of innocence, thank you very much.

  19. Then you just contradicted your earlier comments.

  20. The Nakba? Ok but how can we make israelis the real victim here?

  21. Why make up how Israel is the victim? Just look at history, you don't need to make up anything. They were attacked in 1948, they did not initiate the attack. The result of the war was catastrophic to the attackers only because they weren't able to accomplish the destruction of Israel.

  22. Glad that you managed to learn some history!

  23. Why is the Israel/Palestine flair on this?

  24. The algorithm auto-detects keywords and applies the flair. "Israel" appears in the Reddit title, so it catches that. The real question is why we don't have a working Iran flair by now. I contacted the mods and got no reply for that.

  25. This is a small pickup after Obama closed

  26. Only a minority see them as defenders, the majority of Lebanese know that they are the cancer that plagues our country.

  27. In Lebanon the Shia sees them as defenders, not others, you are right. However, if you re-read my comment, I said "Hezbollah are taken here as defenders of Lebanon", as in Reddit, where people know nothing about the region. Obviously Lebanese, who live in Lebanon, will know better.

  28. Not all Shia see them as defenders. Especially now a days. Let's stop assuming people born in a religious sect belong to its messed up politics. Reddit is full of Islamists smh tho

  29. True, but there are always exceptions. In general, it's the Shia that support Hezbollah blindly (or by fear, need, etc.). Still, I was talking about Reddit, not Lebanese citizens, and I agree with your observation about Reddit in this regard.

  30. You mean religiously? In general, Islam forbids gambling, but I'm sure there are all sorts of outs. Even so, the person who did it might not have cared about the laws of Islam. If he had done it in Gaza, though, he could have been severely punished.

  31. Not every Palestinian is Muslim either for that matter. I know both atheist and Christian Palestinians (even if they are a minority)

  32. Of course! Today the question of being Palestinian is a matter of definition. The meaning of the word changed over the decades. For example, the Jews who lived in the region of Palestine from the times of the Ottomans can also be called Palestinians.

  33. No, the one caused by 8 Arab nations including a Palestinian army to try and genocide the Jews in 1948. This created 300-400k refugees that were rejected by those same countries that started the war.

  34. Yes. The war in the aftermath of the partition was tragic for all involved. I wonder who decided to partition Palestine?

  35. So we get another civil war like in Syria with "At least 306,887 civilians killed"? There are no simple solutions. Maybe if an absolutely overwhelming UN-force would step in, but I don't see that coming.

  36. Syria and Iran are very different demographically. An Iran-wide civil war is very unlikely.

  37. Really? Aren’t some provinces/regions Shia and others Sunni? If so, how is that not a perfect scenario for a civil war?

  38. Iran is a multi-ethnic nation, better thought of an an empire, similar to the Soviet Union. The Persians are the core ethnicity that rules this empire, and they are about half of the population. In addition, there are Sunni Arabs in Achwaz, Azeris from the conquered part of Azerbaijan, Turkmens from the conquered part of Turkmenistan, Baluchians from the Pakistan/Afghnistan border, Kurds, Lurs, Caspians and so on.

  39. I have a hard time believing this.

  40. Yes, but Erdogan has a history of undermining his own efforts and making capricious contradicting moves just weeks apart, so I'm not surprised.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin