We have done far more world terrorizing than Iran has ever thought of doing.
It isn’t our job to decide who can have nuclear power and who can’t.
So your solution is just to recite LW rhetoric and platitudes. Got it! 
1 Like
Well they are moving in that direction now when they were moving away.
They were never moving away. That is fantasy.
So once again no solutions, just empty rhetoric.
Saudi Arabia has supported more terrorism then Iran probably
Well then. We should sell arms to Iran (again). Because they’re gonna get them from somewhere. Might as well be us.
3 Likes
As of 2012 half of Iran’s population was under 35. And they love the west. It’s simply a waiting game unless you do something like go to war with them.
2 Likes
Wait for what? Them getting a nuclear weapon? Do you honestly believe the mullahs will willing give up power? Maybe we wait until Israel is wiped out???
So you also have no solution; just empty rhetoric.
So how exactly is that a solution???
Israel has it’s own nukes. Mutually assured destruction has been working for over the past fifty plus years. Not saying they should get them but maybe at least act like you want to negotiate in good faith. And honestly I dont blame em. The reason people deal with North Korea is their nuclear arsenal. And trump loves en
What killed any chance with NK is what Obama and Hillary allowed to happen in Libya. If I were NK, I would be very scared.
We are really talking about Saudi Arabia aren’t we? Do we simply abandon them and let the Russians take over?
1 Like
How do ya figure?
I thought the Russians were good now?
Libya willingly gave up all designs on their nuclear weapons program. Kaddafi was rewarded by the U.S. pushing for his overthrow, leading to his eventual assassination. Do you for one second believe Kim will believe anything the U.S. has to say regarding his future without nukes?
Do you want to have a serious discussion or do you want to simply recite empty rhetoric? If the latter, then I will simply move on.
You mean that was about nukes? I always thought it was about him trying to slaughter whole towns of lybians. My bad
Kaddafi was a bad actor, as are many tyrants we have to deal with. Libya was stable and provided a good example of how a country could survive without having to obtain nuclear weapons. The U.S. under Obama was shortsighted in their Libya policy. Libya is much worse off today, and NK is seeing first hand that the U.S. can’t be trusted. While Trump would likely honor his commitments, there is no guarantee that a future administration wouldn’t do to NK what they did to Libya.
That same shortsightedness would be a mistake for Saudi Arabia.
1 Like
Khadaffi was a bad actor . Pan am for example and his open support for terror in northern Africa and beyond. We tried to kill him before but Obama simply succeeded where Reagan failed. It had zero to do with nukes. We were mostly a copilot during that lybianthing as it was a NATO operation trying to prevent a human catastrophe. Lybia is in the French sphere of influence. He was the eating a whole town in lybia with slaughter and was amassing a force to do it so we pulled the trigger. We can agree or disagree if it was a good idea or not. It was hardly a place of peace.
You mentioned how you would not want to be North Korea without nukes and not trusting the us. All I can say is exactly. Why wouldnt they want em.
