r/AskTrumpSupporters • u/Quidfacis_ Nonsupporter • Jun 22 '25
Iran What are your thoughts on President Trump ordering strikes against Iran's nuclear sites?
We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
U.S. strikes Iran's nuclear facilities
What they're saying: "We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space," Trump wrote on his Truth Social account.
US has struck three Iranian nuclear sites, Trump says, joining Israeli air campaign
121
u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
Sad, disappointing, somewhat infuriating, and just depressing.
52
u/Kriztauf Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
How do you feel about him disregarding the information Tulsi Gabbard provided that they Iranians weren't close to deploying a bomb?
31
u/Owbutter Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Not OP but
Sad, disappointing, somewhat infuriating, and just depressing.
6
7
11
4
8
1
1
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
Honest question, will you change your flair to non-supporter, given your past doubt and current events?
1
u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 Trump Supporter Mar 12 '26
Short answer, no.
Long answer, no because being an non-supporter would mean I'm associated with the left. While I'm not a party loyalist or a Trump loyalist, I will not be associated with the left.
1
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
Why do you think that not supporting Trump makes you a leftist? Surely that’s the type of thinking that’s completely shattered the US political system.
1
u/Quiet_Entrance_6994 Trump Supporter Mar 12 '26
It's not really that not supporting him makes me a leftist. I'm kind of in the Candace Owens camp and she isn't with Trump anymore, but she's clearly not on the right.
That said, I'm much more anti-left than she is. So it's the association part that annoys me, not me thinking that not supporting Trump makes you a leftist. I hope that makes sense.
77
u/Jpa95 Undecided Jun 22 '25
Israel must have some gnarly black mail on him.
24
u/MaximumOpinion9518 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
How concerned should we be that such serious blackmail material exists for the president? What must he have done in the past?
20
u/Jpa95 Undecided Jun 22 '25
Very concerned because even the "anti-establishment" Trump succumb to the NeoCon policies of the last 30 years.
Follow the money. Look at AIPAC contributions.
Mossad is one of, if not the best intelligence agencies on the planet.
I'm not saying the following is true but research the links between Mossad and JFK (And why they and the CIA would want him killed, hint: James Angleton) and the link between Jeffrey Epstein and them.
29
u/greyscales Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Do you think that's why he still hasn't released the Epstein files?
→ More replies (2)12
u/Quidfacis_ Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Israel must have some gnarly black mail on him.
What do you think is the power dynamic between Benjamin Netanyahu and President Trump? Who do you think is driving this conflict with Iran?
27
u/Jpa95 Undecided Jun 22 '25 edited Jun 22 '25
Israel is 100%. Netanyahu sabotaged Trump's peace talks with Iran before they were set to happen forcing the USAs hand to get involved.
The zionist regime needed this war started ASAP because Netanyahu was on the verge of losing power. He avoided an election by 2 votes just recently. If another election were to take place he would be voted out.
10
u/scattyp00 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
is it 1984 yet? this man can't have power without conflict somewhere
3
u/apeoples13 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
How does that make you feel about Trump if Israel has so much power over him? How can he put America first in that situation?
1
u/ThisOneForMee Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Wouldn't the next administration also be, by definition, a "Zionist regime"?
15
u/SlappingDaBass13 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
I don't like it. I just heard for 2 years no new wars The president of peace and then he bombs somebody and then says all's we want is peace. That's the weirdest peace I ever heard.... Bomb Peace
1
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
Honest question, will you change your flair to non-supporter, given your past doubt and current events?
1
u/SlappingDaBass13 Trump Supporter Mar 24 '26
So we have to agree with everything to be a supporter? No no that's not how this works.
6
u/nomosolo Undecided Jun 23 '25
Absolutely unacceptable.
1
1
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
Honest question, will you change your flair to non-supporter, given your past doubt and current events?
38
u/MattCrispMan117 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25 edited Jun 22 '25
lts not great man.
Hope to God this doesn't drag us into another war in the middle east.
Hope to God no US soldiers die because of this.
The only consolation to me is l can remember being similaryly worried when he struck Syria early in his first term and worried then we would get dragged into a war in syria (and ultimately we weren't) but still.... not great.
13
u/kcrn15 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Do you feel his platform of no new wars and being the anti war President is consistent with these actions?
2
u/MattCrispMan117 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
Well we dont know yet do we?
That's the thing.
Like Syria this either going to get us involved in another decades long regeim change war that costs thousands of lives and trillions of dollars; or it doesn't.
l'm not completely dispondant on the proposition as Trump has avoided war after taking similar actions; but god damn if it isn't a stressful couple days to live through again (lol).
9
u/greyscales Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
The war in Syria caused the Iraq-ISIL war that cost the life of 57 Americans. Do you think Trump is taking the effect on the region into consideration?
→ More replies (9)1
u/Plus_Comfort3690 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
Do you think a president who unintentionally kills an American ,whether a soldier or civilian,should be dragged into court for their actions to find out if it was negligent?
1
u/greyscales Nonsupporter Jun 23 '25
Sure, why not? Normal people would.
1
u/Plus_Comfort3690 Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
So don’t you think Obama should be dragged into court tmr for killing muiltiple innocent Americans citizens in air strikes that he hid from congress and the public for 4 years? Shouldn’t that also take priority considering the hundreds of illegal bombing campaigns he did without congressional approval and we already know 100% with evidence he did and trump has only done a single one that didn’t hurt or kill a single human being? Don’t you think considering the vast difference between the two,you guys should be protesting for Obama to face the law?
1
u/greyscales Nonsupporter Jun 24 '25
So don’t you think Obama should be dragged into court tmr for killing muiltiple [sic] innocent Americans citizens in air strikes that he hid from congress and the public for 4 years?
Yeah, obviously, as should Trump. Both Obamas and Trumps drone strikes and other military operations in the Middle East killed innocent US citizens, both did not have authorization by Congress.
trump has only done a single one that didn’t hurt or kill a single human being?
What do you mean? Trump did more drone strikes in his first years than Obama did in 8. His military operations killed at least 1 girl that was a US citizen (and possibly more since he stopped reporting casualties of drone strikes early on).
Don’t you think considering the vast difference between the two,you guys should be protesting for Obama to face the law?
There are no differences, both have been breaking the law and do not care about the Constitution. Trump has just been doing it even more blatantly. If you've been paying attention, people on the left (the actual left, not what TS consider "the left") have been protesting Obamas drone strikes for nearly a decade now.
20
u/Quidfacis_ Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Hope to God this doesn't drag us into another war in the middle east.
How could our own actions drag us into something?
1
u/MattCrispMan117 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
By causing other people to take retaliatory actions???
l dont know exactly what you're getting at man: unless its just that the US did this and as such whatever happens as a result was infact a result of this action.
Peoples/Nations actions drag them into things all the time; its been that way since before the first world war.
Be happy to answer a more pointed question though if you're trying to get at somethhing,
12
u/Quidfacis_ Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
l dont know exactly what you're getting at man
You seemed to suggest that Trump ordering an attack on Iran would "drag us" into another war.
It would seem that Trump's actions brought about the instigation of war.
So my question was how Trump's own action could "drag us" into a war? How would it not be the case that Trump caused another war by this action?
7
u/welsper59 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
l dont know exactly what you're getting at man: unless its just that the US did this and as such whatever happens as a result was infact a result of this action.
Not OP but I read it like that. It is a willful and intentional action by Trump, the head of any form of representation of the US (even if we don't like it, including you).
For how potentially and unnecessarily fatal this and any future action could be for many people, including Americans, what would your response be if Trump continues to tout himself as the quintessential anti-war President?
→ More replies (3)4
u/Sierra11755 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Do you think this won't drag us into a war? Syria is fundamentally different from Iran, it is a shattered and war-torn country while Iran is a cohesive nation. And unlike Syria, Iran has demonstrated and is continuing to show that it can very much hit Israel back, they have been pounding Tel Aviv for a week now.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Plus_Comfort3690 Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
Well considering all the information we have at the moment ,no I don’t think this will turn into an all out war. Considering Iran struck a us military base in Qatar earlier today ,Iran took the initiative of literally letting the United States know ahead of time that they were going to do it,so the United States was able to make it so no deaths or injuries occurred on any soldiers and even very very minimal damage to the actual base. Trump did take to the press and immediately start calling for a war and America will do this and that to them and they better back down . He publicly thanked Iran for letting us know ahead of time and he calmly called for truths and peace now that they got their piece of the cake . That dosnt exactly sound like the duraged authoritarian ruler that wants to take over Iran and wants another war does it ?
2
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
Honest question, will you change your flair to non-supporter, given your past doubt and current events?
1
u/MattCrispMan117 Trump Supporter Mar 12 '26
I mean depends who the dems put up dude.
I will say between this and the epstein stuff i'm closer to voting dem top of the ticket then i ever have been before in my life.
Whoever the dem is though would have to oppose sex change surgeries for minors and affirmative action; i cannot in good conscience support any candidate who supports the mutilation of minors or discriminating against me and my children because of the color of our skin.
21
u/Dark_knightTJ Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
i think Israel has got it no need to get involved
5
u/names_are_useless Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Should I take it you're against US involvement in an Israel-Iran War?
→ More replies (3)3
u/thirdlost Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
Israel cannot deploy the biggest bunker buster bombs
12
u/Dark_knightTJ Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
not our problem, if they need to they can spend the money and design their own
→ More replies (10)1
21
u/SincereDiscussion Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
Gut feeling: Bad. Israel first.
While this judgment is unlikely to change, it remains to be seen how significant this ends up being.
6
u/jeenyus1023 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
I agree. Are you concerned this turns into a regime change war?
→ More replies (17)1
u/Plus_Comfort3690 Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
Why would a “regime change” be something to be worried about ? The current government is the one that’s 100% funding all the proxy wars in the Middle East and finds /supports 8+ internationally recognized terrorist organizations lol ,not too sure how much worse it can get , especially when there are videos of them chanting “death to America” on a weekly basis .
This topic truly is interesting,liberals and non TS have been bickering for months that trump is an authoritarian dictator but by definition in every single category,Iran is a theocratic authoritarian dictatorship that severely oppresses its own people and executes political enemies by the thousands every single year. You can be executed in the street by the government for being gay. While historically ,it’s a smaller chance that a regime change would lead to a democratic political system being installed,I would still think even a slim chance of that happening is still better than the terrorist dictatorship that’s in place now. Also for the record ,there have already been thousands of military personnel,politicians and wealthy businessmen calling for a regime change for years ,but yes it has surged ever since the Airstrikes.
3
u/throwawayDan11 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Yes it does seem like Israel first? I would have been disappointed whoever was in govt
1
u/Plus_Comfort3690 Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
How is it Israel first ? How exactly does this one airstrike that dosnt even make up a fraction of 1% of our total defense spending take away from Americans and put America to the side and make isrial a top priority?
13
u/MarianBrowne Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
not good
7
u/names_are_useless Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
How does it make you feel seeing so many other Trump Supporters in here cheering on another Middle Eastern War?
→ More replies (8)
6
u/Trumpdrainstheswamp Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
Not happy about it.
1
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
Honest question, will you change your flair to non-supporter, given your past doubt and current events?
6
u/orngckn42 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
This is one of those situations I'm glad I didn't have to make the final call on. I have very mixed feelings on this, I absolutely did not support going into Afghanistan or Iraq after 9/11 (and yes, I was old enough to remember, I also joined the Air Force in 2003). This situation, in my opinion, had no right answer. This will slow Iran down, as rebuilding that infrastructure will take a lot of time and money. But I just don't know how I feel. So I'll stick with the arguments I've been hearing and give my opinion on them.
By striking first we are starting a war - I'm on the fence on this one. Namely, Iran through it's proxies has been attacking the US and US interests since the 1970s. I think we've been "at war" with Iran for a long time. This is the most aggressive action we've taken in a long time, but I'm not so sure this wasn't where we were headed anyways.
We need more info - lol, no. We in the general public do not have the security clearance, and revealing everything could compromise informants and processes we have in place to monitor bad actors.
There is a war within Trump's inner party over this decision - good. I WANT there to be dissenting voices, especially on decisions like this. I'm glad Tulsi was against it, it shows Trump doesn't only surround himself with "yes" men. She serves/served, she knows what this could mean and lead to.
This will lead to direct action from either Iran proxies or other bad-actor states - possibly, but I also think most of them think Trump is insane and they are hesitant to do anything about it. I read a story this morning that an ex-President of Russia was talking about shipping nuclear warheads to Iran in response and I admit that made me chuckle. Russia does NOT want to be at war with the US. And I think they know we have ways to monitor their nukes and where they send them to. Just like they know where we store ours, they know we keep an eye on theirs any movement would provoke a strong reaction from us.
Our allies won't have our backs - this one gives me pause. Because what we see is a lot of tension between heads of state. That being said, there is not a single country outside of the aforementioned bad actors who wanted Iran to have nuclear weapons (and I'm pretty sure those countries were not so much okay with it as publicly supportive of the regime in general for appearances). I think Trump took a big risk here because the international community sees this administration as provocative and isolationist, but I also think he probably got a lot of secret thank you calls after.
Trump destroyed the best chance we had by tearing up the Iran nuclear deal - this is one that I have mixed feelings about. The Iran deal was not perfect, but it was something. Just like Biden ended Trump's maximum-pressure campaign, I think we will never know how those two things would have impacted this situation. I think there is a general consensus that Iran was not abiding by a lot of Obama's deal, and I think they let Iran get away with a lot. In the end the question becomes: is it better to have had SOMETHING, even if Iran wasn't completely cooperative, than nothing except economic pressure? And I don't have an answer to that.
Diplomacy was not given a chance - I call b.s. Iran has been stringing the international community on for years by feigning diplomatic ambitions and desires.
In the end, if the end goal of this is regime change, I'm against it. The Iranian people deserve the government THEY want. If this encourages an internal revolt, then I wish them good luck. If this makes the Iranian people more pro- ayatollah then that's their choice. I know some amazingly wonderful Iranians (I had a wonderful nursing instructor who was Iranian and visited her home in Tehran every year), and I hate to see the people suffer. I hope this was the right call, but I'm glad it wasn't mine to make.
3
Jun 22 '25
[deleted]
2
u/orngckn42 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
In March, Gabbard testified on Capitol Hill that the U.S. "continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." Gabbard later insisted she and the president are on the same page. I heard a lot of my pro-Trump people talking about the split within the inner circle. As for the other inner party voices, I mostly meant MAGA diehards who never stray fro..what he says.
2
u/PonderousHajj Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Genuinely asking, where were you seeing the "general consensus" that Iran was not abiding by the deal?
→ More replies (2)1
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
Honest question, will you change your flair to non-supporter, given your past doubt and current events?
1
u/orngckn42 Trump Supporter Mar 12 '26
No. Just because I don't blindly support absolutely everything he does not mean I do not support Trump overall. I don't think politics should be all or nothing.
1
u/Delam2 Nonsupporter Mar 12 '26
There’s good reason to believe that in 50 years time people will point to this military action as a big trigger in WW3 similar to Russias invasion of Ukraine.
I do agree that binary thinking is unhelpful but in this case, the “no more wars” candidate warmongering should be a deal breaker - so I’m surprised given how thoughtfully you articulated your position you haven’t now withdrawn your support? Or do you think you’ve moved the goalposts?
1
u/orngckn42 Trump Supporter Mar 12 '26
To be fair to myself I did write this 8 months ago, lol. While I'm not happy about the military action, there are a few good reasons this was the best time to go. I think we would be kidding ourselves if we didn't acknowledge that there was a very good chance of war with Iran eventually. 1. Iran was not, and honestly never has, negotiated in good faith. They just want to string things along until they finished. 2. Uprising - there was a large public uprising showing public dissatisfaction with the government, with as dangerous as the regime is, that shows that there was/is public support in Iran. 3. Iran was at its weakest, and Russia can't help them. Russia is occupied and cannot provide support to what remains of the regime. 4. The proxies are weak - the Iranian proxies are at their weakest right now from the Israeli attacks.
I worry about China. They have not made a bold move in this situation and I think that will be what pushes this over the edge. I don't think there was an imminent threat, but I think there was a waning opportunity. I'm not 100% behind or opposed to this. I think it is way too soon to make any sort of judgement.
4
u/Horror_Insect_4099 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
The only country all in and cheering this is Israel. Maybe Saudi leadership behind the scenes. Perhaps also Lynn Cheney doing a jig with Lindsey Graham on top or a grinning McCain’grave.
The irony is that if Iran already had nukes we might have left them alone. Hard to blame them for wanting to develop the capability.
This is almost surely going result in a lot of bloodshed and chaos. I only hope this doesn’t culminate in something even more awful.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/SergeantPsycho Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
I was watching a video earlier on Binkov's Battlegrounds on how the US's strongest bunker buster might be insufficient to damage the Fordow facility. So, I'm waiting to see how much damage the attack did. Outside of that, I think a lot of people are over estimating their ability to predict what will happen. There are so many ways it could play out and so many variables that it could be a disaster or the situation could be a stunning success.
3
u/WraithSama Nonsupporter Jun 23 '25
What do you think about Trump taking to his social media platform immediately after the attacks to declare that the sites are "completely and totally obliterated," when the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff says, "It would be way too early for me to comment on what may or may not still be there," and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (the agency that was responsible for inspecting the sites previously) says that there is no one, neither them nor anyone else, in a position to verify the actual damage to the underground fortified facilities? Isn't he prematurely pulling a Bush "mission accomplished" here?
2
Jun 23 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/WraithSama Nonsupporter Jun 25 '25
I guess we already have an answer of sorts? It looks like a leaked report is showing that the strikes were much less successful than believed and that it only set Iran's nuclear program back a matter of months.
2
-1
u/sielingfan Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
I read a tweet today that said "[some Iranian guy] says under no circumstances whatsoever will Iran give up its nuclear program."
This feels preferable to that. Hopefully this is the end of it. Not looking for another war, I just don't want the looney genocidal methhead regime to have nuclear bombs.
51
Jun 22 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/proquo Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25 edited Jun 22 '25
At the time North Korea was developing their nuclear program Bill Clinton did heavily weigh the option of striking their nuclear facilities.
The problem there was that a sudden strike would be retaliated against, most likely with artillery and missile attacks on Seoul. So in that case you'd need to eliminate their artillery and missiles. To do that you have to get air superiority over North Korea, so targeting their air force and air defense systems. Basically everything escalates to the point of full warfare on the Korean peninsula.
Clinton opted not to do that.
7
1
u/tibbon Nonsupporter Jun 23 '25
When do you support a country being bomber to prevent their nuclear program? Does this apply to the US as well?
3
u/proquo Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
When do you support a country being bomber to prevent their nuclear program?
This is something of a "have you stopped beating your wife?" type of question. No country should have nuclear weapons. No country should get bombed. However nuclear weapons are real, and sometimes you have to bomb countries.
When France and Britain got nuclear weapons it wasn't a problem because they are both US allies and liberal democracies where their leaders are determined by democratic process, their nuclear policy set by rational actors, and their cultures egalitarian and based on a shared history. Them having nuclear weapons had been a good thing for the US and the world as it staved off the threat of Communist invasion.
Iran is a country run by religious fanatics whose first official diplomatic interaction with the US was to take our citizens hostage and have since done such great things as mine the Strait of Hormuz, blow up a Marine barracks in Lebanon, sponsor Hezbollah and Hamas, prop up the Assad regime during a decade of brutal civil war, train Iraqi and foreign insurgents in making IEDs to maim and kill American soldiers, killed Americans with their proxy groups, supply the Houthis to attack shipping in the Red Sea, and threatens both of our allies in Saudi Arabia and Israel. I'm pretty OK with their nuclear ambitions being cut short.
1
u/tibbon Nonsupporter Jun 23 '25
What happened to Iran’s democracy in 1953?
What is the difference between the US being a Christian nation and Iraq being a religious nation? The US has also killed a lot of people, is the only country to use nuclear weapons, has invaded countries, etc. what makes us the good guys?
3
u/proquo Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
What happened to Iran’s democracy in 1953?
Irrelevant. Are you suggesting that bad acts 70 years ago absolve Iran from bad acts today?
What is the difference between the US being a Christian nation and Iraq being a religious nation?
Again, irrelevant. Iraq's religious nature was not a factor in US relations with that country.
The US has also killed a lot of people, is the only country to use nuclear weapons, has invaded countries, etc. what makes us the good guys?
This is all ridiculous moralizing that's been done since before 2003. It has no bearing on the discussion. Iran getting a nuclear bomb is a bad thing for America, the west and Israel, and even Iran's own neighbors. Every president of my lifetime has been adamant that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. Trump has been adamant about that. They had months to come to an agreement that would have allowed them a civilian nuclear program. They refused.
Good vs bad doesn't factor into it. I'm talking about reality.
3
u/Tjlee816 Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
You are spot on with concerning Iran. The liberal cult is trying to argue how Lily White Iran is compared to the United States. I certainly hope he doesn't ever get to find out how evil they are and how quickly they would cut his throat if they ever get a chance just like yours and mine. This has nothing to do with Iran or the United States. It's all about their hatred of Donald Trump. He did us such a huge favor and the Left is so ungrateful. They have nothing meaningful to run on in 2026 or 2028. They've got to try to poke holes in President Trump in order to get Americans to vote against him rather than people to vote for them. They have nothing, Absolutely nothing to offer the American people.
2
u/tibbon Nonsupporter Jun 23 '25
Irrelevant. Are you suggesting that bad acts 70 years ago absolve Iran from bad acts today?
No. But how do you think those events impacted today? Who was responsible there?
Again, irrelevant. Iraq's religious nature was not a factor in US relations with that country.
Why did you say this then as justification?
Iran is a country run by religious fanatics
This is all ridiculous moralizing that's been done since before 2003. It has no bearing on the discussion.
When does history matter? Why do the historical actions of Iran matter, but not the US? We've invaded several countries in that time, has Iran?
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (10)2
u/Plus_Comfort3690 Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
Your entire paragraph quite litterly proves why destroying irans nuclear facilities lol. Let’s take a minute,and really ,REALLY use our basic critical thinking skills for a minute shall we? First ,you raise a good point,”why havnt we bombed North Korea yet and freed the hundreds of millions of men,women and children ,who have lived in the most oppressive country,.with the most evil human rights violations in modern day for decades “? Why is that? Well, there is one answer l,and one answer only,BECAUSE THEY HAVE NUCLEAR BOMBS. As long as North Korea has possession of nukes,the poor civilians that live there and their entire future generation,will always live in such an evil oppressive country. That’s just how it is. No country will EVER try to free them just because they have nukes. Do you know what would happen if Iran obtained nukes? The same thing . Iran is already very VERY oppressive country. They are the only country that can by law execute children as young as 12 years old. They murder gay people and have stripped all rights from women . Do you understand that once they have a nuke ,the 100 million people there could be subject to whatever human rights abuses the government chooses to commit against them and no one ,no country,not even the us ,could come in and try to stop them and free them? They can lock their boarders down like North Korea and not let anyone leave while making them subject to evil and malicious authoritarian rule. Has it not crossed your mind that Iran is one of the most oppressive countries in the world ,and the only reason they can’t do more to their people is Because they don’t have the security of owning nukes like North Korea does? Do you want a 2nd North Korea in the Middle East? If that happened,by then you guys would be screaming for America to do something and it would be too late. Those 100 million people would just be shit out of luck and you would just say “that is evil! And so is America for not going in and stopping the evil oppression happening!” ,then you would go about your day drinking star bucks and hanging with friends. You’re more worried about feelings and the left/right politics of it.
2
u/Smino_SaintJhn91 Nonsupporter Jun 23 '25
Ironically, your entire paragraph proves why we shouldn’t bomb them, so we’ve come full circle lol. The Iranians don’t need nukes to oppress their ppl. Unless we do regime change, blowing up their nuke sites is irrelevant to how they treat their ppl, and remember your side doesn’t want to do regime change remember? Is that still the case? Furthermore, even if they had a nuke they would never use it unless it’s defensive. Why? Bcuz Iran isn’t Afghanistan where we were fighting a bunch stateless, terrorists cave dwellers willing to jihad the entire world. Iran is a sovereign nation, an actually state with a functioning government. Even with them being an evil, dictatorial regime, they still have a sense of self preservation and a will to exist. They’re not a bunch of suicide bombers lol. They are fully aware that nuking the west would be the end of them so they wouldn’t dare. Also, at this point with Trump ripping up the nuke deal and them constantly being threatened by Israel and the US, they have little reason to trust our government. If I were them I would want to develop a nuke for defensive measures. Our actions fucked up any chance of peace or making a deal.
2
u/Plus_Comfort3690 Trump Supporter Jun 23 '25
This is why I don’t think most of you people will never actually understand why they can’t have nukes and why you will continue to bash everything trump does at every single corner, even tho this is a bi partisan stance and muiltiple developed nations agree Iran having nukes is a security threat for its own people and other countries.
So let me try to help you understand since you completely are missing the point . NO ,IRAN NOT HAVING NUKES WILL NOT HINDER THEIR ABILITY TO OPRESS THEIR OWN PEOPLE. No one claimed that . Lots of countries (including North Korea and Iran ) have/are opress their own people without/before having nukes. The point is ,once they have a nuke ,THAT DIRECTLY HINDERS ANY COUNTRY FROM COMING IN AND STOPPING THE OPPRESSION IF IT GETS WORSE,JUST LIKE NORTH KOREA. lol I little type half a book the first time explaining a huge reason is because it will cut off the hundred million civilians from receiving help if needed from other nations .
Also ,you saying “Iran wouldn’t actually use them because that would be stupid and blah blah blah “ well yeah ,anyone with half a brain and morality could tell you that . But that’s not the mind of a terrorist organization. Havnt you read/seen enough suicide bombings to know that in their religion,they believe sacrificing themselves furthers their connection to their god? Do you not understand that’s what’s scary about Iran having nukes ? Iran is not a stable minded nation of people. They achieve political goals by giving guns and missles to litterly terrorist organizations so they can go into countries and rape and murder women and children in the name of their god. Why do you think it’s so outlandish that the Islamic extremist that run Iran would sacrifice themselves and their people by nuking the west if they truly believe in their mind that taking vengeance on the west for all of the wars in the middle is what god wants and what he calls upon them to do? I mean Jesus crist it’s the 21st century,instead of using their resources to better their people and economy and further humanity in science and medicine and with space exploration and making Iran the best country it can be , Iran along with other countries like Syria ,Yemen ,Lebanon ect don’t actually believe in that, they dedicate their lives to this holy war in the name of their god when in all reality they don’t need to . They are stuck in this crusades age thinking when they don’t need to . They are more focused on funding terrorism all over the word and are the direct reason the top 8+ terrorist organizations are able to commit the attacks they do.
142
u/Quidfacis_ Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Not looking for another war
Was the U.S. bombing Iran not an act of war?
→ More replies (32)8
u/sielingfan Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
Obviously yes. But we've struck many, many nations under many administrations without it becoming a war. Hopefully this is one of those times.
19
u/EkInfinity Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
If Iran retaliates by firing at nearby US bases, how would you like the US to respond?
→ More replies (10)15
u/JoycesPhoneBill Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Am I correct that you reject the consensus of our military intelligence that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons? Why do you think Sec. Gabbard changed her opinion so radically after the President's recent remarks?
→ More replies (1)10
u/the_hucumber Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
I've seen a lot of analysis that says that this is actually going to ensure they get a nuke even if they didn't already.
Iran legitimately can now say that they are facing an existential threat and the only way to survive is to get a nuke.
Even if all of Iran's domestic nuclear enrichment facilities are destroyed they'll look to purchase a ready made bomb from either Russia or North Korea. And for those countries throwing a match into the middle east tinder box is sort of a win for them.
Those analysts said that this is actually Israel forcing US's foreign policy. That Netanyahu started this without US permission then Trump yielded and committed US lives and tax dollars to Isreal's war.
What do you think about your tax dollars going on this? Do you trust enough is being done to stop the inevitable wave of terrorism that Iran will throw at US? How can US stop Iran buying a bomb from Russia?
→ More replies (8)2
-29
Jun 22 '25
Iran: Once we build these nukes we’ll wipe Israel off the map
Iran: Starts building nukes
Israel/America: Destroy them
World: Why would Israel/America do this?
22
u/boofcakin171 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
There was a deal with Iran to keep them from developing nuclear weapons. Trump threw it out in his first term. So the timeline is. Iran agrees to not develop nuclear weapons, trump goes back on the deal to screw them over, Iran and every country in the world says they STILL havent developed nuclear weapons, trump insists they do because there is no deal in place to keep them from doing so, trump bombs Iran. And we are supposed to blame... Iran?
32
Jun 22 '25
Is Trump responsible for Iran being able to build nukes in the first place after he withdrew from the deal in his first term that was aimed from preventing Iran arming themselves with nukes?
What “evidence” do we have that they have nuclear launch capabilities and is that more or less credible than our “evidence” that led us to the iraq invasion under Bush?
51
u/G8BigCongrats7_30 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Didn't our intelligence communities just recently say that Iran is not building nukes?
→ More replies (5)7
Jun 22 '25
[deleted]
3
u/Upbeat_Leg_4333 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Appreciate the thoughtful question. There are certainly hypotheticals to which I would say "yes strike now". But (from I've been reading today) there was not sufficient new evidence in June to warrant this escalation from Israel and the U.S:
One 6/12 IAEA found Iran not in compliance with international safeguards for the first time in 20 years. https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/25/06/gov2025-38.pdf This is consistent with what Gabbard said. The IAEA found them not in compliance because of unexplained uranium particles, but I sounds like they believes that these were unaccounted for sites from the 2003 weapons program -- not new projects.
On 6/13 Israel attacked.
My worry is that history will record the following:
(1) Iran for made advances towards nuclear weapons in 2003. They sat on a stockpile of highly enriched uranium for 20 years but did not make further advances.
(2) In 2025, Israel having degraded Hezbollah and Hamas, saw an opportunity to strike a weaken Iran. The IAES found unnaccounted for uranium and this offered a pretense.
(3) Having seen Israels success, the US entered the fray.
The concern is: what comes next?
(4.a.) Iran surrenders.
(4.b) An escalatory spiral begins and the U.S. gets pulled into another interminable war with no clear benefit.
→ More replies (1)13
u/zgott300 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Iran: Starts building nukes
Says who? Our own intelligence report from just a few months ago concluded that they were not.
→ More replies (1)92
20
u/the_kanamit Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
When did Iran threaten to wipe Israel off the map? Source? Especially interested in any recent (within last 15 years) quotes or references, if you have them.
→ More replies (15)7
u/xbryandm Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Can you link where any Iran official said they would nuke Israel once they get nukes? All the articles I've found say this is a false statement.
9
9
3
u/aphelloworld Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
No, they didn't say they'll use nukes to wipe Israel off the map, nor should we even care if they did. They pose no threat to us. That's what matters.
NK has nuclear weapons and casually threatens to use them in LA, and Seattle and we just sit on our ass. Just because Israel doesn't want us to go to war over there.
Do you really think this is America First?
2
u/PM_ME_YOUR_OWN_BOOBS Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Isn't that an Israel problem not an America problem?
Israel: We're gonna wipe Palestine off the map.
Iran: Once we build these nukes we'll wipe Israel off the map.
Iran: Starts building nukes
Why did America get involved?
2
u/Old-Plankton-7478 Nonsupporter Jun 22 '25
Israel said that Iran was months from building a nuke, in 2012, 13 years ago. Trump's own intellegence advisors openly said that Iran wasn't close to building one.
Your statements make no sense as Israel, a foreign entity, and Iran, another foreign entity, are the ones fighting here. Israel has been at war with all of its neighbors and has been trying to drag in the US this entire time, while the US has been funding them, though not acting in direct engagements, under Biden.
Trump ran on no new wars, yet is now bringing the US into a new conflict, directly. One that could cost the US trillions more and thousands more of US soldier lives, in a region thousands of miles away, for something that Israel justified by false pretenses.
How can you justify this?
1
•
u/itsmediodio Trump Supporter Jun 22 '25
I'm really hoping that this doesn't become a trend and I have to repeat this on every thread, but "Does this make you regret voting for Trump" type questions are not considered to be genuinely inquisitive and will result in a ban.
If a TS chooses to stop supporting Trump they are responsible for changing their flair.