America preparing legal work to invade Iran

[Deleted]

Testing missiles inside your own borders isnt an act of war. Its testing your own fucking military hardware, to see if works

Well to be fair i think nobody in the world is waiting for a 2e North Korea.
It a wonder we did not had any big issues as a world with them sofar.

But i would say let China or Russia handle it for once and pay for it to solve the issue, they got the money aswell.

[sarahtasher]

Please, explain me how a war in a country wracked by civil war (Syria) would lead to ww III with Russia, but not attacking another Russian ally, who is actually fighting ISIS and who is a much harder target ?

[Shadee]

They dont have a nuclear weapons program. Its being scrutinized by the UN and the US so the cant keep enough fissile material to make a bomb.
And they test fire missiles on their own borders, since when thats a bad thing?

It violated the UN resolution by testing missiles.

[zenkai]

I thought the UN is a a joke, at least that was the rhetoric some weeks ago.

Violating a UN security counsil resolution still isn't an act of war though.

That's like stuffing merchandise in your pocket and saying "I didn't steal anything, I haven't walked out the door yet"

[Thepersona]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...sile-test.html




The U.N. Security Council held an emergency meeting Tuesday, at the request of the United States, to discuss Iran’s latest ballistic missile test.

The U.S. Mission to the United Nations said Monday it wanted the U.N.’s most powerful body to talk about Sunday’s launch of a medium-range missile, which defies U.N. sanctions. Ambassador Nikki Haley took part in the meeting.

As other poster said, its still not an act of war

[Independent voter]

Sounds like more fake news.

[zenkai]

As other poster said, its still not an act of war

What's the point of having sanctions if there is no teeth to back it up? Disagree with the UN if you want but you can't say there isn't a conflict there.

[Thepersona]

It violated the UN resolution by testing missiles.

Which is not an act of war. Can we have some common sense here? I know that it violates the UN resolution, but that calls for sanctions, not fucking invading an 80 million coutry which is a russian ally (another country with fucking nukes)

- - - Updated - - -

What's the point of having sanctions if there is no teeth to back it up? Disagree with the UN if you want but you can't say there isn't a conflict there.

That calls for sanctions (economic) not an invasion

[Shadee]

As other poster said, its still not an act of war

So you think they should be able to defy an agreement that they signed with no consequences?

[Cyberowl]

That's like stuffing merchandise in your pocket and saying "I didn't steal anything, I haven't walked out the door yet"

In what world does that comparison make sense?

If you want to punish Iran for it's program, put the sanctions back on. They haven't committed an act of war, so keep it in your pants and don't commit one yourself.

[Blade Wolf]

I fucking knew it...

When that limp wristed nuke deal went through I knew it wouldn't be long before war were declared.

You mean the deal where YOU fucked them over?

[Wilian]

Trump's going to be busy if they go about with their China plans too.

[Thepersona]

So you think they should be able to defy an agreement that they signed with no consequences?

The consequences are economic. The sancions are always economic, not a freaking invasion with a country thats an ally of 2 other countries with more than half the nuclear warheads on this planet...
And then the same ppl whine about killary and the ww3

[Cyberowl]

So you think they should be able to defy an agreement that they signed with no consequences?

Is the only consequence you can think of war? Ain't I happy you guys didn't elect a warmonger. :rolleyes

The agreement was signed to lift sanctions, if the agreement is defied, put the sanctions back on.

[Somewhatconcerned]

Good. Wars increase the value of oil (which is what I want). I'm tired of seeing the barrel @ < $60

Will you go fight?

[Thepersona]

Is the only consequence you can think of war? Ain't I happy you guys didn't elect a warmonger. :rolleyes

The agreement was signed to lift sanctions, if the agreement is defied, put the sanctions back on.

Bbut hillary! The no fly zond would have triggered ww3, not trump invading iran, who's a russia and china ally! (I'm reading this with certain posters in mind, some of which are currently banned

[Shadee]

Which is not an act of war. Can we have some common sense here? I know that it violates the UN resolution, but that calls for sanctions, not fucking invading an 80 million coutry which is a russian ally (another country with fucking nukes)

- - - Updated - - -



That calls for sanctions (economic) not an invasion

I already said I think we should impose sanctions on them. I don't think we should invade them besides possibly bombing or dismantling their "nuclear power plants". All the liberals on here just seem to think that Iran should be able to break the rules with no consequence.

[HumbleDuck]

I'd say it's against US interest, but that really isn't a concern these days, is it?
Iran is vast, very geopolitical and has a fairly decent deterrence. It's also a neighbor of Russia. Afghanistan was neighbors with Russian allies an it's still a mess in northern regions.
Also it's the only country in the region with a somehow democratic government and a pro US population. So destabilizing it only means to make a vacuume for ISIS and other jihadists to thrive in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And that all not to mention strait of Hormuz and it's influence on oil market, but again, that's a good thing when you consider who is running the office.

[zenkai]

Which is not an act of war. Can we have some common sense here? I know that it violates the UN resolution, but that calls for sanctions, not fucking invading an 80 million coutry which is a russian ally (another country with fucking nukes)

- - - Updated - - -



That calls for sanctions (economic) not an invasion

In what world does that comparison make sense?

If you want to punish Iran for it's program, put the sanctions back on. They haven't committed an act of war, so keep it in your pants and don't commit one yourself.

Not going to debate you on this but you should note that the situation isn't as simple as you made it out to be.

[HumbleDuck]

I already said I think we should impose sanctions on them. I don't think we should invade them besides possibly bombing or dismantling their "nuclear power plants". All the liberals on here just seem to think that Iran should be able to break the rules with no consequence.

What rules did they break?