G7 leaders: ‘Iran can never have a nuclear weapon’
-
"Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,”
I guess we all just have to pretend Israel doesn't exist?
Tbf they both are...
-
Israel is the principal source of regional instability and terror and everyone and his dog knows this.
The kowtowing to Trump and his Zionist sponsors by the client states of the US Empire is an insult to objective reality.
Seriously. We’re supposed to regard Iran as an existential threat that is worth any price to neutralize. Okay, boomers.
-
Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.
The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.
"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.
They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."
Nukes for me but not for thee
-
Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.
The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.
"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.
They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."
Israel is the criminal and everyone knows it.
Israel will face the long-term consequences of its reckless behavior. Just not today.
-
Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.
The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.
"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.
They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."
Even the statement is not about protecting people lives but about market stability.
They are not working for the people...
-
Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.
The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.
"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.
They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Ukraine gave up their nukes, look what happened to them. Libya gave their nuclear weapons program up, and look at them today. North Korea didn't, and they're still standing, for better or for worse. Iraq was accused of having nukes, but didn't have them, and got destroyed. Seems that if you want any semblance of sovereignty outside of NATO, you better have some nukes.
So for any nations reading along I'll summarize the basic conclusions:
- Get nukes
- If you have nukes, do not give them up
- If you're accused of having nukes, drop everything and get nukes asap
Do you think Israel would be bombing Iran if they had nukes?
-
Whatever.
Don’t care if yanks go get blown up in the Middle East. It’s all in service of enriching Halliburton and the military industrial complex. Yawn. It is 2003 again?
Whatever happened to: “tRuMp iS tHe PeAcE pReSIdEnT”.
I thought the US was trillions in debt. There’s always money for war.
Can’t wait to laugh at this smoothbrained crew of assclowns as they try to fight a foreign war. Good luck maintaining those supply chains for US war mongering when the whole world fucking hates you.
FFS. Anyway. Next.
Don’t care if yanks go get blown up in the Middle East. It’s all in service of enriching Halliburton and the military industrial complex. Yawn. It is 2003 again?
The last time they did this, a million Iraqis died.
-
Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.
The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.
"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.
They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."
Isreal has bombed Iran
everyone likes this
-
Iran is a special case. Unlike others, the two I mentioned have essentially declared themselves as the enemies of the west,
You reversed it. The west made itself the enemy of iran
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Elaborate..
For others who don't want the alternative history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–United_States_relations
Iranian explanations for the animosity with the United States include “the natural and unavoidable conflict between the Islamic system” and “such an oppressive power as the United States, which is trying to establish a global dictatorship and further its own interests by dominating other nations and trampling on their rights”, as well as the United States support for Israel ("the Zionist entity").[11][12] In the West, however, different explanations have been considered,[1] including the Iranian government's need for an external bogeyman to furnish a pretext for domestic repression against pro-democratic forces and to bind the government to its loyal constituency.[13] The United States attributes the worsening of relations to the 1979–81 Iran hostage crisis,[1] Iran's repeated human rights abuses since the Islamic Revolution, different restrictions on using spy methods on democratic revolutions by the US, its anti-Western ideology and its nuclear program.[14][15]
-
Please don't make Iran out to be some sort of victim in all this. What Israel is doing is wrong, but Iran has funded a lot of terrorists throughout the years, and execute people in medival ways for holding hands with the "wrong" person.
The iranian government is pure fucking evil and deserves to die horrible deaths for what they instigate and fund around the world and in their local area.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Dude. I don't disagree but this is not helpful. What's helpful is acknowledging that none of that matters to the US. Our greatest allies in the region have all of what you listed and more.
All this sentiment does is manufacture concent for this war. There is one constant factor in the west asia. A constant that continues to keep countries from being able to have civil rights movements, keeps their citizens impoverished, keeps dictatorships and monarchs in power while everyday people suffer.
That constant is US intervention and disruption of the region. Intervention against evil authoritarian rule only when that countries rulers don't allow US exploitation or threaten it's imperialist interest.
It serves no purpose what you're doing. Otherwise I think you should be more concerned about the US arming Saudi Arabia or Israel. Both of those countries have significantly more innocent people slaughtered under their rule.
Iran and it's people will only know civil liberties and equal rights when they are given the stability to have those movements of their own.
Do you think the best thing for the US civil rights movement would have been a bombing campaign from Canada? No.
Please. Again, I don't defend Iran if we're talking about it in a bubble. But the world does not work like that. And comments like yours only manufacture consent for the invasion of a country that attacked no one without first being attacked. That's it. We don't need to try to pick apart anything more than that.
If you care about gay people in Iran. You should care about them being bombed. End of story. That should be everyone utmost focus right now. There is no gay person in Iran right now thinking "oh, finally the bombs of freedom reign!". No, they are thinking "oh fuck, I need to get me and my family and friends out of here"
Sorry, a bit of a rant. So much so that I came back to re-edit the comment later. But, right now, I think it's really important that we don't fall for this type of narrative. The fascist controlling America are doing everything they can to manufacture concent with the Liberals.
The intentions of your comment are good and correct. But they are only helpful in a vacuum outside of the war mongering fascism that is rising.
If the only threat to Iran was it's civil rights violations you'd be right. But the threat to Iran right now is it's population experiencing what Gaza has for the last 21 months. Something I pray they don't experience.
-
Elaborate..
For others who don't want the alternative history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–United_States_relations
Iranian explanations for the animosity with the United States include “the natural and unavoidable conflict between the Islamic system” and “such an oppressive power as the United States, which is trying to establish a global dictatorship and further its own interests by dominating other nations and trampling on their rights”, as well as the United States support for Israel ("the Zionist entity").[11][12] In the West, however, different explanations have been considered,[1] including the Iranian government's need for an external bogeyman to furnish a pretext for domestic repression against pro-democratic forces and to bind the government to its loyal constituency.[13] The United States attributes the worsening of relations to the 1979–81 Iran hostage crisis,[1] Iran's repeated human rights abuses since the Islamic Revolution, different restrictions on using spy methods on democratic revolutions by the US, its anti-Western ideology and its nuclear program.[14][15]
wrote on last edited by [email protected]We are going to ignore that the 1953 coup never happened?
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/31/690363402/how-the-cia-overthrew-irans-democracy-in-four-days
According to Stephen Kinzer, author of the book All the Shah's Men, Roosevelt quickly seized control of the Iranian press by buying them off with bribes and circulating anti-Mossadegh propaganda. He recruited allies among the Islamic clergy, and he convinced the shah that Mossadegh was a threat.
-
We are going to ignore that the 1953 coup never happened?
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/31/690363402/how-the-cia-overthrew-irans-democracy-in-four-days
According to Stephen Kinzer, author of the book All the Shah's Men, Roosevelt quickly seized control of the Iranian press by buying them off with bribes and circulating anti-Mossadegh propaganda. He recruited allies among the Islamic clergy, and he convinced the shah that Mossadegh was a threat.
The coup explains the current form of government, not why the government hates west, a west that is broader than just US
-
The coup explains the current form of government, not why the government hates west, a west that is broader than just US
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The west didn't abandon the idea of controlling Iran again for it's oils and for Israel to have free reign in controlling all Palestine and keep expending it's illegal settlements. I am all for a regime change but without foreign intervention for geopolitics reasons .
-
Don’t care if yanks go get blown up in the Middle East. It’s all in service of enriching Halliburton and the military industrial complex. Yawn. It is 2003 again?
The last time they did this, a million Iraqis died.
I know. Fuck the US. They can’t even come up with different propaganda.
-
Tehran “is the principal source of regional instability and terror,” declare G7 leaders in a joint statement.
The leaders of the G7 countries on Monday issued a joint statement saying Iran should not have nuclear weapons and affirming Israel's right to defend itself.
"Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror. We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," declared the statement, issued by the leaders of the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan, along with the EU.
They pledged to "remain vigilant to the implications for international energy markets and stand ready to coordinate, including with like-minded partners, to safeguard market stability."
Nobody should have nukes, you fucking hypocrites..
-
Ukraine gave up their nukes, look what happened to them. Libya gave their nuclear weapons program up, and look at them today. North Korea didn't, and they're still standing, for better or for worse. Iraq was accused of having nukes, but didn't have them, and got destroyed. Seems that if you want any semblance of sovereignty outside of NATO, you better have some nukes.
So for any nations reading along I'll summarize the basic conclusions:
- Get nukes
- If you have nukes, do not give them up
- If you're accused of having nukes, drop everything and get nukes asap
Do you think Israel would be bombing Iran if they had nukes?
Are you claiming that the world would be a safer place with every other unstable or authoritarian country having nukes?
-
Are you claiming that the world would be a safer place with every other unstable or authoritarian country having nukes?
MAD safer no, but essentially disabling conventional warfare as a practical idea yes.
India and Pakistan are armed to the teeth, yet they haven't fought a real war ever since they both got nukes.
-
Religious zealots can't be allowed to have nukes. You have to at least masquerade as a well-adjusted nation while you develop the nukes and slowly massage your zealots into positions of power over a few decades. Those are the rules.
The country founded on the idea that "God promised us this land" already has nukes.
-
The west didn't abandon the idea of controlling Iran again for it's oils and for Israel to have free reign in controlling all Palestine and keep expending it's illegal settlements. I am all for a regime change but without foreign intervention for geopolitics reasons .
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Again, you're doing something called US defaultism. The west is not in agreement about Palestine for example. Western Europe is quite obviously against everything that's currently happening. Neither did other parts of the west planned to control Iran's oil. I'll have to remind you that the initial topic/argument was why Iran/West are on bad terms, not Iran and US.
For me, a European, my hate towards them comes from their continious support towards Russia who's invading checks notes Europe.
-
MAD safer no, but essentially disabling conventional warfare as a practical idea yes.
India and Pakistan are armed to the teeth, yet they haven't fought a real war ever since they both got nukes.
What makes you assume said countries would not act exactly like Russia towards others without nukes?
