Anonymous #1 14w

…The one literally yesterday that they admitted was a preemptive strike based on speculation?

3

Anonymous OP 14w

Preemptive and unprovoked are different words, and therefore mean different things. The existence of the Ayatollah’s regime in Iran is sufficient provocation as long as their openly stated goal is the destruction of Israel and they continue to seek to develop nuclear power.

0

Anonymous #1 14w

“Waaaaah waaaaah he existed near me that’s a provocation” okay bud

1

Anonymous #1 14w

With that logic you better not be condemning any attacks by Palestinians against Israel

1

Anonymous OP 14w

“As long as” was doing some heavy work in that sentence but I don’t expect Iranian throat goats to be able to read.

-2

Anonymous #1 14w

Yeah believe it or not that doesn’t make what I said any less valid. The mere existence of something is not a provocation, unless you’re willing to say that Israel’s existence as a genocidal destabilizing force is a provocation to everyone in the region

2

Anonymous OP 14w

If it was a provocation to everyone in the region, everyone in the region might behave in a provoked manner. Israel has peace with most of its neighbors that are not funded by Iran. Behavior is provocative. If your neighbor says he’s going to kill you and starts building a nuclear bomb, you’re justified in preemptive action to defend yourself. The only reason someone might disagree with this is if they hate you and they want your neighbor to do it.

-1

Anonymous OP 14w

Violating nuclear nonproliferation agreements as the biggest sponsor of terror in the world is an act of war and Iran knew that. Now they are suffering the consequences. The fact that you and anyone else are siding with fucking IRAN is actually insane and is a testament to the fact that you’ll side with anyone that stands against the West because you’re a bad person.

2