Philosophy Now Forum

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:58 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Jun 18, 2025 11:44 pm What do you see as a reasonable way out of this shit show in the Middle East?

Betray Bibi. The truth is he's been trying to start a war with Iran for America to fight for the last 30 years, always claiming Iran is just about to develop the bomb. Netanyahu doesn't have the reach to maintain a high tempo air war against Iran for more than a few days, all his planes will be overdue for maintenance by the end of the week. There's no way for the US president to order Israel to end the air strikes, but they will end anyway due to logistics soon, or the tempo will collapse and it will look a bit silly.

So let Bibi punch himself out, then negotiate a treaty to put the constraints back in place that Obama negotiated. And then prepare to make some very large concession to Iran to purchase peace. In return for a non-proliferation agreement with inspections they will get a big roll back of sanctions targeting their oil industry, and we'll probably have to let them build their own medical isotope reactor if they haven't got one already.

The it's probably time Bibi faced the music for all that corruption he did.

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 4:49 pm I wonder why Kim Wrong-Un, or Russia in particular. doesn't just loan Iran a nuke or ten? America has loaned 100 to 5 NATO countries. Surely it's in Russia's interests to throw that cat among the pigeons?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 4:57 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 4:49 pm I wonder why Kim Wrong-Un, or Russia in particular. doesn't just loan Iran a nuke or ten? America has loaned 100 to 5 NATO countries. Surely it's in Russia's interests to throw that cat among the pigeons?

Countries typically don't divvy out nuclear weapons to other countries that don't have them already because depending on how fortunes and diplomacy go, those countries might be enemies at some point or might use them to stir trouble with other allies. It's called "nuclear proliferation" and it's generally not a good idea unless you want a world where every crackpot dictatorship can nuke someone they don't like.

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:34 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 4:57 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 4:49 pm I wonder why Kim Wrong-Un, or Russia in particular. doesn't just loan Iran a nuke or ten? America has loaned 100 to 5 NATO countries. Surely it's in Russia's interests to throw that cat among the pigeons?

Countries typically don't divvy out nuclear weapons to other countries that don't have them already because depending on how fortunes and diplomacy go, those countries might be enemies at some point or might use them to stir trouble with other allies. It's called "nuclear proliferation" and it's generally not a good idea unless you want a world where every crackpot dictatorship can nuke someone they don't like.

That would suit Putin just fine. He has no meaningful allies. America would just have to proliferate to Egypt & Saudi. I wonder what stops him? He should loan some to Argentina too. There's nothing anyone could do about it.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 12:43 am Nah. Walker is a foreign policy genius. If you are afraid of something, declare war on it.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:44 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 12:43 am Nah. Walker is a foreign policy genius. If you are afraid of something, declare war on it.

Declare war only when necessary, which is why Israel has and the USA has not, but your element of fear does explain your war against rational, clear-thinking that contradicts what AI has been whispering into your ear.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:47 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:44 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 12:43 am Nah. Walker is a foreign policy genius. If you are afraid of something, declare war on it.

Declare war only when necessary, which is why Israel has and the USA has not, but your element of fear does explain your war against rational, clear-thinking that contradicts what AI has been whispering into your ear.

We declared war on Iraq and Afghanistan when we thought it was "necessary". How did that turn out? War should always be a LAST resort, not the first one you spring to.

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 6:57 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:47 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:44 pm
Declare war only when necessary, which is why Israel has and the USA has not, but your element of fear does explain your war against rational, clear-thinking that contradicts what AI has been whispering into your ear.

We declared war on Iraq and Afghanistan when we thought it was "necessary". How did that turn out? War should always be a LAST resort, not the first one you spring to.

That's with boots on the ground. The only question is can the bunker busters guarantee to trash the enriched uranium. There can be no negative consequences for America, apart from setting the precedent. Putin's way ahead on impunity. It'll send oil prices rocketing. Especially for China. Good for Russia.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Jun 18, 2025 9:08 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Jun 18, 2025 8:27 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Jun 18, 2025 1:53 am Is it possible that the MAGA Republicans will refuse to go the same route as so many other US presidents and send our young people to fight, kill and die in foreign wars? Or will the MAGA movement stand by and watch Trump the "new boss, same as the old boss?" get us mired in Iran?

https://x.com/RepMTG/status/1935004625238945952

Thoughts?

Iran has mired the world in the miasma of terrorism for half a century. Ending the cause of that would end the mire. Not ending it continues the mire.

Trump wants to end Iran’s nuclear threat. Sounds like one of those 30 thousand pound bunker busters would do the job if there’s only the one site left and it hasn’t been moved.

Iran can then determine its own fate while continuing to suppress its own population, which won't include nuking Israel or any other infidels.

It doesn't take mire time to drop a bunker buster.

You read it here first folks, Walker reckons this all goes quiet after one bunker buster shuts down the entire Iranian nuclear program all clean and simple and no spreading of violence around the middle east... better buy one of those "Mission accomplished" banners.

Good news for Putin though, Oil prices will go right back up when the Iranians close Hormuz up good and tight. You can put little "I did that" stickers on the gas pumps of America again. That will be nice.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 7:16 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 6:57 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:47 pm

We declared war on Iraq and Afghanistan when we thought it was "necessary". How did that turn out? War should always be a LAST resort, not the first one you spring to.

That's with boots on the ground. The only question is can the bunker busters guarantee to trash the enriched uranium. There can be no negative consequences for America, apart from setting the precedent. Putin's way ahead on impunity. It'll send oil prices rocketing. Especially for China. Good for Russia.

And if we rely on negotiations instead of force to accomplish what we want, would that not be more ethical, or else more pragmatically preferable to solving the issue through force?

Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 7:58 pm empty threats are intimidating...

-Imp

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 8:04 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 7:16 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Jun 19, 2025 6:57 pm
That's with boots on the ground. The only question is can the bunker busters guarantee to trash the enriched uranium. There can be no negative consequences for America, apart from setting the precedent. Putin's way ahead on impunity. It'll send oil prices rocketing. Especially for China. Good for Russia.

And if we rely on negotiations instead of force to accomplish what we want, would that not be more ethical, or else more pragmatically preferable to solving the issue through force?

The ethics of Hamas? Israel? Russia? Trump? The ruling class enemy with the monopoly of violence everywhere?