Tehrani021
Registered Member
Using your “simple logic”:
US doesn’t have the ability to hit Iran from [insert regional base - ie Diego Garcia] or else it would have done so by now.
Israel doesn’t have the ability to nuke Tehran. Or else it would have done so by now.
This idea that if you have the ability = you would 100% have done it…doesn’t make sense. It’s illogical and you know it.
War is more than the first order effect (ie the strike) its the 2nd and 3rd order that stops militaries. Or else Iran would have been attacked in 2003 when it’s soldiers wore metal helmets and it’s best air defense system was Hawk and it’s best missile couldn’t hit within 1500 meters of its intended target.
B-2 alongside prototype F-22s could have systemically demolished Iranian nuclear sites and returned home unscathed like John McCain and the Neocons wanted. Fordow didn’t exist either. So why didn’t US do it? By your logic it had the ability so it should have done it. But since it didn’t do it, it didn’t have the ability. Hogwash.
You say this:
But also say this:
And admit this:
You admit that there is no strike Iran can do to stop Israel AND at the same time avoid a 2006 like skirmish or worse regional war.
So it has nothing to do with ability (or lack thereof) to strike from Syria/Iraq/Atlantis/Mars and everything to do with what happens after.
Comparing apples and oranges yet again, just like you do with pretty much every other user you debate!
Has Iran been directly smoking US officials in the region on a weekly with their BMs or drones? NO. If Iran were to launch attacks on US officials and assets in the region from Iranian soil on a weekly basis, would that spur a response from US? YOU BET! This also wouldn't just be restricted to US assets and officials, I think any nation in the world would respond if they were attacked like Israel has attacked Iranian targets.
So yes if you are attacked and have the ability to do respond, you 100% would and you know it.
Therefore if Iran has the capability to hit Israel from Syria they would have and should have done it by now. The fact that they havent means either the capability isn't there or they do have the capability but not the willpower, which would be criminal!
So to compare US and Iran with Israel and Iran just shows how desperate and illogical you have become in this discourse.
Look how desperately you're trying to find contradiction in what I said. Yet when any sane person reads what I've written they can see what I think should be done and what the pros and cons are. Another reason Iran would have hit Israel from Syria had it had the capability would be to actually avoid a regional war because it is not done from Iranian soil. So that's actually more evidence in my favour and a refutation of the tweet you posted about an attack coming from Syria.
And please don't put words in my mouth. There is something Iran can currently do. There's a thing called tit for tat. Iran has the capability to hit Israeli consulates in a neighbouring country from it's own territory. People saying "yeah but Iran won't do that" is not a reason why Iran shouldn't.
Last edited:









