upvote
> The US has absolutely no business attacking Iran.

Iran's theocratic regime just murdered tens of thousands of protestors, regularly organizes chants of "Death to America", calls the US "The Great Satan", sponsors terror organizations all around the region, has (through their Houthi proxies) cut off critical sea lanes in one of the most strategic areas, is very close to developing nuclear weapons (with enough HEU already to build maybe a dozen bombs), has extensive ballistic missile magazines and expertise, and is working on ICBMs explicitly to reach the US homeland.

But oh yeah, this is totally unprovoked and the US has no business attacking Iran. Right.

reply
1. There's absolutely no proof that happened.

2. Maybe if we weren't killing millions of Arabs on behalf of Israel, they wouldn't hate us.

3. I would absolutely want Iran to have nuclear weapons to put Israel in check.

Israel is a terrorist nation controlling my country and Iran is an ally in the fight against them.

reply
> There's absolutely no proof that happened.

Pathetic.

reply
What I said is factual. We're already seeing pictures of murdered children coming out of Iran, just like we did with Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon... Not a single shred of evidence has been produced to back the claim that Iran murdered anyone, let alone tens of thousands of people.
reply
What you said is a pathetic lie. The regime itself claims they killed over 3000.

https://apnews.com/article/iran-protests-memorials-chehelom-... https://apnews.com/article/iran-protests-crackdown-hospitals... https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2026/02/20/how-man... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62v248xkl5o

Honestly I don't even know why I bother. You're not debating in good faith.

reply
I'll save everyone the clicks: there's no evidence of Iran claiming they killed over 3000 people in any of these articles. There's a claim they said this, but as with all reporting about Iran, no proof. Also, 3000 is not "tens of thousands".
reply
It looks like you saved yourself the clicks.

"The Human Rights Activists News Agency says it confirmed more than 7,000 deaths and that it is investigating thousands more. The government has acknowledged more than 3,000 killed, though it has undercounted or not reported fatalities from past unrest." - https://apnews.com/article/iran-campus-protests-crackdown-54...

'"I would put the minimum estimates to be 5,000 plus," Mai Soto, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on Iran, said in an interview with ABC Australia. Soto noted 5,000 dead is a "conservative" or "the minimum" estimate. Other credible estimates, she said, indicate as many as 20,000.' - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2026/02/20/how-man...

> as with all reporting about Iran, no proof.

In the same way there's no proof humans ever walked on the moon, I suppose.

reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Activists_in_Iran

> the organization is based in Fairfax, Virginia, United States

reply
It's constant deflection with you people. You can never actually address the facts head on; just deflect with "there's no evidence", pivot to "there's no proof", then cast aspersions on the most disagreeable messenger.

You have previously intimated that you are also in the United States. Should I dismiss your arguments because you're allegedly based in the US, too?

reply
It's amazing to see the justification done by some people to attack other sovereign countries. Did not america learn from the fake WMD fiasco with Iraq?
reply
> fake WMD fiasco

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-stored-highly...

  The IAEA estimates that Iran had 440.9 kg of uranium enriched to up to
  60% before last year's Israeli-U.S. attacks - enough, if enriched further,
  for 10 nuclear weapons, according to an IAEA yardstick.
  
  The agency and Western powers believe the bulk of that is still intact.
  Washington wants Tehran to give it up.
I seem to have missed the IAEA report on Iraq's 400+ kilos of HEU.
reply
Jm2c but I wonder how people can be surprised that Iran wanted to build a nuclear weapon, especially after the US under Trump's first presidency pulled out the nuclear deal struck under Obama and cornered Iran even more.

Like do people in US realize that countries around the world take notes about what happened to the Libyas and Iraqs and many others (like Colombia recently) and see that the US will attack other countries with impunity.

reply
Who cares what the mullahs want?

The US feels threatened by Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs and has the military force to stop them, probably. Diplomatic avenues bore no fruit. Military force is now being used to--hopefully--end the threat definitively.

Yes, of course we are aware of what happened to Ghaddafi. It's very en vogue to point out the game theoretical incentives to develop nuclear weapons.

But seemingly people never bring up South Africa's disarmament. And nobody ever mentions that game theory also incentivizes the US prevent their adversaries from developing nuclear weapons where possible.

Giving up or stopping development of nukes may invite attack. Refusing to stop developing them may also invite attack.

reply
>> *if enriched further*

Keyword there. They said they were not pursuing weapon enrichment.

Let's also not pretend that the US and israel care about international law, after all, there are arrest warrants by the ICC against israeli officials.

reply
60% is very close to 93%; see my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47198239

> They said they were not pursuing weapon enrichment.

There is literally no other reason for Iran to enrich to 60% U235 than for weapons.

reply