[flagged]

> Dictators are not the good the good guys, for their people or their neighbors.

Trying to find a clear line of "good vs evil guys" is bound to led you down a bad path. Is how Iran treat people very shitty and outright evil? Yes. Does that mean other countries should feel OK with invading them to "liberate" them? Probably no and feels like a very dangerous line of thinking that could be used to invade basically any country, including the US itself.

I don't think many people are arguing that Iran is some beacon of democracy and treating their people right, but regardless of that, we tend to favor sovereignty of nations for a good reason, yet it seems like some countries still struggle with accepting this.

▲

jonyt 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Iran isn't being attacked because it's not nice to its own people (which is a shame really, all dictators and theocrats should worry for their lives). It's being attacked because it has ballistic missiles, a nuclear weapons program, a giant sign in the middle of Tehran counting down the existence of Israel and its leaders have repeatedly called for Israel's destruction. So weapon, opportunity and motive. It's of course free to work towards the destruction of Israel but then it's hardly fair to complain that Israel may try to preempt that.

	▲	diggan an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> It's being attacked because it has ballistic missiles, a nuclear weapons program, a giant sign in the middle of Tehran counting down the existence of Israel and its leaders have repeatedly called for Israel's destruction Switch "Israel" with "Iran" and you have basically the same thing, but seemingly waging war against Israel would never be an option, would it? Because we accept the country's own sovereignty, as we should do with all countries.