Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Conflict in the Middle East

Let's face it Iran is indiscriminatly hitting Israeli civilians targets including schools using cluster bombs.....

1000 replies

mids2019 · 22/03/2026 12:06

Iran is firing missiles into heavily populated Israeli towns and have abandoned the pretence of targeting anything military.....this is just pure terrorism and does make you think what would happen if Iran did manage to develop a nuclear weapon.

Just hoping more of the missile launch sites can be taken out and this terrorist regime falls.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
42
Alexandra2001 · 31/03/2026 15:57

SSAW2026 · 31/03/2026 15:33

I know what insinuate means. You think a different main threat, so what, your opinion is worth no more or no less than anyone elses. It may turn out to be Iran or Russia is the biggest threat or another orgnisaton or state, it does change as things change.

Maybe the UK has many threats, Russia and Iran or the excaped prisoners from Syria as you are proposing, better let MI5 know it case they are too busy just keeping an eye on Iranian proxies 😉

What does it really matter which one I feel, or you feel is the greatest threat anyway on a thread on MN. The people who make those decisions aren't interested in little disagreements on MN between people who don't know all the ins and outs of what is going on. Let's not pretend we do 🙄

I take MN threads for what they are, people's differing opinion. I listen to some, I ignore others. I tend to ignore people who seem to be looking for a spat as if what they say is more important that anyone else, it really isn't. Why get so het up over a mere discussion thread.

Lol, why the passive aggressive stuff? "Het Up" "So what" "your opinion is worthless" stuff.....

I was replying to you dismissing other peoples opinions and dramatising Govt reports to aid your pov.

But i'll leave it here.

RedTagAlan · 31/03/2026 16:05

SSAW2026 · 31/03/2026 15:33

I know what insinuate means. You think a different main threat, so what, your opinion is worth no more or no less than anyone elses. It may turn out to be Iran or Russia is the biggest threat or another orgnisaton or state, it does change as things change.

Maybe the UK has many threats, Russia and Iran or the excaped prisoners from Syria as you are proposing, better let MI5 know it case they are too busy just keeping an eye on Iranian proxies 😉

What does it really matter which one I feel, or you feel is the greatest threat anyway on a thread on MN. The people who make those decisions aren't interested in little disagreements on MN between people who don't know all the ins and outs of what is going on. Let's not pretend we do 🙄

I take MN threads for what they are, people's differing opinion. I listen to some, I ignore others. I tend to ignore people who seem to be looking for a spat as if what they say is more important that anyone else, it really isn't. Why get so het up over a mere discussion thread.

Quote : "The people who make those decisions aren't interested in little disagreements on MN between people who don't know all the ins and outs of what is going on. Let's not pretend we do "

The point is, really, that you are changing/adding to the words of the people that make these decisions. And you were caught out doing so. So just own it ?

It does not matter what people think, as you say. What matters is that the evidence people present to justify what they think, should be genuine and true so far as can be ascertained.

I could post evidence for something here, and we might reach different justified conclusions. That is opinion I reckon. Changing evidence is not.

SSAW2026 · 31/03/2026 16:06

Alexandra2001 · 31/03/2026 15:57

Lol, why the passive aggressive stuff? "Het Up" "So what" "your opinion is worthless" stuff.....

I was replying to you dismissing other peoples opinions and dramatising Govt reports to aid your pov.

But i'll leave it here.

Your opinion isn't worthless, it's worth the same as all of our opinions on a chat thread. Interesting to see how you manage to get to 'your opinion is worthless' 🙄it's just as valid as anyone's.

We don't agree on some things so what.

"I was replying to you dismissing other peoples opinions and dramatising Govt reports to aid your pov." Something that never happened.

SSAW2026 · 31/03/2026 16:07

RedTagAlan · 31/03/2026 16:05

Quote : "The people who make those decisions aren't interested in little disagreements on MN between people who don't know all the ins and outs of what is going on. Let's not pretend we do "

The point is, really, that you are changing/adding to the words of the people that make these decisions. And you were caught out doing so. So just own it ?

It does not matter what people think, as you say. What matters is that the evidence people present to justify what they think, should be genuine and true so far as can be ascertained.

I could post evidence for something here, and we might reach different justified conclusions. That is opinion I reckon. Changing evidence is not.

Not changing opinons and not adding stuff. I disagree.

RedTagAlan · 31/03/2026 16:19

SSAW2026 · 31/03/2026 16:07

Not changing opinons and not adding stuff. I disagree.

As a matter of interest, when you read the same news story on different platforms, do you notice if the language changes ? The Mail, Sky News, GB news, The Guardian, sometimes subtly different, and often not subtle at all. All can be factually true, but very different.

I do think your edit of the MI5 thing did cross the line from fact to misrepresentation. You added .

SSAW2026 · 31/03/2026 16:30

I saw the same back and forth gameplaying on this thread the other day with a different poster. Did, didn't, did, didn't, feels like the playground at times. Not happening here.

Have a lovely day and engage game playing with someone else.

RedTagAlan · 31/03/2026 16:35

SSAW2026 · 31/03/2026 16:30

I saw the same back and forth gameplaying on this thread the other day with a different poster. Did, didn't, did, didn't, feels like the playground at times. Not happening here.

Have a lovely day and engage game playing with someone else.

Seeking the truth on which to base opinion and logical reasoning is not gameplaying.

Edit to add sorry. Nor is suggesting corrections to factual errors gameplaying.

SharonEllis · 31/03/2026 18:36

oldtiredcyclist · 31/03/2026 14:04

If we look at this link to Islamic terrorism, particularly from 1979 to 2024, we can clearly see that 80% of the Islamic terror attacks came from Taliban, Islamic State, Boko Haram, al Shabab and al Qaeda and all these groups have the following in common, they are all Sunni Muslim and none of them have any links to Iran, with the exception that the following groups have all attacked Iran - al Qaeda, Islamic state and the Taliban.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism

The point about Iran is that its a state sponsor of terror. Noone denies the terrorist threat of these organisations but they are not countries

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 02:46

oldtiredcyclist · 31/03/2026 14:04

If we look at this link to Islamic terrorism, particularly from 1979 to 2024, we can clearly see that 80% of the Islamic terror attacks came from Taliban, Islamic State, Boko Haram, al Shabab and al Qaeda and all these groups have the following in common, they are all Sunni Muslim and none of them have any links to Iran, with the exception that the following groups have all attacked Iran - al Qaeda, Islamic state and the Taliban.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism

This fact is conveniently missed by those who justify starting wars against Iran.
The majority of terror attacks have been carried out by groups of Sunni Muslims, such as ISIS and Al Queda. Iran is majority Shia.
There are plenty of other countries that support terrorism, the US being one. They have repeatedly funded terrorist groups when convenient. In fact, they imposed an Al Quaeda terrorist in Syria after supposedly attacking Syria to eliminate terrorism. The 'terrorist threat' is clearly not the reason why Israel and The US decided to start a war with Iran. It wasn't even listed in their initial objectives. Let's stop pretending.

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 06:46

The terrorist threat was one of the main reasons Israel and the US decided to start a war with Iran.

Taken from Trump’s speech following the start of US and Israeli strikes against Iran, February 28, 2026 (full text is in the link):

Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime — a vicious group of very hard, terrible people.
Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world.

From Lebanon to Yemen and Syria to Iraq, the regime has armed, trained and funded terrorist militias that have soaked the earth with blood and guts.
And it was Iran’s proxy Hamas that launched the monstrous October 7 attacks on Israel, slaughtering more than 1,000 innocent people, including 46 Americans, while taking 12 of our citizens hostage. It was brutal, something like the world has never seen before.

Iran is the world’s number one state sponsor of terror, and just recently killed tens of thousands of its own citizens on the street as they protested.
It has always been the policy of the United States, in particular, my administration, that this terrorist regime can never have a nuclear weapon. I’ll say it again. They can never have a nuclear weapon.

That is why, in Operation Midnight Hammer last June, we obliterated the regime’s nuclear program at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.

After that attack, we warned them never to resume their malicious pursuit of nuclear weapons, and we sought repeatedly to make a deal. We tried. They wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it again. They wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it. They didn’t know what was happening. They just wanted to practice evil.

But Iran refused (to make a deal), just as it has for decades and decades. They rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can’t take it anymore.

Instead, they attempted to rebuild their nuclear program and to continue developing long range missiles that can now threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed overseas and could soon reach the American homeland.

Just imagine how emboldened this regime would be if they ever had and actually were armed with nuclear weapons as a means to deliver their message.

For these reasons, the United States military is undertaking a massive and ongoing operation to prevent this very wicked, radical dictatorship from threatening America and our core national security interests.

We are going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground. It will be totally again obliterated.

We are going to annihilate their navy. We are going to ensure that the region’s terrorist proxies can no longer destabilize the region or the world and attack our forces, and no longer use their IEDs — or roadside bombs, as they are sometimes called — to so gravely wound and kill thousands and thousands of people, including many Americans.

And we will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. It’s a very simple message. They will never have a nuclear weapon.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-trumps-declaration-of-major-combat-operations-against-iran/

Aprilshowers13 · 01/04/2026 06:51

@Twiglets1 thanks.
Let's hope they can set them back from getting one.

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 07:02

Aprilshowers13 · 01/04/2026 06:51

@Twiglets1 thanks.
Let's hope they can set them back from getting one.

Indeed.

Iran developing the capacity for nuclear weapons is a very, very bad idea.

Don't give a shit if people feel that is "unfair" because other countries have them.

Other countries don't chant “Death to America! Death to Israel!" or fund terrorist militias around the Middle East to help them achieve these goals.

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 07:16

SharonEllis · 31/03/2026 18:36

The point about Iran is that its a state sponsor of terror. Noone denies the terrorist threat of these organisations but they are not countries

This

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 07:17

Aprilshowers13 · 01/04/2026 06:51

@Twiglets1 thanks.
Let's hope they can set them back from getting one.

Iran will be more likely, not less likely to acquire nuclear weapons now.

Note that other countries which are known to sponsor terrorism but do have nuclear weapons are not attacked eg Pakistan and N Korea. The Iranian's supreme leader who was against developing a n. weapon for religious reasons has been assassinated by the Israelis/US. The next leaders are more likely to be more radical, not less. That's before you even start to think about all the other very serious effects of this war.

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 07:21

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 07:17

Iran will be more likely, not less likely to acquire nuclear weapons now.

Note that other countries which are known to sponsor terrorism but do have nuclear weapons are not attacked eg Pakistan and N Korea. The Iranian's supreme leader who was against developing a n. weapon for religious reasons has been assassinated by the Israelis/US. The next leaders are more likely to be more radical, not less. That's before you even start to think about all the other very serious effects of this war.

They had 60% enriched uranium, that’s not for civilian use.

Pakistan and NK having them doesn’t mean people should push for Iran getting them.

Alexandra2001 · 01/04/2026 07:25

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 06:46

The terrorist threat was one of the main reasons Israel and the US decided to start a war with Iran.

Taken from Trump’s speech following the start of US and Israeli strikes against Iran, February 28, 2026 (full text is in the link):

Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime — a vicious group of very hard, terrible people.
Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world.

From Lebanon to Yemen and Syria to Iraq, the regime has armed, trained and funded terrorist militias that have soaked the earth with blood and guts.
And it was Iran’s proxy Hamas that launched the monstrous October 7 attacks on Israel, slaughtering more than 1,000 innocent people, including 46 Americans, while taking 12 of our citizens hostage. It was brutal, something like the world has never seen before.

Iran is the world’s number one state sponsor of terror, and just recently killed tens of thousands of its own citizens on the street as they protested.
It has always been the policy of the United States, in particular, my administration, that this terrorist regime can never have a nuclear weapon. I’ll say it again. They can never have a nuclear weapon.

That is why, in Operation Midnight Hammer last June, we obliterated the regime’s nuclear program at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.

After that attack, we warned them never to resume their malicious pursuit of nuclear weapons, and we sought repeatedly to make a deal. We tried. They wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it again. They wanted to do it. They didn’t want to do it. They didn’t know what was happening. They just wanted to practice evil.

But Iran refused (to make a deal), just as it has for decades and decades. They rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can’t take it anymore.

Instead, they attempted to rebuild their nuclear program and to continue developing long range missiles that can now threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed overseas and could soon reach the American homeland.

Just imagine how emboldened this regime would be if they ever had and actually were armed with nuclear weapons as a means to deliver their message.

For these reasons, the United States military is undertaking a massive and ongoing operation to prevent this very wicked, radical dictatorship from threatening America and our core national security interests.

We are going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground. It will be totally again obliterated.

We are going to annihilate their navy. We are going to ensure that the region’s terrorist proxies can no longer destabilize the region or the world and attack our forces, and no longer use their IEDs — or roadside bombs, as they are sometimes called — to so gravely wound and kill thousands and thousands of people, including many Americans.

And we will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. It’s a very simple message. They will never have a nuclear weapon.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-trumps-declaration-of-major-combat-operations-against-iran/

I'm not sure quoting someone who is unhinged is evidence or support for your views, let alone his.

He claimed to have destroyed their nuclear facilities last year and now claims it again, the reality is, no one knows what he has achieved other than global economic crisis.

Iran launched many attacks around the gulf last night, blowing up oil tanks, setting fire to a tanker.... Hormuz still remains closed to most.

... they will then, when Trump has had enough in 2 or 3 weeks time, sell oil at a much higher price to Asia etc and have the money to rebuild.... then what? bomb again?

Their enriched stockpiles are likely to be very deep under ground and ready to be exploited again.

RedTagAlan · 01/04/2026 07:29

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 07:17

Iran will be more likely, not less likely to acquire nuclear weapons now.

Note that other countries which are known to sponsor terrorism but do have nuclear weapons are not attacked eg Pakistan and N Korea. The Iranian's supreme leader who was against developing a n. weapon for religious reasons has been assassinated by the Israelis/US. The next leaders are more likely to be more radical, not less. That's before you even start to think about all the other very serious effects of this war.

It is unclear if the DPRK have a viable ICBM to use their nukes on the US. And I have not seen any evidence that they sponsor terrorism. I would not count DPRK troops in Ukraine as terrorism.

But yes, after the 2nd Iraq war and the Arab Spring, the DPRK accelerated their efforts on nukes and ICBMs Because it is a sure way to prevent attacks as is happening against Iran now.

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 07:34

RedTagAlan · 01/04/2026 07:29

It is unclear if the DPRK have a viable ICBM to use their nukes on the US. And I have not seen any evidence that they sponsor terrorism. I would not count DPRK troops in Ukraine as terrorism.

But yes, after the 2nd Iraq war and the Arab Spring, the DPRK accelerated their efforts on nukes and ICBMs Because it is a sure way to prevent attacks as is happening against Iran now.

It’s not NK’s defence that is concerning it’s Iran’s use of them.

Does anyone on here want them to have the weapons?

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 07:38

Alexandra2001 · 01/04/2026 07:25

I'm not sure quoting someone who is unhinged is evidence or support for your views, let alone his.

He claimed to have destroyed their nuclear facilities last year and now claims it again, the reality is, no one knows what he has achieved other than global economic crisis.

Iran launched many attacks around the gulf last night, blowing up oil tanks, setting fire to a tanker.... Hormuz still remains closed to most.

... they will then, when Trump has had enough in 2 or 3 weeks time, sell oil at a much higher price to Asia etc and have the money to rebuild.... then what? bomb again?

Their enriched stockpiles are likely to be very deep under ground and ready to be exploited again.

Edited

I didn’t expect you to acknowledge that Trump’s speech at the beginning of the war proved that a big motivation for the US going to war was to fight the terrorist threat. Even though I literally quoted the words Trump said at the time.

If you prefer to minimise the terrorist threat from Iran for your own reasons then that is up to you and nothing anyone can say would convince you otherwise.

BelleHathor · 01/04/2026 07:42

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 07:17

Iran will be more likely, not less likely to acquire nuclear weapons now.

Note that other countries which are known to sponsor terrorism but do have nuclear weapons are not attacked eg Pakistan and N Korea. The Iranian's supreme leader who was against developing a n. weapon for religious reasons has been assassinated by the Israelis/US. The next leaders are more likely to be more radical, not less. That's before you even start to think about all the other very serious effects of this war.

There has been discussion in the Iranian parliament this week to leave the Nuclear Non proliferation treaty. Made more urgent by the fact that Israel and America have struck multiple Nuclear sites in Iran during this war (with no regard for the humanitarian disaster any leak would cause). Did the IAEA head Grossi condemn this?

Grossi told US broadcaster CBS News in an interview earlier this month that no war has the capability to totally destroy Iran’s nuclear programme, “unless it was nuclear war and you go for destruction unfathomable, which we hope will never be the case”.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/28/lawmakers-push-npt-exit-as-us-israel-hit-irans-nuclear-sites-steel-plants

The incentive to develop and deploy a Nuclear weapon is now heightened by the fact that 2 nuclear states (US and Israel) are hell bent on the destruction of Iran and it's 92 million people. This war killed the older generation of leaders who were used to the status quo (often only responding symbolically). They also adviced the younger leaders who wanted to "fire more rockets" to negotiate.

Also, I am not sure citing the morality of perfidious entities that have unilaterally attacked twice during negotiations matters anymore, when they double tapped a girl's primary school. Destroyed and starved Gaza and are in the process of destroying South Lebanon.

As war rages, Iranian politicians push for exit from nuclear weapons treaty

As war rages, Iranian politicians push for exit from nuclear weapons treaty

While US-Israeli attacks hit key infrastructure, hardliners demand withdrawal from Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/28/lawmakers-push-npt-exit-as-us-israel-hit-irans-nuclear-sites-steel-plants

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 07:47

No one else is going to think Iran getting those weapons is a good idea, no other leader.

RedTagAlan · 01/04/2026 07:54

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 07:34

It’s not NK’s defence that is concerning it’s Iran’s use of them.

Does anyone on here want them to have the weapons?

I was replying to a PP that mentioned the DPRK.

I personally do not want any more countries to have nukes, and I firmly agree with non proliferation, and reduction.

But as @rainingsnoring correctly points out, what Trump is doing is going to increase proliferation, or certainly discussions by nations to attain them. Including Iran. Over the past year there has been various stories on nations considering nukes because of Trump kicking off about how the USA "protects them without them paying".

Germany for example:

Merz: German planes could carry French and British nukes | Euractiv

South Korea :

South Korean politicians push for nuclear capability amid security concerns | DEFENSEMAGAZINE.com - World of defense and security

And these are US allies. Reconsidering their position because of Trump.

South Korean politicians push for nuclear capability amid security concerns

The debate over South Korea’s potential nuclear armament has reignited following a significant remark by U.S. President Donald Trump. On his first day in…

https://www.defensemagazine.com/article/south-korean-politicians-push-for-nuclear-capability-amid-security-concerns

Alexandra2001 · 01/04/2026 07:54

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 07:38

I didn’t expect you to acknowledge that Trump’s speech at the beginning of the war proved that a big motivation for the US going to war was to fight the terrorist threat. Even though I literally quoted the words Trump said at the time.

If you prefer to minimise the terrorist threat from Iran for your own reasons then that is up to you and nothing anyone can say would convince you otherwise.

Why would you take the word of Trump as gospel? his reasons for going to war have been wide and contradictory, even his secretaries of state have come out with very differing justifications.

Trump will now withdraw, not because of "Job Done" but because the price of petrol has doubled in the USA.......

You must be one of the very few people anywhere who believes Trump.

He thought he could do a Venezuela on Iran, knew nothing about their ideology and has achieved nothing longer term, wont stop them trying to get a nuke, wont lead to a moderate regime nor reduce terrorism in the region.

Where have i minimised any threats from Iran? a Nuclear armed Iran would be a disaster but what Trump has done has only (long term) strengthened the Iranians.
As for Terrorism, well, that will only increase now, people in Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon & Iran will all want revenge

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 07:58

RedTagAlan · 01/04/2026 07:54

I was replying to a PP that mentioned the DPRK.

I personally do not want any more countries to have nukes, and I firmly agree with non proliferation, and reduction.

But as @rainingsnoring correctly points out, what Trump is doing is going to increase proliferation, or certainly discussions by nations to attain them. Including Iran. Over the past year there has been various stories on nations considering nukes because of Trump kicking off about how the USA "protects them without them paying".

Germany for example:

Merz: German planes could carry French and British nukes | Euractiv

South Korea :

South Korean politicians push for nuclear capability amid security concerns | DEFENSEMAGAZINE.com - World of defense and security

And these are US allies. Reconsidering their position because of Trump.

Well yeh the US has been paying more and others getting a freer ride from it. There’s no point complaining that countries rely too much on the US as many have and then complaining when they disassociate from relying on them.

The EU putting in 600bn extra too.

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 08:25

Alexandra2001 · 01/04/2026 07:54

Why would you take the word of Trump as gospel? his reasons for going to war have been wide and contradictory, even his secretaries of state have come out with very differing justifications.

Trump will now withdraw, not because of "Job Done" but because the price of petrol has doubled in the USA.......

You must be one of the very few people anywhere who believes Trump.

He thought he could do a Venezuela on Iran, knew nothing about their ideology and has achieved nothing longer term, wont stop them trying to get a nuke, wont lead to a moderate regime nor reduce terrorism in the region.

Where have i minimised any threats from Iran? a Nuclear armed Iran would be a disaster but what Trump has done has only (long term) strengthened the Iranians.
As for Terrorism, well, that will only increase now, people in Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon & Iran will all want revenge

Edited

Trump has said that a main reason for going to war was to fight the terrorist threat.

That is factually what he has said on multiple occasions. For Israel too, they wanted to fight the terrorist threat that has threatened them on multiple occasions.

Now Trump may have had other motivations too, but it's strange to me that you keep trying to deny that an important war goal was to fight the terrorist threat from Iran and their many proxies in the Middle East.

We are never going to agree on anything so it's pointless us debating really.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread