Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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
EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:27

Kassamungo · 01/04/2026 11:20

So, Iran, who doesn’t actually have nuclear weapons, is a signatory to the NPT and following the JCPOA was subjected to one of the most vigorous inspections undertaken in the history of the IAEA is not allowed to have nuclear weapons because they chant to “Death to America! Death to Isreal!” And therefore, it is ok to bomb the 92 million population…

But Isreal, who does have nuclear weapons (estimated to have around 90 warheads) but maintains a policy of deliberate ambiguity, is NOT a signatory to the NPT (only 4 other nations in the world are not a signatory) and refuses to accept any inspections by the IAEA (and to place its nuclear programme under the full safeguarding system of the IAEA) and who regularly chants “Death to Arabs” is fine to have nukes?

Just want to be clear that I am understanding the double standard/hypocrisy correctly.

No one is going to agree with you that Iran should have them.

RedTagAlan · 01/04/2026 11:30

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 10:13

Has anyone suggested that the G7 called for military action?

If so I missed it.

The point I saw was that the G7 statement said Iran must never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

Thats fair enough @Twiglets1 . You did not cut a bit off the statement as I implied. So I apologize for suggesting you did.

I had not seen that statement till posted above. All other statements I have seen emphasized negotiation. All those statement date from before this war.

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:31

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:21

The answer to what to do about 60% enriched uranium can’t just be going back in time to not rip something up which is always the response.

As for the Strait I do wonder how passively everyone will be held to ransom by a limited group of violent authoritarian men, even if geography is on their side.

It's no answer at all seeing as we can't time travel.

I don't know what is going to happen about the Straight.

As I mentioned on another thread, Iran are now saying they will reopen the Straight "to those who obey our new laws"

Ebrahim Azizi, the head of the Iranian parliament’s national security committee, also said the passage, a key trading route for international oil exports, would not be reopened for American vessels.

The committee approved proposals to toll ships passing through the strait on Monday, according to Iran’s state media. Iran is currently charging select vessels around £1.5 million to transit the strait.

www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/04/01/iran-war-latest-news-trump-israel-strait-of-hormuz-nato/

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:32

RedTagAlan · 01/04/2026 11:30

Thats fair enough @Twiglets1 . You did not cut a bit off the statement as I implied. So I apologize for suggesting you did.

I had not seen that statement till posted above. All other statements I have seen emphasized negotiation. All those statement date from before this war.

Apology accepted, thank you.

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 11:33

TopPocketFind · 01/04/2026 11:16

If the war has stopped Iran from developing nuclear weapons for decades then that is at least one positive outcome.

If only Trump hadn't torn up the JCPOA

Indeed! 😂

Kassamungo · 01/04/2026 11:33

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:24

If only all they had done was chant "Death to America! Death to Israel!"

You must have forgotten 7/10/23 if you think all Iran did was a bit of chanting.

Or maybe you were unaware than Hamas are proxies of Iran?

Just want to be clear that I am understanding if you are forgetful or unaware?

So to be clear - you think it’s fine for Isreal to have nuclear weapons that they don’t disclose, won’t sign the NPT for and won’t allow inspections? That’s perfectly acceptable to you because…

I’ve not forgotten 7 Oct 2023 nor have I forgotten the more than 156,000 Palestinians that have been killed by Isreal since the creation of the state in 1948 (this is a moderate estimate). Have you? Or do Palestinian lives not matter/count? Surely this is what is meant when Israelis chant “Death to Arabs” …

Kassamungo · 01/04/2026 11:35

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:27

No one is going to agree with you that Iran should have them.

I haven’t said Iran should have them. I don’t believe in proliferation and would rather see total nuclear disarmament across the globe. My question is regarding the double standard - is it ok for Isreal to have secret weapons, to not sign up to the NPT and to not allow the IAEA to inspect their sites and programme. So is it ok for Isreal to have secret nukes?

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:36

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:31

It's no answer at all seeing as we can't time travel.

I don't know what is going to happen about the Straight.

As I mentioned on another thread, Iran are now saying they will reopen the Straight "to those who obey our new laws"

Ebrahim Azizi, the head of the Iranian parliament’s national security committee, also said the passage, a key trading route for international oil exports, would not be reopened for American vessels.

The committee approved proposals to toll ships passing through the strait on Monday, according to Iran’s state media. Iran is currently charging select vessels around £1.5 million to transit the strait.

www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/04/01/iran-war-latest-news-trump-israel-strait-of-hormuz-nato/

Yes I have a feeling we’ll be left with this in a few weeks. Everyone took a step back but will they really just be held to ransom by them?

Maybe, but really what power for one of if not the most authoritarian brutal state going. I’m not sure what limitations are on paying them even by those who have proscribed them.

Will everyone just be yeh ok we’ll pay

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:37

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:27

No one is going to agree with you that Iran should have them.

Well some on MN might - but not anyone that cares about Iran's destabilizing activities in the Middle East, like the members of the G7 and EU that made the statement about it.

TopPocketFind · 01/04/2026 11:39

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:37

Well some on MN might - but not anyone that cares about Iran's destabilizing activities in the Middle East, like the members of the G7 and EU that made the statement about it.

Why do you keep saying 'some on MN might'? If you want to accuse people from siding with Iran at least have the courage to do so directly.

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:40

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:36

Yes I have a feeling we’ll be left with this in a few weeks. Everyone took a step back but will they really just be held to ransom by them?

Maybe, but really what power for one of if not the most authoritarian brutal state going. I’m not sure what limitations are on paying them even by those who have proscribed them.

Will everyone just be yeh ok we’ll pay

I think countries will pay if they have to.

But in the longer term - surely this will make the international community want to find alternatives to relying so heavily on the Straight.

Which could make it a bad move for Iran long - term, who knows.

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 11:43

TopPocketFind · 01/04/2026 10:56

But the reality is that Iran represents a major obstacle to peace in the Middle East and elsewhere and if Trump is willing to spend US taxpayers money on trying to remove that threat to all of us, then that is to everyone's benefit.

How is that going?

Exactly. Let's pretend for a moment that everyone agrees that the object of this war is to remove the perceived threat that Iran presents to the world.

How do you think this completely unplanned war, without any strategy will both remove this threat and 'benefit everyone'? @1dayatatime
The outcomes so far have been:

-Thousands of deaths with more to come if they continue the conflict and launch a ground offensive
-Billions of $ of destruction across various countries
-A proposed 200 billion budget, many billions already spent, increasing the already massive US deficit
-Strait of Hormuz with major implications for the world economy
-Fuel shortages in a number of countries
-Shortages of fertiliser already being announced by farmers, with a knock on effect on crops, so the potential for major shortages and even starvation
-Conflict between 'the allies'
-Trump making various threats about not selling oil to Europeans
-Trump making threats about disbanding NATO

As I've already said, I think that this war will increase the likelihood of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons and increase the risk of terrorist attacks.

To whose benefit is this exactly? I'm struggling.

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 11:45

Kassamungo · 01/04/2026 11:20

So, Iran, who doesn’t actually have nuclear weapons, is a signatory to the NPT and following the JCPOA was subjected to one of the most vigorous inspections undertaken in the history of the IAEA is not allowed to have nuclear weapons because they chant to “Death to America! Death to Isreal!” And therefore, it is ok to bomb the 92 million population…

But Isreal, who does have nuclear weapons (estimated to have around 90 warheads) but maintains a policy of deliberate ambiguity, is NOT a signatory to the NPT (only 4 other nations in the world are not a signatory) and refuses to accept any inspections by the IAEA (and to place its nuclear programme under the full safeguarding system of the IAEA) and who regularly chants “Death to Arabs” is fine to have nukes?

Just want to be clear that I am understanding the double standard/hypocrisy correctly.

You understand it perfectly.

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:47

TopPocketFind · 01/04/2026 11:39

Why do you keep saying 'some on MN might'? If you want to accuse people from siding with Iran at least have the courage to do so directly.

I can't remember all the names of people who have implied by their comments that they have more sympathy for the Iranian regime than Trump in this war.

Anyway, I could be wrong in my interpretation.

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:51

Kassamungo · 01/04/2026 11:35

I haven’t said Iran should have them. I don’t believe in proliferation and would rather see total nuclear disarmament across the globe. My question is regarding the double standard - is it ok for Isreal to have secret weapons, to not sign up to the NPT and to not allow the IAEA to inspect their sites and programme. So is it ok for Isreal to have secret nukes?

Probably. It’s Israel not Isreal btw. But this still doesn’t have any impact on whether Iran should have them. They still shouldn’t.

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:53

Kassamungo · 01/04/2026 11:33

So to be clear - you think it’s fine for Isreal to have nuclear weapons that they don’t disclose, won’t sign the NPT for and won’t allow inspections? That’s perfectly acceptable to you because…

I’ve not forgotten 7 Oct 2023 nor have I forgotten the more than 156,000 Palestinians that have been killed by Isreal since the creation of the state in 1948 (this is a moderate estimate). Have you? Or do Palestinian lives not matter/count? Surely this is what is meant when Israelis chant “Death to Arabs” …

Why do you say "to be clear" and then accuse me of things I have never said.

I have not said it's fine for Israel to have nuclear weapons (if they do) or that it's fine for any country not to allow inspections.

Please don't put words into my mouth. You suggested I was being a hypocrite for saying Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapons over a bit of chanting.

I correctly pointed out that they had done way worse than a bit of chanting and have attacked Israel multiple times via their proxies, most shockingly on 7/10/23.

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 11:56

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:51

Probably. It’s Israel not Isreal btw. But this still doesn’t have any impact on whether Iran should have them. They still shouldn’t.

Your answer to the pp's very reasonable and sensible question is 'probably'?! You then correct her (or him) on a typo. Seriously?

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:57

rainingsnoring · 01/04/2026 11:56

Your answer to the pp's very reasonable and sensible question is 'probably'?! You then correct her (or him) on a typo. Seriously?

I don’t usually but the Isreal / Israel pattern on these threads crops up a fair bit.

1dayatatime · 01/04/2026 11:58

TopPocketFind · 01/04/2026 10:56

But the reality is that Iran represents a major obstacle to peace in the Middle East and elsewhere and if Trump is willing to spend US taxpayers money on trying to remove that threat to all of us, then that is to everyone's benefit.

How is that going?

Well they've got a lot less weapons than they used to have for a start. And their leadership and senior figures have been removed. So it's definitely a step forward.

1dayatatime · 01/04/2026 12:04

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 11:21

The answer to what to do about 60% enriched uranium can’t just be going back in time to not rip something up which is always the response.

As for the Strait I do wonder how passively everyone will be held to ransom by a limited group of violent authoritarian men, even if geography is on their side.

As for the Straits other countries (with the exception of China, Russia, Pakistan and a few others) will passively accept having to pay Iran for the right to use international waters quite simply because they don't have the military capability to escort tankers through it?

Whats the UK realistically able to do with its one operational frigate HMS Dragon?

Notonthestairs · 01/04/2026 12:07

So the war means we will have to pay to use the Strait.
Was that one of the objectives?

EasternStandard · 01/04/2026 12:08

1dayatatime · 01/04/2026 12:04

As for the Straits other countries (with the exception of China, Russia, Pakistan and a few others) will passively accept having to pay Iran for the right to use international waters quite simply because they don't have the military capability to escort tankers through it?

Whats the UK realistically able to do with its one operational frigate HMS Dragon?

They could charge whatever it’s a ransom. Perhaps everyone will start feeling it and think maybe we should have taken them out when there was a chance.

TopPocketFind · 01/04/2026 12:12

1dayatatime · 01/04/2026 11:58

Well they've got a lot less weapons than they used to have for a start. And their leadership and senior figures have been removed. So it's definitely a step forward.

Their leadership and senior figures have already been replaced, nothing has changed for the Iranian people in that respect.

Less weapons? For now.

Meanwhile the rest of the world is struggling with this war Trump has inflicted on us

Kassamungo · 01/04/2026 12:17

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 11:53

Why do you say "to be clear" and then accuse me of things I have never said.

I have not said it's fine for Israel to have nuclear weapons (if they do) or that it's fine for any country not to allow inspections.

Please don't put words into my mouth. You suggested I was being a hypocrite for saying Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapons over a bit of chanting.

I correctly pointed out that they had done way worse than a bit of chanting and have attacked Israel multiple times via their proxies, most shockingly on 7/10/23.

ok - so I’ll ask - do you think it’s ok for one country to have secret nuclear weapons that they don’t allow to be inspected? And then to attack and bomb another country who does not have nuclear weapons killing over 3,400 of that county’s citizens (to date)?

Israel has done significantly more than a “bit of chanting” and are conservatively estimated to be responsible for at least 250,000 deaths (Palestinian, Lebanese, Iranian among others) since the founding of the state. The death tolls continue to rise daily at present. Israel has attacked/conducted military operations against the following countries since its founding; Palestine, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Morocco, Tunisia and Iran.

Alexandra2001 · 01/04/2026 12:28

Twiglets1 · 01/04/2026 10:11

I quoted Trump for a specific reason which was to correct the misinformation given by another person that stopping terrorism was never a war goal of the US.

It was a goal of Trump and he said so plainly on more than one occasion.

Trump has said he wants to grab women by the pussy/leave NATO/blames Ukraine for the Russian invasion/say Zelenskyy is a block to peace/UK forces are cowards/then said they are hero's...

Sorry but whatever the argument you re attempting to make, quoting Trump makes you sound ridiculous

The man is unhinged.

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