6 hours ago, jts-khorat said:

The USA have been the only nation in the world to commit such a monumental war crime as to detonate a nuclear warhead over a civilian population -- twice.

The USA is currently committing war crimes in Iran, since day one ('schoolgirls' is a good keyword), and they have a history going back decades masking very serious war crimes as 'collateral damage', which is fully accepted by the desensitized American public.

I would hope that the USA is never using such a weapon again, but having elected Trump twice, the American people certainly have proven themselves to be uneducated and depraved enough to accept this risk.

In case a nuke is used, I would hope that the USA would become an international pariah instantly, in the same way North Korea is today, with all and any economic or politic cooperation ended immediately, full reparations in the literally trillions of dollars to be paid by the USA to the affected countries (fallout will spread), Americans barred of leaving their home country as long as they do not renounce their criminal passport, a complete demilitarization of the USA, and a form of Nuremberg 2.0 trials bringing all and any person within the American government to the same swift justice.

Nothing less would be right, if such a monstrous action should ever occur (and the same would be true of any other country using a nuke).

If the US didn't stop Japan with that weapon, the war would have gone on much longer, likely killing many more people as we would have attacked Japan eventually, so it ended things very fast.

Those who keep bringing up the schoolgirl thing and calling it a war crime are ignorant, as it wasn't intentional. Iran has killed thousands of it's own citizens for years, including children, so that's another thing some dismiss, all because they dislike the US, and mainly because of Trump. Calling people uneducated when a large majority might be smarter than you isn't helping you.

Your country has never made mistakes, including their politicians? I think not. Include war crimes in there also. The US doesn't need to use a nuke against Iran , and won't. They can continue eliminating their military if Iran's ignorance continues, instead of negotiating, which would help all the countries involved in this. This is beating a dead horse, but some like you can't get it, so don't bother.

Trump will rename the French fry after he nukes Iran to distract the MSM. 😄

Pariah state - Wikipedia https://share.google/stv4guQHyDA1KbAaB

2 hours ago, jts-khorat said:

Of course, the perpetrators of horrendous war crimes and crimes against humanity always have a "good reason", or a reason why it was "not quite that bad".

You fall right into this category, together with Hitler, Truman, Stalin, Mao and Trump. I hope you can sleep easy -- I could not, would I think in such a disgusting way about mases of fellow humans you seem to do.

In which world does it make sense to incinerate hundreds of thousands of women and children during a fight against a country with an army already "obliterated" and the economy "devastated" (the exact parallel between Japan then and Iran now)?

Of course you come with the old hat that Iran also committed crimes. They sure have, but does that mean you want the American military now to nuke Washington, where similar war criminals sit, sending out Tomahawks and Reaper drones by remote control against guys with Kalashnikovs and school girls...? Of course not, which shows that your point is born out of pure hypocrisy.

In which world is it acceptable to have a man stand in the UN telling the world that he wants to repeat such a thing, in a forum created after the second world war to excactly prevent such heinous actions.

Americans, all of them, should sink into the ground in shame, having fully taken on the role of the Second World War Germans, eg pure and unadulterated evil... and some of you are even proud of that.

All that just to prove there are no shortages of fools in the world.

I sleep very good at night. Obviously, you don’t. I’m happy Trump keeps you up at night. 24/7/365. LMAO

You forgot to mention. Japan brought the bomb onto themselves. No Pearl, Nanking or the beheadings of American and Australian pilots, no A-bomb.

Edited September 22Sep 22 by HolmesEquivelant

4 hours ago, HolmesEquivelant said:

Trump says it best!

Much better than Biden/Harris “don’t “.

All without a teleprompter! Biden wouldn’t of gotten out one sentence without F-ing it up.

No signs of senility. Clear, concise and direct! Whether you like him or not!

Edited September 22Sep 22 by HolmesEquivelant

1 hour ago, fredwiggy said:

Those who keep bringing up the schoolgirl thing and calling it a war crime are ignorant,

It is a war crime. Period.

You believe in ghosts, angels, and the paranormal, and you are calling rational people ignorant?

Please post your measurements, you are in need of a straitjacket.

11 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

So, media reports are biased, but you're happy to jump on the band-wagon of outdated intelligence......hmm

No, as in everything political and government related, I wait for the truth to come out, if it does

Stuff like this is what he is famous for it never is going to happen! EVER!

16 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

I don't think it's thinkable. I read Trump can't press the button out of nothing. There is a procedure he has to follow. I'm sure not all Generals or govt deciders are demented.

From an interview with retied CIA director Hayden.

"Scarborough then asked a hypothetical question to Hayden about how quickly nuclear weapons could be deployed if a president were to give approval.

“It’s scenario dependent, but the system is designed for speed and decisiveness. It’s not designed to debate the decision,” Hayden said.

Hayden was CIA director from 2006 to 2009 during the George W. Bush presidency. He was the National Security Agency director from 1999 to 2005, spanning the presidencies of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush."

Nuke,

If launched which direction do they travel? Towards Russia and China but heading towards Iran.

They call the US and say we detected the launch what's up? China and Russia go to highest Alert and ready their military for this scenario. Who knows all of what that entails.

All Russian and Chinese subs are ordered to rise to launch depth and await the next command.

Yeah, hope that nightmare is never realized.

4 hours ago, save the frogs said:

40 - 92% of what Trump says is just "messing with people's minds" .

not to be taken at face value or cling to every word.

He's jealous, mess with peoples minds because he hasn't one of his own.

If the US used a nuke on Iran the US would be even more of a Pariah than they are now, it would take them decades to receive admission to the humane race.

My bottom line on this is I don't care what America does just so long as a Jihadi does not get to build a suitcase bomb fueled by enriched Iranian uranium who then goes looking to eliminate the infidel as the Jihadi is instructed to do by the Quran

Trump has dementia. That makes everything possible however the generals know he has dementia and won t let him nuke anyone and Trump is full of it and talks randomly and then probably forgets what he says, so folk s don t worry Trump s not nuking anyone.

I doubt Trump would use nukes. But I agree with many others, it would give a green light to Russia to use tactical nukes in Ukraine and probably breach some Nato countries with convential forces at the same time. With all the turmoil those events would cause globally, China would probably invade Taiwan. Don't even want to think about what North Korea might do to Japan and South Korea at that time.

Just another thought though, if Trump ordered the use of Nukes, I wonder if the military high command would have him arrested and placec Vance under house arrest. The excuse would be both are now incapable of carrying out their duties as leaders and the next in line (the Speaker of the House??) would be running the country. So it would look like a coup, but the Constitution would still be followed (at least partly).

Edited September 23Sep 23 by ronnie50

Would there be fall out in Israel?

If so .Trump will not be allowed to use a nuke.

I think then the World should force the USA to destroy all its nuclear weapons.

18 hours ago, Jeff the Chef said:

Absolute horror if another Atomic bomb is dropped anywhere in the World.

I would hope, the horror unleashed on the Japanese has shown the World that.

Humans have a very short memory.

If America does it will lose the last chunk of legitimacy in the eyes of the rest of the world and will start a domino effect.

19 hours ago, connda said:

Conversely, what do you think the reaction will be from what is left of Iran as well as other predominately Shi'a Islam nations in the Middle East if one or more nukes are dropped on Iran?

My guess would be something along the lines of "WT'F was that?" and "Who is the connda fellow"?

32 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I think then the World should force the USA to destroy all its nuclear weapons.

This has always been true, but some think bigger is better. Staying at conventional weapons leaves a lot of people alive that aren't even involved in the wars, along with their infrastructure. It helped stop World War 2 with Japan, but it also gave us a black eye on how some look at the US.

11 hours ago, swissie said:

Everybody thinks of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with uncontrolled radioactive contamination.

Unfortunately science has advanced.

Today, there are Atomic Bombs only making a "big bang" with little atomic "fallout". Others disighned to eradicate "biological live" with little atomic "fallout".

This as an "update". Hiroshima and Nagasaki is the past.

Atomic warfare is becoming financially "manageable".

While, at the same time, remaining solidly morally reprehensible.

Trump by his threats seems to be "testing the water" to see what will be the reaction.

The indications so far are that most of the world will simply recoil in horror. And then it will be "business as usual". That is to say, as usual since Trump came to power, with some added cringing.

The goal should be to pre-empt Trump from dropping nuclear bombs. By global population pressure on governments world-wide to make clear to the U.S. public, upon whose acquiescence Trump ultimately depends, that the use of nuclear weapons will entail SANCTIONS by the global community. Cessation of trade with the U.S., irrespective of the cost.

Failure to do this will cost us all too dearly.

I guess I first of all have to say that analyzing what Donald Trump says and trying to draw any logical conclusions from it, is a fools game. Half the time he doesn’t even know what he means, the other half is all about projecting an image, rather than the meaning of what he says.

The second thing is that Donald Trump is not in sole control of Americas nukes. He wouldn’t be allowed to use them on a non nuclear state that is not threatening the existence of the USA.

Thirdly, Trump does appear to care about his legacy. I think it’s fantasy to think that he wants to go down in history as the first person who dropped nukes after WW2.

Hypothetically , how would other nations react? A UN Security Council resolution vetoed by USA? Strong condemnation? More words blah blah blah?

I mean, no country is going to threaten military action. Nor economic sanctions. So what else is there? Yep, you got it, copy cat behavior by Russia on Ukraine, India on Pakistan, or vice versa. Basically any nuclear country would have the precedent set for them to use nuclear weapons to get their own way.

Not a good look.

Thank you for your attention to this matter!

7 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

If the US didn't stop Japan with that weapon, the war would have gone on much longer, likely killing many more people as we would have attacked Japan eventually, so it ended things very fast.

Those who keep bringing up the schoolgirl thing and calling it a war crime are ignorant, as it wasn't intentional. Iran has killed thousands of it's own citizens for years, including children, so that's another thing some dismiss, all because they dislike the US, and mainly because of Trump. Calling people uneducated when a large majority might be smarter than you isn't helping you.

Your country has never made mistakes, including their politicians? I think not. Include war crimes in there also. The US doesn't need to use a nuke against Iran , and won't. They can continue eliminating their military if Iran's ignorance continues, instead of negotiating, which would help all the countries involved in this. This is beating a dead horse, but some like you can't get it, so don't bother.

Advertisement

The Japanese authorities are said to have agreed to surrender prior to the dropping of the atomic bombs. The only sticking point, subsequently conceded them, was the retention of the Emperor.

Note also:

"[H]e [Stimson, U.S. Secretary for War when the bombs were dropped] estimated that possession of the bomb gave Washington a tremendous advantage—“held all the cards,” a “royal straight flush”-- in dealing with Moscow on post-war problems: “They can’t get along without our help and industries and we have coming into action a weapon which will be unique.” … he believed that the bomb would be the “master card” in U.S. diplomacy. … top officials in the Truman administration believed that possessing the atomic bomb would provide them with significant leverage for inducing Moscow’s acquiescence in U.S. objectives."

Source: Henry Stimson Diary, Sterling Library, Yale University (microfilm at Library of Congress)

20 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

I'm ok with him nuking them except it will give Russia the green light to nuke Ukraine

So you have no issue with hundreds of thousands of Iranian civilians being murdered? Quick question, do you consider the average Iranian to be a vermin or a human?

Second question, why do you consider yourself to be so far superior to an Iranian civilian?

And my third question is have you stopped to ponder the questions and the implications of your suggestion for even a nanosecond, or is this just a politically motivated meme?

This provides some context regarding the first, and so far only, use of nuclear weapons in war

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2025-08-05/atomic-bombings-japan-and-end-world-war-ii-80-years-later

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

It does not matter to me whether the targeting was intentional or unintentional. It is still a war crime.

If you were a parent of one of those children, would you be satisfied with oops?

What about the hundreds of children Iran's regime has intentionally killed over the years, along with making thousands of orphans? Maybe not war crimes but outright murder. No bad intel, mistakes, missiles going off target but deliberate murder.Breakdown of Child Casualties by Period

• 2025–2026 Protests: Human rights monitors such as HRANA and the Children Killed in the 2025-2026 Protests Wikipedia Page have documented at least 226 children killed by state security forces and allied militias amid civil unrest.

• 2022 Mahsa Amini Protests: During the widespread protests sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini, human rights groups like Amnesty International and IranWire recorded that at least 48 to 58 children were killed by security forces employing live ammunition and brutal physical crackdowns.

• Prior Unrest (2019–2021): United Nations reports and human rights assessments note that earlier movements—such as the 2019 gasoline protests—resulted in the confirmed deaths of at least 22 children at the hands of state security forces.

• Collateral damage happens in all wars from all sides. When it's intentional it needs to be formerly addressed and taken responsibility for, but when you have an enemy that couldn't care less about it's people, you're dealing with a disturbed adversary where citizens will die also because of their actions and base placement......

• Over 200 Schoolchildren Killed by Security Forces in Iran: ‘They’ve Effectively Massacred an Entire School

• February 12, 2026 — At least 216 children were killed during the Islamic Republic’s brutal crackdown on protesters in January 2026, when Iranian security forces unleashed live ammunition, military-grade weapons, knives, and machetes to kill thousands of protesting civilians

• The number of children killed and detained represents only what is known at this time. Due to the massive scale of the state’s violence across the country, ongoing repression, and the widespread communication blackouts, the full death toll is expected to increase. Overall, so far, HRANA has confirmed at least 6,506 protesters killed, in addition to the 215 children, with an additional 11,730 deaths under review..’.............https://iranhumanrights.org/2026/02/over-200-schoolchildren-killed-by-security-forces-in-iran-theyve-effectively-massacred-an-entire-school/.

Edited September 23Sep 23 by fredwiggy

7 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

What about the hundreds of children Iran's regime has intentionally killed over the years, along with making thousands of orphans? Maybe not war crimes but outright murder. No bad intel, mistakes, missiles going off target but deliberate murder.Breakdown of Child Casualties by Period

• 2025–2026 Protests: Human rights monitors such as HRANA and the Children Killed in the 2025-2026 Protests Wikipedia Page have documented at least 226 children killed by state security forces and allied militias amid civil unrest.

• 2022 Mahsa Amini Protests: During the widespread protests sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini, human rights groups like Amnesty International and IranWire recorded that at least 48 to 58 children were killed by security forces employing live ammunition and brutal physical crackdowns.

• Prior Unrest (2019–2021): United Nations reports and human rights assessments note that earlier movements—such as the 2019 gasoline protests—resulted in the confirmed deaths of at least 22 children at the hands of state security forces.

• Collateral damage happens in all wars from all sides. When it's intentional it needs to be formerly addressed and taken responsibility for, but when you have an enemy that couldn't care less about it's people, you're dealing with a disturbed adversary where citizens will die also because of their actions and base placement.

Nothing of your look over there post answers my question about the parents of the children who were killed by American ordinance.

Could go for a round double and treble with Pakistan and Afghanistan .

21 hours ago, connda said:

Donald Trump has been making a lot of innuendo and threats about destroying Iran. Much of this innuendo points to the potential use of nuclear weapons on Iran.

Direct “end the country / wipe it out” language include:

• Sept. 20, 2026 — In a phone interview with Fox News’s Trey Yingst, Trump said the options were “wiping Iran out, letting them rot economically, or making a deal,” and asked “if and when do I blow the entire nation up? They better behave.”

  people.com

• Sept. 1, 2026 — Same reporter: if Iran responded a third time after U.S. strikes, “they’re going to be totally wiped out as a country.” He also said a further attack would leave “very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

  jpost.com

• Late June 2026 — Truth Social, after accusing Iran of violating a ceasefire: if the U.S. had to “militarily complete the job,” “the Islamic Republic of Iran will cease to exist” / “will no longer exist.”

  plataformamedia.com

• April 7, 2026 — Truth Social: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” That post was tied to a deadline over the Strait of Hormuz; he later pulled back and a short ceasefire followed.

  Advertisement

  nytimes.com

• April 1, 2026 — Primetime remarks: threaten to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages, where they belong,” and that Iran “could be taken out in one night.”

  theguardian.com

So If Donald Trump does the unthinkable and actually drops nuclear bombs on Iran, what do you believe will be the reaction from the rest of the world?
Conversely, what do you think the reaction will be from what is left of Iran as well as other predominately Shi'a Islam nations in the Middle East if one or more nukes are dropped on Iran?

Advertisement

21 hours ago, JackGats said:

My fear is that such a thing would emboldened Putin to do the same with Ukraine.

Yes. I tend to think (harbor the hope) that Xi has told Putin that's a no-no so far. Russia is now a complete vassal to China - another national crime directly attributable to Putin.

However if the US (or any western country) starts chucking nukes around anywhere Xi might just claim it's not his business what Russia does.

I also harbor the hope that the thought of a first strike might stiffen the spine of even the most abjectly craven bootlickers in Hegseth's ''Hitler's generals'' chain of command, to prevent the order going through. That there might be a General Milley left somewhere, who sticks to his oath to the Constitution and refuses to kiss Trump's ring piece.

But actually I am very worried about the current situation. Something I never was in all the years of the Cold War - even as a soldier.