Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Gargamel on June 26, 2025, 12:16:11 PM
-
This guy gets so much praise on the web for his views on Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Iran.
He argues that Russia is justified in its attack of Ukraine because they wanted to join NATO and that it poses a threat to Russia and its circle of influence. Remember NATO is a defensive alliance.
On the Middle Eastern conflict he argues that Israel is the aggressor and that they have no right to bomb Iran and they must negotitate with the Ayatollahs. Remember Iran has declared its intent to wipe Israel off the map and they are building an atomic bomb.
Now, if you look at his arguments on these 2 conflicts in isolation you might agree in some hidebound manner and I would say you can have an opinion on that. BUT! How can you reconcile these 2 views and say Russia is entitled to attack but Israel is not. It irks me that Mearsheimer never gets called out on this obvious contradictions when everyone pretends that he is such a smart professor. But in fact, he is a dumbass who only talks to people who kowtow to his BS. Makes me think he is probably a shill for Russia who gets a monthly paycheck from them. And don't get me started on this Oompa Loompa judge.
-
He is a Chinese shill.
-
He argues that Russia is justified in its attack of Ukraine because they wanted to join NATO and that it poses a threat to Russia and its circle of influence. Remember NATO is a defensive alliance.
I think NATO is defensive in name only. They've conducted operations in the Balkans and in Libya, but I don't think any member nations were attacked there, right?
To your other point I don't think Russia is entitled to invade Ukraine, but I do think they have reasons to be wary of their neighbor joining NATO. Of course, Ukraine should be free to do so in an ideal world too. I just don't see a reason for the US to feel obliged to send money and arms over there to defend them.
-
Mearsheimer has certainly duped me and I don't mind.
He wrote that wonderful and much needed book on the lobby.
Remember Iran has declared its intent to wipe Israel off the map and they are building an atomic bomb.
LOL and Iran is antagonistic for no reason whatsoever.
-
Good point about how it's ok for Russia but not Israel, both the aggressor unless you factor in Irans funding of Hamas to carry out Oct 7th.
-
Good point about how it's ok for Russia but not Israel, both the aggressor unless you factor in Irans funding of Hamas to carry out Oct 7th.
Israel has funded and currently funds ISIS, al Qaeda, HTS and a multitude of adjacent radical Islamist groups, all Iran's enemies. Israel built up Hamas itself.
Iran isn't waging war of aggression anywhere, hasn't invaded another country. Iran isn't a genocidal country unlike Israel. Iran doesn't want the bomb, they've had the capacity to do it for years, but they clearly would need one. There's currently a Fatwa against it. Israel has an undeclared nuclear arsenal in violation of all international laws, Iran is fully legal to have a nuclear program for civilian use. Now the security wrt nuclear proliferation is much worse than before the war.
In the end it's all opinions and I'm on the side of the Mearsheimer adjacent factions.
-
Blow israel completely off the map - 1 big step to making the world a better place.
Bunch of whinny Untrustworthy Khvnts.
-
Yes, of course, the widely respected professor and expert in his field is the dumbass; certainly not the retard bodybuilder posting rambling misrepresentations of his views on Getbig!
There is no contradiction. You're just a dingbat who listened to a few YouTube clips and suddenly thinks he knows better than an international relations scholar with a PhD from Cornell. But, sure, please don't get started on the 'Oompa Loopa' former jurist and adjunct professor next! Neither of them could possibly survive further evisceration from 'Gargamel' LOL.
Mearsheimer is strategically analyzing the actions of both actors through a realist IR framework, not making moral judgements. He argues that Russia's response can be explained as a predictable defensive move against NATO expansion and provocation, whereas Israel is driven by the desire for regional dominance as opposed to a genuine belief that a nuclear Iran poses an existential threat to them.
Iran as another regional power wants nukes for deterrence, and it is rational to pursue them given the US and Israel's (both nuclear powers) constant threats to wipe them off the map, along with Israel literally doing just that to Palestine. Of course, no one wants Iran to have nuclear weapons, but he sees Israel's actions as needlessly escalatory and likely to trigger a regional war while only delaying Iran's nuclear ambitions at best. It is therefore not in America's interests to kowtow to pro-Israel lobbying and risk getting drawn into another Middle Eastern conflict when they would be better served returning to diplomacy and negotiating with Iran.
-
Defensive move lol.
-
Yes, of course, the widely respected professor and expert in his field is the dumbass; certainly not the retard bodybuilder posting rambling misrepresentations of his views on Getbig!
There is no contradiction. You're just a dingbat who listened to a few YouTube clips and suddenly thinks he knows better than an international relations scholar with a PhD from Cornell. But, sure, please don't get started on the 'Oompa Loopa' former jurist and adjunct professor next! Neither of them could possibly survive further evisceration from 'Gargamel' LOL.
Mearsheimer is strategically analyzing the actions of both actors through a realist IR framework, not making moral judgements. He argues that Russia's response can be explained as a predictable defensive move against NATO expansion and provocation, whereas Israel is driven by the desire for regional dominance as opposed to a genuine belief that a nuclear Iran poses an existential threat to them.
Iran as another regional power wants nukes for deterrence, and it is rational to pursue them given the US and Israel's (both nuclear powers) constant threats to wipe them off the map, along with Israel literally doing just that to Palestine. Of course, no one wants Iran to have nuclear weapons, but he sees Israel's actions as needlessly escalatory and likely to trigger a regional war while only delaying Iran's nuclear ambitions at best. It is therefore not in America's interests to kowtow to pro-Israel lobbying and risk getting drawn into another Middle Eastern conflict when they would be better served returning to diplomacy and negotiating with Iran.
I suggest listening to Stephen Kotkin and Peter Zeihan.
Mearsheimer has some value for his offensive realism and Great-power analysis, but his defenses of Russia/China verge on apologism.
-
I suggest listening to Stephen Kotkin and Peter Zeihan.
Mearsheimer has some value for his offensive realism and Great-power analysis, but his defenses of Russia/China verge on apologism.
I'd agree with listening and reading widely. People are certainly free to refute his points and propose alternatives but they should at least understand what his arguments are in the first place. Hopefully then they can do better than 'defensive move lol' and 'he is a dumbass'.
-
Iran as another regional power wants nukes for deterrence, and it is rational to pursue them given the US and Israel's (both nuclear powers) constant threats to wipe them off the map, along with Israel literally doing just that to Palestine. Of course, no one wants Iran to have nuclear weapons, but he sees Israel's actions as needlessly escalatory and likely to trigger a regional war while only delaying Iran's nuclear ambitions at best. It is therefore not in America's interests to kowtow to pro-Israel lobbying and risk getting drawn into another Middle Eastern conflict when they would be better served returning to diplomacy and negotiating with Iran.
I am sorry but this is bullshit. What basis has Mearsheimer to make this claim?
Iran wants nuclear weapons to annihilate Israel. What basis do I have to make this claim? Iran's own words. This (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_won%27t_exist_in_25_years)is a good starting point. The destruction of Israel is enshrined in their foreign policy and their leaders, most of whom are thankfully now fucking dead, repeat this constantly.
-
I'd agree with listening and reading widely. People are certainly free to refute his points and propose alternatives but they should at least understand what his arguments are in the first place. Hopefully then they can do better than 'defensive move lol' and 'he is a dumbass'.
Brutal meltdown. Russia/Pootoon considers Ukraine to belong to Russia, is Russia, he was not making a defensive move and now he has more Nato on his borders not less. Phantom Spunker is that a gay porn stars name? :D
-
Also, I remember seeing a video from Mearsheimer where he was detailing how afoul he has fallen of the Israel lobby in the US. I think something to the effect that he has been boycotted in certain circles, and that there has been a significant professional as well as personal cost
It gives a different spin to his motivations when you see him give talks entitled "Israel will fall"
-
Brutal meltdown. Russia/Pootoon considers Ukraine to belong to Russia, is Russia, he was not making a defensive move and now he has more Nato on his borders not less. Phantom Spunker is that a gay porn stars name? :D
Savage display of shame-induced aggression from Big Ro after the infamous punch bag video. Is it a gay pornstar's name? I don’t know… you tell me. Did any of your co-stars go by that moniker when you were shooting those videos with your cock out? :o
I’m not Mearsheimer, Ro, and I don’t support Russia’s actions, but there's a difference between and explanation and a justification. Do you completely deny the role of NATO and the US in engendering the conflict?
-
Savage display of shame-induced aggression from Big Ro after the infamous punch bag video. Is it a gay pornstar's name? I don’t know… you tell me. Did any of your co-stars go by that moniker when you were shooting those videos with your cock out? :o
I’m not Mearsheimer, Ro, and I don’t support Russia’s actions, but there's a difference between and explanation and a justification. Do you completely deny the role of NATO and the US in engendering the conflict?
I am feeling quite peaceful actually no shame or roid induced aggression here. So if your neighbor starts to build his shit up and get fit and capable will you attack him because you get afraid? Does he not have the right seeing as there is a long history of conflict and oppression and he wants nothing more to do with you? But I do not deny there is any role in Nato and the US stimulating the conflict also.
Who the fuck chooses a name like Phantom Spunker, it makes me think of some dude with a balaclava on in a dick shelf scenario.
-
Also, I remember seeing a video from Mearsheimer where he was detailing how afoul he has fallen of the Israel lobby in the US. I think something to the effect that he has been boycotted in certain circles, and that there has been a significant professional as well as personal cost
It gives a different spin to his motivations when you see him give talks entitled "Israel will fall"
There's always a degree of subjective bias no matter who you listen to. In this instance him being shut out strengthens his argument about the lobby. Isn't it notesworthy how almost every congressman has an AIPAC 'handler' and takes their money? If a politician expects to go anywhere he assumes he has to smooch up to Jews and Israel, do that sponsored trip, with lavish gifts, and take pics at the wailing wall wearing a kippah.
Did you see what Tammy Bruce just said?
"The US is the greatest country in the world... next to Israel"
Someone told me I'm reading biased sources. Well give me an objective source then.
-
I am feeling quite peaceful actually no shame or roid induced aggression here. So if your neighbor starts to build his shit up and get fit and capable will you attack him because you get afraid? Does he not have the right seeing as there is a long history of conflict and oppression and he wants nothing more to do with you? But I do not deny there is any role in Nato and the US stimulating the conflict also.
Who the fuck chooses a name like Phantom Spunker, it makes me think of some dude with a balaclava on in a dick shelf scenario.
Ro.. Iran is a Radical Islamic state & i am sure the normal people there want more freedoms but while the Radical idiots are running the show they are a risk.
No one wants a Nuclear biological Holocaust not even Putin or Israel
-
I am feeling quite peaceful actually no shame or roid induced aggression here. So if your neighbor starts to build his shit up and get fit and capable will you attack him because you get afraid? Does he not have the right seeing as there is a long history of conflict and oppression and he wants nothing more to do with you? But I do not deny there is any role in Nato and the US stimulating the conflict also.
Who the fuck chooses a name like Phantom Spunker, it makes me think of some dude with a balaclava on in a dick shelf scenario.
Sure, it's clearly a complex issue and I agree with some of your points but Mearsheimer views the world as an IR realist, where power is the final arbiter of international relations and the West's actions were always going to guarantee a rational, strategic response from Russia aimed at defending itself from what looks like aggression. My only point is that he's not a dumbass and he's not contradicting himself with what he's said regarding Russia and Israel.
As to your last point, I have no doubt that many things make you think of balaclava-clad men resting their penises on one another. Indeed, I've literally seen you use an innocent hallway mirror as a makeshift dick shelf when no man's buttocks were available; however, I cannot be held responsible for every deviant fantasy that pops into your head. I suggest more magic mushrooms and less 'semen retention' to unfetter your mind from such filthy thoughts.
-
Ro.. Iran is a Radical Islamic state & i am sure the normal people there want more freedoms but while the Radical idiots are running the show they are a risk.
No one wants a Nuclear biological Holocaust not even Putin or Israel
Which country has a contingency plan called the 'Samson Option'?
It's true that the diaspora doesn't care for the clerics, not at all. But when an outsider comes and bombs them in the name of peace even the most fervent critics support the regime. Basic psychology. Some Iranians have said even kurds, even people in prison, are in support of the regime now. I read that Iran is 60% Persians and 40% is other ethnic groups.
It doesn't sound logical to me that if Iran had the bomb they would immediately use it against the US and Israel as that would mean suicide. Reportedly, with 60% enriched uranium they could race towards a finished product in 8 days. Sounds to me like they could have done that and fired a few off and brought the whole world down with them. Like I said, Israel has the plan, if Israel is existentially threatened, they will bring down all of humanity with them. It's unthinkable and evil in my view. As Bibi said, they will not get into an extended attrition war with Iran. Not with conventional weapons because they would lose, so they needed this largely performative PR stunt US bombing to bring things to a close, for the time being.
What do you think about what I said here?
-
Sure, it's clearly a complex issue and I agree with some of your points but Mearsheimer views the world as an IR realist, where power is the final arbiter of international relations and the West's actions were always going to guarantee a rational, strategic response from Russia aimed at defending itself from what looks like aggression. My only point is that he's not a dumbass and he's not contradicting himself with what he's said regarding Russia and Israel.
As to your last point, I have no doubt that many things make you think of balaclava-clad men resting their penises on one another. Indeed, I've literally seen you use an innocent hallway mirror as a makeshift dick shelf when no man's buttocks were available; however, I cannot be held responsible for every deviant fantasy that pops into your head. I suggest more magic mushrooms and less 'semen retention' to unfetter your mind from such filthy thoughts.
I like women's buttocks. Your very name on here is a filthy thought.
-
Which country has a contingency plan called the 'Samson Option'?
It's true that the diaspora doesn't care for the clerics, not at all. But when an outsider comes and bombs them in the name of peace even the most fervent critics support the regime. Basic psychology. Some Iranians have said even kurds, even people in prison, are in support of the regime now. I read that Iran is 60% Persians and 40% is other ethnic groups.
It doesn't sound logical to me that if Iran had the bomb they would immediately use it against the US and Israel as that would mean suicide. Reportedly, with 60% enriched uranium they could race towards a finished product in 8 days. Sounds to me like they could have done that and fired a few off and brought the whole world down with them. Like I said, Israel has the plan, if Israel is existentially threatened, they will bring down all of humanity with them. It's unthinkable and evil in my view. As Bibi said, they will not get into an extended attrition war with Iran. Not with conventional weapons because they would lose, so they needed this largely performative PR stunt US bombing to bring things to a close, for the time being.
What do you think about what I said here?
Iran was a more tollerant land until the Radical Khomeini took over. It´s not the people of Iran who are a danger it´s their Leaders
-
I am sorry but this is bullshit. What basis has Mearsheimer to make this claim?
Iran wants nuclear weapons to annihilate Israel. What basis do I have to make this claim? Iran's own words. This (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_won%27t_exist_in_25_years)is a good starting point. The destruction of Israel is enshrined in their foreign policy and their leaders, most of whom are thankfully now fucking dead, repeat this constantly.
I missed this while responding to Ro.
I suppose the basis is a logical one based on the fact that other nuclear powers sought these weapons as a deterrent too, and that it would be rational to pursue this goal when nuclear-armed neighbors have been threatening war for decades.
As to Iran's own words, I'd like to put forward a more careful reading (https://english.khamenei.ir/news/10342/Elimination-of-Zionist-regime-via-a-democratic-solution-accompanied?utm_source=chatgpt.com) of what was actually said:
We consider the destruction of the Israeli regime to be the solution to the Palestinian issue.” [Aug. 8, 1991] Of course, the "elimination of Israel" and the downfall of this child-killing, racist regime is not an anti-Semitic position, because the official view and stance of the Islamic Republic on this issue is related to the usurpation of the Palestinian land by the occupying Zionists, “From the very start, the Islamic Republic has never said such a thing [throwing the Jews into the sea].” [June 10, 2018] “That is not the Islamic Republic’s opinion that people should be thrown into the sea." [Nov. 29, 2023]
The Islamic system has presented a clear, democratic solution to the world in order to solve the Palestinian issue and to put an end to the fallacious regime that is a source of terrorism and insecurity in the region, "The logical solution is a solution that all the people in the world with awakened consciences and all those who believe in today's concepts have no choice but to accept. ... The solution is to ask the Palestinian people themselves for their opinion, as well as all those have been displaced from Palestine – that is, the people who wish to return to the land of Palestine and their homes. … And those who were in Palestine before 1948, which is the year when the fallacious Israeli regime was formed, should be asked for their opinion – whether they are Muslims, Christians, or Jews. These people should determine in a public referendum the regime to rule over the Palestinian land. That is democracy. ... That regime and that government should be formed and decide about the people who came to Palestine after 1948.” [Apr. 5, 2002] And this is exactly what the Islamic Republic means by the "elimination of Israel." It means the downfall of the illegitimate, fallacious regime through a mechanism based on the vote of the people, “This is the destruction and elimination of the invalid, fallacious Zionist regime that is ruling today.” [June 15, 2018] In fact, "the elimination of the Zionist regime does not, in any way or form, equate to the massacre of the Jewish people in that region. ... What it means is that a referendum should be held and the regime to rule this region should be determined by the referendum and by the people. That is what we mean by eliminating the Zionist regime. That is what needs to be done.” [July 23, 2014]
-
I like women's buttocks. Your very name on here is a filthy thought.
Ro, please. Straight men are talking here.
-
He is a Chinese chill.
Like Sub-Zero?
-
Superb posts by Phantom. Iran's own words are worth reading, but it's probably TL;DR for most.
Iran was a more tollerant land until the Radical Khomeini took over. It´s not the people of Iran who are a danger it´s their Leaders
I hardly know anything about Iran's history but my understanding is that the US installed the Shah, basically over oil, he was a puppet. They, the CIA, now had the Shah's son, the 'Crown Price of Iran' in exile waiting in the wings to be flown in when the regime fell, which they expected to happen in a few days with the initial decapitation strike. I don't know, but I saw some mention that the Shah was brutal and repressive too? Unfortunately, what this war will likely do is increase repression within Iran. Iran was so infiltrated by Mossad and various malicious actors.
Mearsheimer is strategically analyzing the actions of both actors through a realist IR framework, not making moral judgements.
I think this is key to understanding him.
-
Mearsheimer is strategically analyzing the actions of both actors through a realist IR framework, not making moral judgements. He argues that Russia's response can be explained as a predictable defensive move against NATO expansion and provocation, whereas Israel is driven by the desire for regional dominance as opposed to a genuine belief that a nuclear Iran poses an existential threat to them.
What an idiot explanation by a Mearsheimer fanboy. The name fits lol. Where was I making moral judgements? You can read my original post again and it still holds. But Iam happy to repeat the exposure of Mearsheimer contradictory views for the dim witted.
Like I said how can you argue that Russias invasion of Ukraine is a predictable defensive move against NATO expansion. NATO is a defensive alliance and Ukraine is a sovereign state. It is clearly the case that Russia wants to exert dominance over Ukraine. But Israel nuking Iran before they get an atomic bomb is not a predictable defensive move, when Irans numerously stated goal is the obliteration of Israel? Holding these 2 contradictory views does not make sense and Mearsheimer comes off as an idiot.
The US and Israel repeatedly stated that Iran can never have an atomic bomb and Iran should have known better before they tried to develop it. Maybe they got the message now. In the realist framework Mearsheimer, Iran and Phantom Spunker are the idiots clearly.
-
Superb posts by Phantom. Iran's own words are worth reading, but it's probably TL;DR for most.
I hardly know anything about Iran's history but my understanding is that the US installed the Shah, basically over oil, he was a puppet. They, the CIA, now had the Shah's son, the 'Crown Price of Iran' in exile waiting in the wings to be flown in when the regime fell, which they expected to happen in a few days with the initial decapitation strike. I don't know, but I saw some mention that the Shah was brutal and repressive too? Unfortunately, what this war will likely do is increase repression within Iran. Iran was so infiltrated by Mossad and various malicious actors.
I think this is key to understanding him.
as i wrote before the USA only has it´s own interests at heart, however it´s better to have a puppet in charge you can control than a volitile boiling pot of hatred
-
But Israel nuking Iran before they get an atomic bomb is not a predictable defensive move, when Irans numerously stated goal is the obliteration of Israel?
The US and Israel repeatedly stated that Iran can never have an atomic bomb and Iran should have known better before they tried to develop it. Maybe they got the message now.
What do you think of Iran's own statements regarding Israel that Phantom quoted? You may call lies and maybe they are but them calling for killing all Jews or destroying Israel as country is not correct.
I think the message they got is they should have had a nuke for deterrence. I don't think they ever actually wanted a nuke per se. No one has attacked North Korea for a reason, they also have a leader everyone thinks would push a button immediately upon attack. Iran doesn't want it but they also don't want to be attacked like they just were. They perhaps foolishly enriched to 60% for leverage in negotiations but the intelligence agencies all agreed they have not worked on a nuclear bomb since like 2003 or whatever it was. Now everyone is worried that if Iran is perhaps given a nuke then Saudi, Turkey, Egypt, Ukraine and so on will also decide they need one. The Russians are absolutely horrified at this development, they were always against Iran ever acquiring a nuke, but now the likelihood is bigger, not smaller.
The goal I think was regime change, not destroying the nuclear program, it was just a pretext. Clearly they expected the regime to fall immediately after the decapitation strike. They hadn't planned on a long attrition war, they knew they didn't have the means, before the US bombing they would be out of defensive missiles in 1-3 weeks.
-
What an idiot explanation by a Mearsheimer fanboy. The name fits lol. Where was I making moral judgements? You can read my original post again and it still holds. But Iam happy to repeat the exposure of Mearsheimer contradictory views for the dim witted.
Like I said how can you argue that Russias invasion of Ukraine is a predictable defensive move against NATO expansion. NATO is a defensive alliance and Ukraine is a sovereign state. It is clearly the case that Russia wants to exert dominance over Ukraine. But Israel nuking Iran before they get an atomic bomb is not a predictable defensive move, when Irans numerously stated goal is the obliteration of Israel? Holding these 2 contradictory views does not make sense and Mearsheimer comes off as an idiot.
The US and Israel repeatedly stated that Iran can never have an atomic bomb and Iran should have known better before they tried to develop it. Maybe they got the message now. In the realist framework Mearsheimer, Iran and Phantom Spunker are the idiots clearly.
Sorry, cock breath, I never said you were making moral judgements. I said that Mearsheimer was giving causal explanations as opposed to making moral judgements and claiming Russia is 'entitled' to attack. Clearly you struggle with basic reading comprehension so it's no surprise that you have absolutely zero clue about the history of Iran and Israel, too.
And NATO is a purely defensive alliance based on what? The fact that they say they are?
I suppose their 1999 bombing to assist a non-NATO member, without UN Security Council approval, under the guise of humanitarian intervention was defensive, right?
Or how about the long-term military occupation of Afghanistan? Or the 2011 bombing of Libya to enact regime change which led to civil war?
By your logic, North Korea is a democratic republic, LOL. What a dunce.
'The US and Israel repeatedly stated that Iran can never have an atomic bomb and Iran should have known better before they tried to develop it. Maybe they got the message now.'
Great, that sounds legitimate. And Russia repeatedly stated that they would never allow a hostile military alliance on its border so perhaps Ukraine should have known better, right? Maybe they get the message now!
Lastly, I'm not sure how correctly summarizing a few of his arguments makes me a fanboy, but it's not like you followed up with anything coherent anyway, so I'm happy just to take your comments as the misinformed ramblings of a stupid tosser.
-
Phantom spunker. I dont even need to add an insult to that. LOL. You Are only adding little factoids that do nothing to resolve mearsheimers contradiction. Iran is such a hostile nation with many of them and their proxies happy to blow themselves up if they could only take Isreal with them. How is it not a defensive move for Israel to strike first. The realist view is one of strength and power and clearly Iran and Russia are the weak ones. If you love Iran so much I suggest you move you there and marry a rag head. Maybe you can find happiness there and can stop being a sore loser on a Message Board.
-
The realist view is one of strength and power and clearly Iran and Russia are the weak ones.
Iran is so weak the war had to be stopped after 12 days. IDF still takes casualties in Gaza, just the other day it was 7 diaper wearing soldiers and it should be like shooting fish in a barrel for Israel. Israel has the Samson Option, that's it really. They can nuke Iran but Israel would never, ever be forgiven for that.
Russia only has the biggest nuclear arsenal. Russian makes more missiles in a month than the whole of NATO combined in a year, and that's including the US! Just now heard some statistic about tanks, NATO makes 40 a year and Russia makes 12000. Oreshnik is in serial production now, whatever that means.
A couple of weeks ago Putin said that they had offered a signed military alliance with Iran but they declined. The reason is that Iran, at least partly, has always wanted an alliance with the US and didn't want to upset them. Russia offered security, maybe they would've wanted a couple of bases in Iran, don't know exactly. But what did Iran get for trying to please the west? They got fucked in the ass. But now, will they take a deal? I'm pretty sure there will be Russian deals offered so we'll see. Israel will attack again. Any deal with the US cannot be trusted, there is zero trust in Trump anywhere, we know what "negotiations" means to him.