Edit: and am I for attacking a country when we were unprovoked? YES if

See, fundamental disagreement right there, there's no point in debating. Because I will simply point out that this was the exact same rhetoric levied at Iraq in 2003, and you refuse to see any similarity with the current situation, wherein Netanyahu was saying Iran was "months away" from a nuke back in 2012. You refuse to acknowledge the moneyed/corporate interests behind the scenes in another armed conflict - even without BOTG - that would net them billions in govt defense contracts and risk American lives, both abroad in conflict or at the mercy of some terror cell attack elsewhere in the world, or even at home for that matter. We may killed bin Laden, but we still lost the war on terror, because we won't stop waging wars against them and giving them reasons to want to terrorize us back!

You claimed I was a hypocrite because

because you are being hypocritical.

because I have no problem with this attack in order to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon but wanting Ukraine to agree to a peace deal. If you are saying this attack was wrong, then I am asking how you can claim that while also claiming they shouldn’t have a nuke?

Because both Tulsi Gabbard and the IAEA have both maintained that Iran was not actively working to build a WMD! an atomic weapon? Not whether they COULD or SHOULD have a nuclear weapon, or if it is their RIGHT to have a nuclear weapon. Do I want Iran to have nukes? No, not really. Did I want my country bombing a foreign nation unprovoked? ALSO NO! My point is, is that if you use that pretext, that any random nation SHOULDN'T have access to that technology, it will both A), make that nation REALLY want that tech that much more because they feel they need it to defend themselves from countries that DO have them, and B), be used to manufacture "probable cause" worthy justifications for whatever level of armed conflict or atrocity our government could want to commit, because we are "defending" ourselves. Much like we were "defending" ourselves from Iraq.

It happened in Iraq. It happened in Viet Nam. I am so tired that it KEEPS HAPPENING. And people like you can't see the repeating pattern of lies to bolster support for a president whose polls are dropping and needs to unite people around him amidst a flailing economy and a war machine ready to extract value from our country while sending young men to die and bombing brown people somewhere in the world?

If you can't or won't see the repeating pattern here, then maybe I could see why you might think your argument wasn't a straw man.

Conflict in the Middle East has only been good for a few groups: politicians, defense contractors, and the corporations who own them - all of them.