Is this some confusion over the meaning of “pointless”? It’s all well and good that you and various other people see these reasons for the war. But “pointless” doesn’t mean there’s no reason or motivation. It can just mean “ineffectual” or “futile.” It can both be true that one reason for this war is to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, and that the war is pointless.

If you want to back up your original reply to me, then you need to not only show that there’s a reason for the war, but that the war can actually accomplish those things. And not only that, but that believing otherwise is so catastrophically ignorant that it can only come from a complete failure to be aware of basic facts.

You can argue there are reasons for the war, although I already agree. You can argue that the war has a chance of achieving those goals. I don't agree with that, but it’s certainly an argument that can be made. But don’t give me this stuff about how it’s logically impossible to hold the opposite position.