Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, chainsaw said:

Iran's on the 1 yard line? If that were true why would Tulsi and everyone else in the global intelligence community have hidden that fact?

I think the problem is they aren't allowed on the field. 

  • Haha 4
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

The latest:

 

Do we not have spies or intel anymore? They've been "on the verge" of this shit since the fucking '90s. We haven't done anything because we know they aren't close. If they were George W. would have turned the place to glass instead of fucking around with Saddam. This shit ain't hard to figure out. Bibi wants to stay out of jail, that's literally all that is going on right now, period.

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
14 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Do we not have spies or intel anymore?

Anymore? Our intel has been missing countries developing nuclear weapons since the late 90’s (e.g., Pakistan and North Korea).  I’m sure we have better spies in many countries than Israel, but not in one that Israel considers to be its existential threat like Iran. The Mossad knew where dozens of high ranking officials would be on the first night of the war and had been running a workshop manufacturing drones in Tehran for years. I do trust their intelligence on Iranian capabilities more than our assessment. 

 

25 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Bibi wants to stay out of jail, that's literally all that is going on right now, period.

This is from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists:

At the Fordow plant, located near the city of Qom, the Iranians have enough centrifuges (including IR-6s, their more advanced type) and uranium hexafluoride gas to produce several nuclear weapons. They could probably produce enough weapon-grade (90 percent) enriched uranium for one nuclear weapon within five to six days.
https://thebulletin.org/2025/06/the-united-states-may-destroy-the-fordow-enrichment-plant-it-wont-make-the-iranian-nuclear-threat-go-away/#post-heading

Note that the article is not a pro-Israeli slant, it says bombing Fordow probably isn’t enough, laments the breaking of the JCPOA, but still says the danger is there.

It’s easy to blame Bibi, he’s made a lot of enemies. But it’s also worth noting that the entire military and political structure of Israel seems to believe the threat assessment as well. This is chief opposition leader Yair Lapid:

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
41 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

Watch this space. Dan is extremely plugged in on the Israeli side and has contacts within the administration (even though he’s more of a Bushie).

 

Screenshot_20250619_124346_X.thumb.jpg.5407ae12bf5c30395912ddd5919f6367.jpg

I Dont Think So No Way GIF by FTX_Official

Hard pass on following weird Zionists 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

 I do trust their intelligence on Iranian capabilities more than our assessment. 

While that is undoubtedly true, they are not going to share anything publicly, or with the US, that doesn't serve their purpose of bending American action to their will.  They will lie to our faces if it serves their interests.  They know that no US politician can really oppose them, and they certainly don't care if American interests are harmed or American lives are lost.  I certainly don't think that Iran having nuclear weapons is in America's best interests, but trusting Israel to share intelligence, or take any action that doesn't directly serve their interests, is not a wise path to take.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think there’s plenty of room for ambiguity and skepticism on this but “I can’t believe Tulsi might lie to us all” is a bonkers take. 

Agreed, but on the other side of the coin, not recognizing a decades old "we have to do war cuz WMD" playbook is also pretty bonkers.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Duane Moore said:

The latest:

1 hour ago, Duane Moore said:

Watch this space. Dan is extremely plugged in on the Israeli side and has contacts within the administration (even though he’s more of a Bushie).

Told you all - as I said, if we are evacuating Americans out of Israel, if multiple Republican Senators extremely loyal to Trump are making the rounds with the talking heads to sell us on war, and if Fox News is selling its viewers on war, we are going to war.

 

8 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

At ease. WW3 won’t start for another 2 weeks. 

So it's starting tomorrow?  Makes sense, it's a Friday.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

At ease. WW3 won’t start for another 2 weeks. 

 

Ol "Two Weeks" Trump. His default answeer.

Putin also had two weeks to agree to a ceasefire....three weeks ago. 

This has to be about the 20th time he's announced a two week self imposed deadline to announce a plan or decision. I think we're 0 for 20 so far on actually meeting those deadlines.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

So it's starting tomorrow?  Makes sense, it's a Friday

 

Just now, TornACL said:

Ol "Two Weeks" Trump. His default answeer.

Putin also had two weeks to agree to a ceasefire....three weeks ago. 

This has to be about the 20th time he's announced a two week self imposed deadline to announce a plan or decision. I think we're 0 for 20 so far on actually meeting those deadlines.

Two weeks from tomorrow is July 4. Because it’s Trump, that may not be a coincidence. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, TornACL said:

Ol "Two Weeks" Trump. His default answeer.

Putin also had two weeks to agree to a ceasefire....three weeks ago. 

This has to be about the 20th time he's announced a two week self imposed deadline to announce a plan or decision. I think we're 0 for 20 so far on actually meeting those deadlines.

He works better when he gives himself 90 days, like he did with TikTok.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

At ease. WW3 won’t start for another 2 weeks. 

 

“We’ll see what happens”

Aside from “tremendous”, that is the phrase he uses that grates on me the most. It doesn’t mean anything. It’s literally just a space filler. No shit?  Time will continue on and events will unfold?

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

4th of July announcement. 

If there is a ceasefire, he takes 100% of the credit. 

If we go in, he takes all the credit for the hard decision and blames his team for not getting it done. 

Meanwhile we will have plenty of conflict/bombing videos from Twitter (fuck X) and Bluesky to keep us entertained. It is the offseason you ungrateful bastages. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think there’s plenty of room for ambiguity and skepticism on this but “I can’t believe Tulsi might lie to us all” is a bonkers take. 

Except it's not just Tulsi.

Posted

Interesting "Analyst" take from John Sawyers ala Reuters:

Spoiler

17 minutes ago

13:43 CDT

JOHN SAWERS, SENIOR ADVISOR AT CHATHAM HOUSE AND FORMER HEAD OF BRITAIN'S SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE:

 

“I hesitate about saying what goes on inside Donald Trump’s head – we simply don’t know what calculation he’s making. It looks as though he has ordered everyone to be ready for this strike when he gives the say-so. I think he’s probably quite enjoying being the centre of this story and the whole personal, political aspect of this."

 

“This is what he likes, he loves the whole world to be watching - but we need to separate the comments that Trump makes in order to excite the media and to attract attention from the actions and decisions of the US system of which he is the Commander-in-Chief."

 

“I think the Americans should frankly get on with it and get it over with. So that there’s a chance that: a) it reduces the chance of the Iranians shipping out more and more kit from Fordow and other sites to places where they can store it safely - and they’ll certainly have those options, I think. And secondly, it gives the chance to say to the Israelis – look we’ve not destroyed everything that we know of on the nuclear side, stop going for regime change, it’s just going to create total chaos inside Iran if you do that.” 

I agree with Sawyer and his reasoning that sooner is better than later if the narrative/concern is the nuclear threat. 

I don’t think the Israelis would stop, but understand his logic. 

Posted
43 minutes ago, Ghost of NMAS said:

Do you actually think that Trump could compute the date that is two weeks from now?

Good grift requires maths bro. No better way to get the MAGA base back in line than bombing on the 4th of July. Don't like it? Why do you hate Murica?

I'm adding some flavor for levity and appeasement certain subset of posters, but sadly... the logic tracks.

Posted

So Trump is giving them 2 weeks to get all of their stuff out of the target, while they “negotiate” with him?  Then they tell him to fuck off, he bombs out an empty shell, claims victory, and they build out at another location and are back operating in a couple of months time?

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

So Trump is giving them 2 weeks to get all of their stuff out of the target, while they “negotiate” with him?  Then they tell him to fuck off, he bombs out an empty shell, claims victory, and they build out at another location and are back operating in a couple of months time?

With Putin's help Iran should be able to pull off a new secret underground facility in about 3 years.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

He wanted to feel strong after the dear leader parade was a bust. He doesn't feel like there's enough support from his base, which is the only reason I think he didn't act on his impulse to use the military in order to feel strong. He's got a lot of Huckabees in his ear, though. I think deep down he's afraid because he knows a fox news weekend host absolutely cannot handle actual responsibility.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Yeah yeah TACO is very funny but for the sake of our troops and the safety of Americans abroad let's not mock Trump if he makes a good decision after "very strongly looking into" a horrible decision.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
3 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

The questions are basic but the adversarial tone should be the standard as well. Journalists aren't your fucking friend they're supposed to get the truth out of you. For whatever reason, US journalists have become too afraid to be adversarial most of the time.

Probably because conservative politicians are cowards that behave like DT posters when challenged on anything.

 

3 hours ago, chainsaw said:

Our journalists fucking suck. They are terrified of being shut out so they suck up to and carry water for their sources.

I'm glad we're all back to wanting journalists to be adversarial. I wish that were always the case. Seems to be cyclical though.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 9
Posted
3 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Who has expressed a different opinion?

I'll just say there were some pretty obvious things that could've been uncovered say from 2021-2025 if there had been adversarial journalism. There weren't many calls for that. It was actually the opposite. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck You 12
Posted

Pure speculation on my part, but I’d think the Israelis didn’t go into this without a plan for dealing with Fordow themselves, knowing that predicting Trump’s decision is about as reliable as a 247 crystal ball pick on a junior a year away from signing day. Given how meticulously they’ve planned all the rest of it, I’d be surprised if they were going to do the equivalent of relying upon the FBI to cut the power at Nakatomi Tower that would override the emergency locks on the vault. 
 

I’d also expect they have eyes on Fordow from the outside (and maybe the inside) and if they detect large movements of material out of it, they will hit the trucks with their JDAMS. 

Again, all speculation. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Told you all - as I said, if we are evacuating Americans out of Israel, if multiple Republican Senators extremely loyal to Trump are making the rounds with the talking heads to sell us on war, and if Fox News is selling its viewers on war, we are going to war.

 

So it's starting tomorrow?  Makes sense, it's a Friday.

full

  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Duane Moore said:

Pure speculation on my part, but I’d think the Israelis didn’t go into this without a plan for dealing with Fordow themselves, knowing that predicting Trump’s decision is about as reliable as a 247 crystal ball pick on a junior a year away from signing day. Given how meticulously they’ve planned all the rest of it, I’d be surprised if they were going to do the equivalent of relying upon the FBI to cut the power at Nakatomi Tower that would override the emergency locks on the vault. 
 

I’d also expect they have eyes on Fordow from the outside (and maybe the inside) and if they detect large movements of material out of it, they will hit the trucks with their JDAMS. 

Again, all speculation. 

Bibi has said from the jump there was a 2 week plan. There was and remains a very specific plan in Israel. It goes back to something I said a page or 2 back. 2 weeks is also time line the OG power would allow for as anything longer becomes too disruptive and at that point they won't remain away from the table.

I'm just suprised nobody has picked up on the similarities between Bibi's call at the start and Trump's 2 weeks. I think trying to predict what Trump will do is always an exercise in blind darts, other than he starts heavy, backs off to see what he is offered and how the wind blows. Then, makes a call. I speculate his 2 week talk is a short term stall to get OG power in the region to negotiating table. At the end of the day, lets be clear, ME OG power and OG speculations determine the time frame of this war. 

I think it gives Putin and Iran some sabre rattling rope. They'll both get mouthy, that's guaranteed. Between their shit talk, Israeli plans and OG pressure, not to mention just smart operational, logistic and military planning, Trump's hand may be forced. All of this, of course, will occur behind closes doors. We all know who will claim to have been running the show the entire time regardless of the ultimate outcome.

Then again, as I said before, predictions of Trump is a game of blind darts. So, maybe he "Brokers Peace" tomorrow.

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)

IAEA chief identifies Isfahan as Iran's planned uranium enrichment site

VIENNA - U.N. nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi on Thursday identified Isfahan, home to one of Iran's biggest nuclear facilities, as the location of a uranium enrichment plant that Iran said it would soon open in retaliation for a diplomatic push against it.

The day before Israel launched its military strikes against Iranian targets including nuclear facilities last Friday, Iran announced it had built a new uranium enrichment facility, which it would soon equip and bring online. Tehran did not provide details such as the plant's location.

Spoiler

Iran's announcement was part of its retaliation against a resolution passed by the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation Board of Governors declaring Tehran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations over issues including its failure to credibly explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites.

Had it gone online, the new enrichment plant would have been the fourth in operation in Iran. But Israel's attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities destroyed one of those plants and put another out of action by killing its power supply, the IAEA has said."

There was an announcement, quite coincidentally, on the eve of the start of the military operation by Israel of a new enrichment facility in Isfahan, precisely, that we were going to be inspecting immediately, but this inspection had to be postponed, we hope, because of the start of the military operation," Grossi said.

The IAEA has previously reported that Israeli military strikes on Friday damaged four buildings at Isfahan, including the Uranium Conversion Facility that transforms "yellowcake" uranium into the uranium hexafluoride feedstock for centrifuges so that it can be enriched.

Grossi told the BBC on Monday that the "underground spaces" at Isfahan did not seem to have been affected. Officials say those spaces are also where much of Iran's most highly enriched uranium stock has been stored.

The IAEA has not, however, been able to carry out any inspections since the strikes.

Reuters Link

Edited by BurntEyes
Posted
1 hour ago, Duane Moore said:

Pure speculation on my part, but I’d think the Israelis didn’t go into this without a plan for dealing with Fordow themselves, knowing that predicting Trump’s decision is about as reliable as a 247 crystal ball pick on a junior a year away from signing day. Given how meticulously they’ve planned all the rest of it, I’d be surprised if they were going to do the equivalent of relying upon the FBI to cut the power at Nakatomi Tower that would override the emergency locks on the vault. 
 

I’d also expect they have eyes on Fordow from the outside (and maybe the inside) and if they detect large movements of material out of it, they will hit the trucks with their JDAMS. 

Again, all speculation. 

Not just your speculation, but a common one in the diplomatic space. Rumors abound that Bibi has a weapon capable now after literal decades of development and that we wouldn't be where we are today if there wasn't at least a plan to see it through to the end (complete disembodient of Iran's programming). No half measures.

The other side of the rumor mill is that Bibi & Trump/U.S. brokered a partnership to see it through-- Israel doing 90% of the work and American putting in the finishing touches with the GBU-57's. 

Or Bibi could be calculating that he could see his 90% through and then cajole and sell Trump on finishing them off and sharing the credit or something.

We don't know what we don't know, lots of informed speculation at this pointm though.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
53 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I think it gives Putin and Iran some sabre rattling rope.

Take a look at this analysis of Russia’s reaction. I guess Marjorie Taylor Greene’s vaunted BRICS defense pact isn’t coming to the rescue. 
 

If anyone has the full NYT article, I’d love to read it. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Not just your speculation, but a common one in the diplomatic space. Rumors abound that Bibi has a weapon capable now after literal decades of development and that we wouldn't be where we are today if there wasn't at least a plan to see it through to the end (complete disembodient of Iran's programming). No half measures.

The other side of the rumor mill is that Bibi & Trump/U.S. brokered a partnership to see it through-- Israel doing 90% of the work and American putting in the finishing touches with the GBU-57's. 

Or Bibi could be calculating that he could see his 90% through and then cajole and sell Trump on finishing them off and sharing the credit or something.

We don't know what we don't know, lots of informed speculation at this pointm though.

Yeah.. I think the last 2 are most likely, but given the scary level of Mosad so far, I think 1 plus a check off with US and OG is certainly possible.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Duane Moore said:

Take a look at this analysis of Russia’s reaction. I guess Marjorie Taylor Greene’s vaunted BRICS defense pact isn’t coming to the rescue. 
 

If anyone has the full NYT article, I’d love to read it. 

What do you mean Putin gave nothing. He's offered to mediate peace! What a mensch.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

Take a look at this analysis of Russia’s reaction. I guess Marjorie Taylor Greene’s vaunted BRICS defense pact isn’t coming to the rescue. 
 

If anyone has the full NYT article, I’d love to read it. 

I don't think Russia will HELP Iran at all. I should have been clear. By rope I meant reasons for both Iran and Russia to talk shit. The 2nd biggest narcissist (1st, 3rd ? You pick em) in global politics isn't just going to keep his mouth shut and that could be the nudge that closes the door on Iran.

5 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

What do you mean Putin gave nothing. He's offered to mediate peace! What a mensch.

Not if Trump gets there first! 

The two global Peace Kings.

Edited by BurntEyes
Posted
10 hours ago, chainsaw said:

Iran's on the 1 yard line? If that were true why would Tulsi and everyone else in the global intelligence community have hidden that fact?

I mean she put out that fucked up propaganda piece like a week ago talking about how scared of nuclear annihilation we should be. At the time, we all assumed it was her shilling for Putin. 

Posted

 

The following is a long, pretty comprehensive piece on factors prior to Isreal attack through today. I tried to highlight dates and important aspects with bold for critical points.

How Trump, a self-proclaimed 'peacemaker,' embraced Israel's campaign against Iran

Spoiler

WASHINGTON - Roughly one month ago, from the stage at an investment forum in Saudi Arabia, U.S. President Donald Trump issued a warning to Iran that would prove prophetic.

"We'll never allow America and its allies to be threatened with terrorism or nuclear attack," Trump told the crowd, sending a message to the leadership in Tehran.

"The time is right now for them to choose. Right now. We don't have a lot of time to wait. Things are happening at a very fast pace."

That May 13 ultimatum received little attention at the time.

By mid-May, the Pentagon had begun drawing up detailed contingency plans to aid Israel if it followed through on its long-held ambition to strike Iran's nuclear program, the officials said. And the U.S. had already diverted thousands of defensive weapons away from war-torn Ukraine toward the Middle East in preparation for potential conflict, according to a Western source familiar with the matter and a Ukrainian source.

The Pentagon declined to comment for this story

This account of the weeks and days leading up to Trump's decision to throw his support behind Israel's bombing campaign is based on interviews with over a dozen administration officials, foreign diplomats and Trump confidantes, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.

The picture that emerges is that of a long, secretive preparation process and a president who for weeks found himself torn between diplomacy and supporting military action - and was ultimately persuaded in part by an ally whose actions he did not fully control.

While Trump has long described himself as a peacemaker - dispatching Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff to the region several times to try to seal a diplomatic accord - he had several trusted political allies pushing him to back an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

And U.S. intelligence had indicated a unilateral Israeli strike was possible, even likely, even if Trump wanted to wait, according to two U.S. officials.

While it is unclear if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Trump's more hawkish allies ever got him to a "yes" to Israel's plans, by the days leading up the strike he was at least not a "no," according to two senior U.S. officials and a senior Israeli source.

That stance, people familiar with the dynamics said, helped tip Israel into action.

Seven days into the Israel-Iran conflict, Trump is left with a dilemma, said Aaron David Miller, a veteran diplomat who has advised six secretaries of state on Middle East policy.

He can try again to pursue a diplomatic resolution with Iran, allow Iran and Israel "to fight it out," or he can enter the war with U.S. airstrikes on the deeply buried Fordow enrichment plant, a step that would have unknown consequences for the region.

Trump "let it (the Israeli attack) happen," said Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace policy institute. "He got on the tiger and he's riding it."

The White House on Thursday said that Trump will make a decision on whether the U.S. will get involved in the conflict in the next two weeks.

The White House, the Israeli prime minister's office and Iran's delegation to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment. Tehran has consistently said its nuclear program is designed for peaceful purposes only, a conclusion Washington has rejected.

One of the first hints that Trump might sign off on an Israeli bombing campaign came in April.

During a closed-door meeting on April 17, Saudi Arabia's defense minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian: Take Trump's offer to negotiate an agreement seriously because it presents a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel.

Reuters could not determine whether the message was sent at Washington's behest, nor whether Iran's leaders took that message seriously

The Israel Defense Forces and the head of U.S. Central Command, General Michael "Erik" Kurilla, were discussing detailed intelligence about Iran's missile buildup and nuclear program and steps that could be required to defend U.S. troops and Israel itself in any conflict with Iran, according to a U.S. official and senior Israeli official.

Meanwhile, the U.S. was funneling weapons to Israel that would be useful for an air war with Iran. In one instance in early May, a large shipment of defensive missiles originally meant for Ukraine was diverted to Israel instead, according to the Western source and the Ukrainian source.

The diverted shipment caused consternation in Kyiv and sparked continued fears that additional weapons needed to defend against Moscow will instead be used to defend U.S. interests elsewhere, the Ukrainian source said.

In the opening months of Trump's term, Israel had already proposed to Washington a series of options to attack Iran's facilities, according to sources.

While Trump had rebuffed those ideas, saying he preferred diplomacy for the time being, several people close to him said he was never dead-set against using military force against Iran.

He had done so before. In 2020, despite a foreign policy during his first term that was otherwise marked by restraint, Trump ordered a drone strike that killed major general Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' division responsible for its international operations.

The Iranian government has since sought to murder Trump in revenge, U.S. prosecutors have said, an allegation Tehran denies.

Behind the scenes, Trump had been pulled in multiple directions on the Iran issue since before he even took office.

On one side, many supporters - including conservative media personality Tucker Carlson - and administration officials saw Trump's Make America Great Again movement as an antidote to decades of foreign wars that cost thousands of American lives without significantly advancing American interests.

On the other, several close Trump allies - from conservative commentator Mark Levin to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham - were portraying a nuclear Iran as an existential threat that must be removed at any cost.

Trump himself took pride in being a broker of peace.

"My proudest legacy," he said during his inauguration address, "will be that of a peacemaker and unifier."

Ultimately, no U.S. official, Trump confidante or diplomat Reuters talked to identified an epiphany that tipped the scales for the president.

One senior administration official said that after months of sitting on the fence a lack of diplomatic progress, a push from the Israelis and appeals by hawkish allies likely wore him down.

Trump aides and allies have noted that Israel's attack unfolded just after the expiry of a 60-day deadline the Trump administration had set for a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran.

The senior U.S. official said another dynamic was at play: As U.S. intelligence consistently showed Israel might go ahead with an attack with or without U.S. support, the administration could look caught off guard if they did not get behind it. Worse, it could appear that the U.S. was opposing a longtime ally.

Although Trump had appeared to some to snub Netanyahu as he pushed for a peaceful solution to the crisis, privately, Israel understood that Washington would stand by it, said a separate official.

By the time Trump talked to Netanyahu on Monday, June 9 - one of many phone calls in recent days - his stance was one of tacit, if not explicit approval, according to one U.S. and one Israeli official.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had said he would like more time to see diplomacy play out. But the U.S. official said that he did not explicitly veto Israel's plans.

By Wednesday, June 11, it was clear to Washington that Israel's plans were a go.

The next day, June 12, Washington sent a formal diplomatic note to several regional allies, warning them that an attack was imminent.

Trump and some key cabinet members watched the events live from the wood-paneled "JFK room," part of the White House Situation Room. Other officials watched the events nearby.

The initial attack appeared to be a success, with several close advisers to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei killed and key nuclear sites seriously damaged. Over the weekend, the Israelis considered killing Khamenei himself, but were waved off by Trump, according to two U.S. officials.

Almost immediately, a political civil war erupted in Trump's Republican Party, with several high-profile conservatives, including members of Congress, accusing his administration of fanning the flames of war

Seven days on, the U.S. intelligence community believes the strikes have set Iran's nuclear ambitions back by only months, according to a source familiar with U.S. intelligence reports, confirming a CNN report.

A significant blow to Iran's nuclear ambitions, most analysts say, will require dropping bunker-busting bombs on the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, the crown jewel of Iran's nuclear program. Only the U.S. has that capability.

Trump has said he is considering such a strike, which would represent a major escalation for the United States.

Link

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...