USA Trump to make decision on US involvement 'within two weeks'

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

What threads on the political soapbox are not discussing him?

I am just highlighting the fact then nobody has been held to the same scrutiny as Trump, youre all hypocrites of varying degrees

You seem to have a short memory.

 

Its not that long ago that we were being constantly told that all wars that started during a President’s term of office were that President’s wars.

 

It’s not that long ago we were being told a President was a warmonger. 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Ahh, those polls that dont matter, unless they show the results you want.

More importantly a poll from Murdoch’s NYP, we need to update the following:

 

24 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

His opinion is based on what Fox talking heads tell him to think.

 

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

More importantly a poll from Murdoch’s NYP, we need to update the following:

 

 

Its from MAGA voters not Murdoch but if you want one that is non partisan:

 

Hill Poll: Voters willing to see US attack Iran over nuclear weapons

Nearly half of likely voters think the United States should be willing to use military force to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, according to this week’s The Hill Poll.
Forty-nine percent said military force should be used, while 31 percent said it should not and 20 percent were not sure.

https://thehill.com/polls/105058-hill-poll-voters-willing-to-see-us-attack-iran-over-nuclear-weapons/

[Social Media]

Another off topic post removed. Please discuss the topic without deliberate diversion attempts, read the OP about what this is about and not what you want it to be about.

 

Trump to make decision on US involvement 'within two weeks'

 

If you want to discuss Trumps political supporters/opponents then there are other topics such as this one.

 

 

[theshu25]

53 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Are you a spokeswoman for MAGA now?

 

When did you start in this role?

He took the job of Yagoda.

[Bkk Brian]

Iran are getting decimated and desperate to find a way out.

 

Iran held direct talks with US amid intensifying conflict with Israel, diplomats say

They said the talks included a brief discussion of a U.S. proposal given to Iran at the end of May that aims to create a regional consortium that would enrich uranium outside of Iran, an offer Tehran has so far rejected.
U.S. and Iranians officials did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on the matter.
This week's phone discussions were the most substantive direct talks since the two began negotiations in April. On those occasions, in Oman and Italy, the two men exchanged brief words when they encountered each other after indirect talks were held.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/iran-held-direct-talks-with-us-amid-intensifying-conflict-with-israel-diplomats-2025-06-19/

[Bkk Brian]

More talks not just with US but also European foreign ministers

 

European and Iranian diplomats to meet as US delays decision on joining strikes
Talks to be held in Geneva, with British FM saying there is a 2-week window for diplomatic solution as Trump puts off decision on whether to join campaign against Iran

https://www.timesofisrael.com/european-and-iranian-diplomats-to-meet-as-us-delays-decision-to-join-israeli-strikes/

[ThreeCardMonte]

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He’s changed his story on US involvement multiple times already, his only consistency is his resort to ‘two weeks’.

 

Two weeks does at least give him time to be instructed that MAGA doesn’t stand for let the tail wag the dog.

 

 

 

Much better than “just don’t “

[ThreeCardMonte]

Whatever it takes.

 

Iran will never have nuclear weapons or the capability to build them ever again.

The big boys (bombers) currently awaiting orders on Diego Garcia.

 

 

[ThreeCardMonte]

Go big and go deep.  15 ton bunker busters.

 

I hope Trump gives the order.

 

 

[BangkokReady]

10 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

This is not about MAGA. It's about taking an important decision without haste or do you prefer him to attack now without waiting?

 

They don't know what they think.  They only know they hate Trump and want to make him look bad. 

 

Today they will say, "Two weeks?  That's not enough time.  Trump is bad!"  Tomorrow, it will be, "Two weeks?  That's too long.  Trump is bad!"

[ThreeCardMonte]

Iran has one chance to dismantle before Trump does it for them.

I would never trust Iran so hopefully it’s a quick 2 weeks.

 

 

[candide]

3 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

 

They don't know what they think.  They only know they hate Trump and want to make him look bad. 

 

Today they will say, "Two weeks?  That's not enough time.  Trump is bad!"  Tomorrow, it will be, "Two weeks?  That's too long.  Trump is bad!"

You're making stuff up again. 

 

Who wrote that 2 weeks was too short or too long? No one! 

[BangkokReady]

8 minutes ago, candide said:

You're making stuff up again. 

 

Who wrote that 2 weeks was too short or too long? No one! 

 

Well, of course.  I never claimed otherwise.  🤦‍♂️

[Chomper Higgot]

10 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

 

They don't know what they think.  They only know they hate Trump and want to make him look bad. 

 

Today they will say, "Two weeks?  That's not enough time.  Trump is bad!"  Tomorrow, it will be, "Two weeks?  That's too long.  Trump is bad!"

The criticism of Trump’s ‘2weeks’ remark is not about the time period, but the fact that it’s his go to response to so many decisions that need to be made.

 

It’s a response that is clearly not based on any other than Trump’s incompetence.

 

He doesn’t have answers he doesn’t have a plan, he lacks any semblance of competence.

Those who pay attention to the gap between what Trump promises and what he delivers recognize his constant use of ‘2 weeks’ for what it is, yet more evidence of a weak man who has no idea what he is doing.

 

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna214089

[dinsdale]

21 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

This is not about MAGA. It's about taking an important decision without haste or do you prefer him to attack now without waiting?

Sadly the suffers do not live in reality and will react in their typical way whenever they see any mention of Trump. He's been backed into a corner. The Fordow facility needs to be taken out and only the US can do this. As for involvement the US is already involved but IMO boots on the ground won't happen. This is essentially an air war of attrition the attrition being Iran's missile numbers and it's ability to launch them vs Israel's interception capability. The end goal for Israel is to completely destroys Iran's capability to build nukes and the only way this will happen is with direct US involvement. As I said Netanyahu has backed Trump into a corner and I doubt he's too happy about it but his choices are limited IMO.

[dinsdale]

19 hours ago, Social Media said:

If you want to discuss Trumps political supporters/opponents then there are other topics such as this one.

Agree. There certainly are with several threads attacking Trump started on a daily basis. This thread is about one of the biggest decisions for the world. 

[jerrymahoney]

-- Inside the Situation Room, where Trump and his national security team are weighing next steps on Iran

Top national security officials, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, are among officials who have joined Trump in the meetings as the administration weighs the spiraling conflict.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt held a press conference on Thursday — the first since Israel launched preemptive strikes on Iran June 12 — and said the next two weeks will be a critical time period as U.S. officials map out next steps.

"I have a message directly from the president, and I quote: 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future. I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.' That's a quote directly from the president," she said Thursday.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/inside-situation-room-where-trump-his-national-security-team-weighing-next-steps-iran
__________________________

NB 'TOP'

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

Sadly the suffers do not live in reality and will react in their typical way whenever they see any mention of Trump. He's been backed into a corner. The Fordow facility needs to be taken out and only the US can do this. As for involvement the US is already involved but IMO boots on the ground won't happen. This is essentially an air war of attrition the attrition being Iran's missile numbers and it's ability to launch them vs Israel's interception capability. The end goal for Israel is to completely destroys Iran's capability to build nukes and the only way this will happen is with direct US involvement. As I said Netanyahu has backed Trump into a corner and I doubt he's too happy about it but his choices are limited IMO.

Exactly even the leftie CNN states this. Its obvious but some prefer to ignore the facts

 

It would be easy to mock Donald Trump for blinking. Again.

After all, the president just decided not to decide whether to join Israel’s assault on Iran for up to two weeks.

But it’s not necessarily a sign of weakness when a commander in chief decides to take his time over matters of life and death.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/20/politics/trump-iran-two-week-pause-analysis

 

"Trump isn’t the only president to equivocate over launching new military action in the Middle East"

[Bkk Brian]

 

Trump to decide on Iran action within two weeks

State of play: Trump met with his top national security team in the Situation Room on Thursday — the third such meeting in three days. He's seriously considering joining the war, but wants to ensure three things are true, U.S. officials say:

That a military strike is truly necessary.
That the operation wouldn't drag the U.S. into a prolonged war in the Middle East.
And most of all, that it would achieve the goal of destroying Iran's nuclear program.

https://www.axios.com/2025/06/19/trump-iran-strike-two-weeks-israel

[dinsdale]

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

 

Trump to decide on Iran action within two weeks

State of play: Trump met with his top national security team in the Situation Room on Thursday — the third such meeting in three days. He's seriously considering joining the war, but wants to ensure three things are true, U.S. officials say:

That a military strike is truly necessary.
That the operation wouldn't drag the U.S. into a prolonged war in the Middle East.
And most of all, that it would achieve the goal of destroying Iran's nuclear program.

https://www.axios.com/2025/06/19/trump-iran-strike-two-weeks-israel

Your last point is the big one. There's doubts the MOP can get the job done and now there's talk of very low yield tactical nukes being needed to completely destroy Fordow.

[NanLaew]

23 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

This is not about MAGA. It's about taking an important decision without haste or do you prefer him to attack now without waiting?

 

It has a whole lot to do with MAGA and keeping a slew of his more conservative elected followers and support base, who loudly decry any US involvement in foreign conflicts, onside. A misstep in the next two weeks could shatter those rather thin house majorities, just in time for the mid-term 'bloodbath' and the inevitable, final two years of a lame duck presidency.

 

Netanyahu's questionable decision to attack Iran came within hours of his fragile, right-wing coalition government narrowly defeating a no-confidence vote. The suggestion has been made that committing to attack Iran was a condition of securing critical, last-minute life-support for his government.

 

I think Putin, Xi and Kim are the only despots who can do what they want with impunity. The tin pot dictatorships in Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America aren't in the same league.

[Bkk Brian]

8 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

 

It has a whole lot to do with MAGA and keeping a slew of his more conservative elected followers and support base, who loudly decry any US involvement in foreign conflicts, onside. A misstep in the next two weeks could shatter those rather thin house majorities, just in time for the mid-term 'bloodbath' and the inevitable, final two years of a lame duck presidency.

Nonsense. Its to do with:

 

22 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Exactly even the leftie CNN states this. Its obvious but some prefer to ignore the facts

 

It would be easy to mock Donald Trump for blinking. Again.

After all, the president just decided not to decide whether to join Israel’s assault on Iran for up to two weeks.

But it’s not necessarily a sign of weakness when a commander in chief decides to take his time over matters of life and death.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/20/politics/trump-iran-two-week-pause-analysis

 

"Trump isn’t the only president to equivocate over launching new military action in the Middle East"

 

[NanLaew]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Nonsense. Its to do with:

 

 

 

Thanks for that link.

 

CNN considers that the MAGA faithful in government will (reluctantly) play "follow my leader." I suggest that those who voted for him, and ultimately gave him the job, may not, especially if his decision results in US servicemen and women coming home in body bags.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, NanLaew said:

 

Thanks for that link.

 

CNN considers that the MAGA faithful in government will (reluctantly) play "follow my leader." I suggest that those who voted for him, and ultimately gave him the job, may not, especially if his decision results in US servicemen and women coming home in body bags.

Your suggestion does not tally with MAGA voters in the latest poll that's already been posted.

[jerrymahoney]

From the CNN link above:

 

Why Trump’s two-week pause on Iran makes sense — and why it may not work

 

But Trump’s record of unpredictability casts doubt on whether he will make use of the maneuvering room he’s created.

 

Until Thursday, all the signs coming out of the White House were that Trump was moving close to ordering US bombing raids on Iran’s subterranean nuclear plant at Fordow — despite the risk this could drag the United States into another Middle East war.

But after reviewing strike options, he’s pulled back for now.

[NanLaew]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Your suggestion does not tally with MAGA voters in the latest poll that's already been posted.

 

Ah yes, the polls. They have always been a safe predictor of results, regardless of what happens in the interim.

 

But, as you correctly point it, it is simply my suggestion, and it differs from your opinion. An opinion which I have declined to label as 'Nonsense'.

[Bkk Brian]

16 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

 

Ah yes, the polls. They have always been a safe predictor of results, regardless of what happens in the interim.

 

But, as you correctly point it, it is simply my suggestion, and it differs from your opinion. An opinion which I have declined to label as 'Nonsense'.

I believe them more over your suggestions which I still class as nonsense based on the evidence, not my opinion, this has already been discussed in the thread anyway. You need to read it.

 

MAGA voters overwhelmingly support US strikes on Iranian military: poll

An overwhelming number of self-described “MAGA Republicans” would back US strikes against Iranian military outposts and other infrastructure amid Israel’s military campaign against the theocratic regime, a new poll found.

A whopping 65% of “MAGA Republicans” would back strikes on Iran, compared to a paltry 19% opposed, which even eclipses the support for such military action among more traditional Republicans, according to a J.L. Partners survey shared exclusively with The Post.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/18/us-news/maga-voters-overwhelmingly-support-us-strikes-on-iranian-military-poll/

 

[NanLaew]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

I believe them more over your suggestions which I still class as nonsense based on the evidence, not my opinion, this has already been discussed in the thread anyway. You need to read it.

 

MAGA voters overwhelmingly support US strikes on Iranian military: poll

An overwhelming number of self-described “MAGA Republicans” would back US strikes against Iranian military outposts and other infrastructure amid Israel’s military campaign against the theocratic regime, a new poll found.

A whopping 65% of “MAGA Republicans” would back strikes on Iran, compared to a paltry 19% opposed, which even eclipses the support for such military action among more traditional Republicans, according to a J.L. Partners survey shared exclusively with The Post.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/18/us-news/maga-voters-overwhelmingly-support-us-strikes-on-iranian-military-poll/

 

 

Of course you believe the right-wing populist media and the evidence presented therein by a pollster that got the 2024 election result right.

 

I have no problem with that either.

[jerrymahoney]

Headline now NYTimes:

 

An Iran Deal in Two Weeks? Hard to Achieve, Even if Trump Really Wants One.
Negotiating with Tehran is time-consuming and difficult under the best of circumstances. And it remains unclear whether President Trump’s 14-day clock is more than a way to buy time for military preparations.