So "total obliteration" is a good place to start and we can work backwards from there.

Back to attacking the news bringer I see.

 

Let’s have some of the promised transparency.

1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

So "total obliteration" is a good place to start and we can work backwards from there.

Away you go then.

4 hours ago, bannork said:

US Intelligence says strikes only set Iran back a few months.

Set them back from what? 

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

The aim was to obliterate the Iranian nuclear program. According to the latest news, the damage was minimal, a few months delay.

 

 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/exclusive-early-us-intel-assessment-suggests-strikes-on-iran-did-not-destroy-nuclear-sites-sources-say/ar-AA1Hlooc

 

 

A few months delay from what? 

19 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

(as above) Karoline Leavitt told CNN:

Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”

Where's Karine Jean-Pierre when you need her? 

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Back to attacking the news bringer I see.

 

Let’s have some of the promised transparency.

The only news bringer is Iran, they need to grant access which IAEA chief has demanded

 

VIENNA, June 23 (Reuters) - U.S. bombing probably caused "very significant" damage to the underground areas of Iran's Fordow uranium enrichment plant dug into a mountain, though no one can yet tell the extent, U.N. nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said on Monday.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/iaea-chief-expects-very-significant-damage-irans-fordow-site-2025-06-23/

Trump ignored the testimony of the U.S. DNI, stating Gabbard was ‘wrong’ about Iran.

 

His spokesperson is now disputing the US Defense Intelligence damage assessment.

 

This begs a few questions.

 

On what intelligence basis did Trump authorize the attack on Iran? 

 

On what intelligence basis did Trump claim complete obliteration of Iran’s nuclear program?

 

Why should anyone not believe the Defense Intelligence Damage Assessment?

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump ignored the testimony of the U.S. DNI, stating Gabbard was ‘wrong’ about Iran.

 

His spokesperson is now disputing the US Defense Intelligence damage assessment.

 

This begs a few questions.

 

On what intelligence basis did Trump authorize the attack on Iran? 

 

On what intelligence basis did Trump claim complete obliteration of Iran’s nuclear program?

 

Why should anyone not believe the Defense Intelligence Damage Assessment?

Any more questions you want to throw hope one sticks?

 

You may want to try and keeps things in context, the so called assessment was a preliminary one, others have been published since and as the IAEA has stated, the sites need inspecting.

 

Exact assessments of the damage — which require access to the sites that Iran is unwilling to grant — may never take place.

 

US strikes on Iran believed to have set back nuke program by two years

Saturday’s US strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities set back the Islamic Republic’s atomic weapons capabilities by roughly two years, American and Israeli officials and experts tell The Post — adding that Tehran remains “highly incentivized” to pursue a bomb.

https://nypost.com/2025/06/24/world-news/heres-how-long-us-strikes-may-have-set-back-irans-nuclear-program/

 

Its not surprising you are diminishing the impact of such a successful mission

 

Even the rabidly rightwing press are only claiming the attack ‘may have’ caused a ‘set back’.

 

I guess we ought really start listening to what the professionals in the Intelligence Community are telling us, be that leaked or otherwise.

 

 

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Even the rabidly rightwing press are only claiming the attack ‘may have’ caused a ‘set back’.

 

I guess we’ll soon find ought really start listening to what the professionals in the Intelligence Community are telling us, be that leaked or otherwise.

 

 

Even the rabidly rightwing press

 

Pathetic. 

 

"Rafael Grossi says no one is in a position to assess damage from US attacks; says accounting for Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium necessary to end conflict, bring peace"

 

IAEA chief expects ‘very significant damage’ at Iran’s Fordo site, demands access

https://www.timesofisrael.com/iaea-chief-expects-very-significant-damage-at-irans-fordo-site-demands-access/

Here’s interesting.

 

The IAEA stated, on June 13 Iran informed them it would take "special measures" to protect its nuclear materials and equipment.

 

This seems entirely reasonable given uranium’s highly toxic properties.

 

The IAEA has a mandate to monitor compliance to the non proliferation treaty, but under the circumstances of Israel and the U.S. attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities it’s not at all unreasonable for Iran not to provide anyone with information on where materials and equipment have been moved to.

 

The attacks on Iran’s nuclear program have provided Iran a very strong argument for denying all foreign access to whatever remains of the program, equipment and materials.

The success or failure of a bombing raid must surely rest on its overall impact, not simply the physical damage that, in any case, seems not to be as severe as first claimed.

 

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Here’s interesting.

 

The IAEA stated, on June 13 Iran informed them it would take "special measures" to protect its nuclear materials and equipment.

 

This seems entirely reasonable given uranium’s highly toxic properties.

 

The IAEA has a mandate to monitor compliance to the non proliferation treaty, but under the circumstances of Israel and the U.S. attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities it’s not at all unreasonable for Iran not to provide anyone with information on where materials and equipment have been moved to.

 

The attacks on Iran’s nuclear program have provided Iran a very strong argument for denying all foreign access to whatever remains of the program, equipment and materials.

 

 

The attacks on Iran’s nuclear program have provided Iran a very strong argument for denying all foreign access to whatever remains of the program, equipment and materials.

 

Yea that's a good theory for you to play with in support of Iran, well done 

The topic title is: Trump confirms surprise US airstrikes.

 

With Trump comments like: 'I may do it, I may not do it' and leaving the G7 saying he was going for "something bigger" there was discomfort at the military planer level that he was saying a little too much.

 

and maybe gave the Iranians a heads up

58 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump ignored the testimony of the U.S. DNI, stating Gabbard was ‘wrong’ about Iran.

 

His spokesperson is now disputing the US Defense Intelligence damage assessment.

 

This begs a few questions.

 

On what intelligence basis did Trump authorize the attack on Iran? 

 

On what intelligence basis did Trump claim complete obliteration of Iran’s nuclear program?

 

Why should anyone not believe the Defense Intelligence Damage Assessment?

He's Putin's puppet. Putin told him to

Seems Trump told another whopper, after watching his televised comments on how wonderful the bombing exercise was, it wasn't...............

 

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/trump-strikes-iran-did-not-194139814.html

12 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

The topic title is: Trump confirms surprise US airstrikes.

 

With Trump comments like: 'I may do it, I may not do it' and leaving the G7 saying he was going for "something bigger" there was discomfort at the military planer level that he was saying a little too much.

 

and maybe gave the Iranians a heads up

 there was discomfort at the military planer level that he was saying a little too much.

 

Can you link to that claim please 

5 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

 there was discomfort at the military planer level that he was saying a little too much.

 

Can you link to that claim please 

Outsiders tried to divine which faction was ascendant based on whom Mr. Trump met with at any given time. Mr. Trump seemed almost gleeful in telling reporters that he could make a decision “one second before it’s due, because things change, especially with war.”

All the while, Mr. Trump was making blustery statements indicating he was about to take the country into the conflict. “Everyone should evacuate Tehran!” he wrote on Monday last week on Truth Social, the social media platform he owns. The following day, he posted that he had not left a meeting of the Group of 7 in Canada to broker a Middle East cease-fire but for something “much bigger.”

So, he told the world, “Stay tuned!”

These public pronouncements generated angst at the Pentagon and U.S. Central Command, where military planners began to worry that Mr. Trump was giving Iran too much warning about an impending strike.

 

NYTimes via https://archive.ph/374Cz#selection-815.0-895.199

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Outsiders tried to divine which faction was ascendant based on whom Mr. Trump met with at any given time. Mr. Trump seemed almost gleeful in telling reporters that he could make a decision “one second before it’s due, because things change, especially with war.”

All the while, Mr. Trump was making blustery statements indicating he was about to take the country into the conflict. “Everyone should evacuate Tehran!” he wrote on Monday last week on Truth Social, the social media platform he owns. The following day, he posted that he had not left a meeting of the Group of 7 in Canada to broker a Middle East cease-fire but for something “much bigger.”

So, he told the world, “Stay tuned!”

These public pronouncements generated angst at the Pentagon and U.S. Central Command, where military planners began to worry that Mr. Trump was giving Iran too much warning about an impending strike.

 

NYTimes via https://archive.ph/374Cz#selection-815.0-895.199

Oh ok, so unnamed officials again. Bit like the un named leak of a report that nobody has seen

10 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Outsiders tried to divine which faction was ascendant based on whom Mr. Trump met with at any given time. Mr. Trump seemed almost gleeful in telling reporters that he could make a decision “one second before it’s due, because things change, especially with war.”

All the while, Mr. Trump was making blustery statements indicating he was about to take the country into the conflict. “Everyone should evacuate Tehran!” he wrote on Monday last week on Truth Social, the social media platform he owns. The following day, he posted that he had not left a meeting of the Group of 7 in Canada to broker a Middle East cease-fire but for something “much bigger.”

So, he told the world, “Stay tuned!”

These public pronouncements generated angst at the Pentagon and U.S. Central Command, where military planners began to worry that Mr. Trump was giving Iran too much warning about an impending strike.

 

NYTimes via https://archive.ph/374Cz#selection-815.0-895.199

A link has been provided in this thread in which the IAEA stated Iran informed them that they had taken steps to protect materials and equipment.

 

I expect the appreciated being given a ‘heads up’.

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A link has been provided in this thread in which the IAEA stated Iran informed them that they had taken steps to protect materials and equipment.

 

I expect the appreciated being given a ‘heads up’.

 

Trump is an idiot, has not got a calooooooooo......🙄

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A link has been provided in this thread in which the IAEA stated Iran informed them that they had taken steps to protect materials and equipment.

 

I expect the appreciated being given a ‘heads up’.

 

Yes you'll be very pleased to know that they may have moved the Uranium. Together with your theory of why Iran should not give permission to IAEA then everything's good.

 

Oh wait.

 

“Given the explosive payload utilized and the extreme vibration-sensitive nature of centrifuges, very significant damage is expected to have occurred,” Grossi added referring to the US bombing.

 

IAEA chief expects ‘very significant damage’ at Iran’s Fordo site, demands access

https://www.timesofisrael.com/iaea-chief-expects-very-significant-damage-at-irans-fordo-site-demands-access/

 

 

On 6/23/2025 at 2:50 PM, nauseus said:

 

False and misleading claim.

 

This "point-blank" congressional hearing of Tulsi Gabbard was a confirmation  hearing - meaning that she was not  Director of the US intelligence at that time. As a nominee, she was not privy to to all relevant intelligence then and has changed her view since being confirmed.

did she said it yes or no

50 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Outsiders tried to divine which faction was ascendant based on whom Mr. Trump met with at any given time. Mr. Trump seemed almost gleeful in telling reporters that he could make a decision “one second before it’s due, because things change, especially with war.”

All the while, Mr. Trump was making blustery statements indicating he was about to take the country into the conflict. “Everyone should evacuate Tehran!” he wrote on Monday last week on Truth Social, the social media platform he owns. The following day, he posted that he had not left a meeting of the Group of 7 in Canada to broker a Middle East cease-fire but for something “much bigger.”

So, he told the world, “Stay tuned!”

These public pronouncements generated angst at the Pentagon and U.S. Central Command, where military planners began to worry that Mr. Trump was giving Iran too much warning about an impending strike.

 

NYTimes via https://archive.ph/374Cz#selection-815.0-895.199

It's President Trump. 

The DIA assessment also indicates some of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile was moved before the strikes, one of the sources said.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-iran-strikes-set-back-nuclear-program-by-months-intel-assessment/

 

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

The DIA assessment also indicates some of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile was moved before the strikes, one of the sources said.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-iran-strikes-set-back-nuclear-program-by-months-intel-assessment/

 

Again?

 

"An initial classified assessment found the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities set back Tehran's nuclear program by a matter of months, according to three sources familiar with its contents."

 

That said they would have been very wise to move them. 

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It's President Trump. 

I agree ,for now.

All of this is totally mute,Putin is willing to sell nukes to Iran.

Maybe Pakistan also,what are they going to do about that?

This preliminary DIA report was incomplete and was not supposed to be released, nobody knows where they got their findings. They only have eyes in the sky, not eyes on the ground. Its the Intelligence Community (IC) which do have eyes on the ground.

 

 

11 minutes ago, jvs said:

All of this is totally mute,Putin is willing to sell nukes to Iran.

Maybe Pakistan also,what are they going to do about that?

Trump is Putin's puppet, and the whole idea of the strikes was to get Iran to buy nukes from Russia.