Early assessment suggests US strikes didn’t destroy Iran’s nuclear sites

[frank83628]

6 hours ago, BLMFem said:

Well, well, well, what have we here. So the sites weren't obliterated anyway? Wonder who'll take the fall for this.

 

 

Early assessment suggests US strikes didn’t destroy Iran’s nuclear sites

 

"The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by seven people briefed on it.

The assessment, which has not been previously reported, was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm. It is based on a battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command in the aftermath of the US strikes, one of the sources said."

 

 

Briefed by who? Last article said 'anonymous sources'... conveniently.

But font let that get in the way of your trolling 

[dinsdale]

3 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Briefed by who? Last article said 'anonymous sources'... conveniently.

But font let that get in the way of your trolling 

Watch the video I posted. Leaked by someone and the assessment was not a final assessment and with very low confidence.

[BLMFem]

5 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Briefed by who? Last article said 'anonymous sources'... conveniently.

But font let that get in the way of your trolling 

Quoting Sane Stream Media sources is trolling?😄

 

[BLMFem]

2 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Watch the video I posted. Leaked by someone and the assessment was not a final assessment and with very low confidence.

Lower than the claims made by Trump?

[RMK54]

The benefits of disinformation is that it has everyone, including this forum, imparting and disseminating half truths to further a narrative to justify extending warfare on an engagement that may not be warranted. Everyone here has done their bidding. What one thinks they know about something is usually way less than 10% of reality...especially when it deals with national intelligence.

[DezLez]

1 minute ago, BLMFem said:

Quoting Sane Stream Media sources is trolling?😄

 

It is to him!

[dinsdale]

10 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Lower than the claims made by Trump?

You obviously didn't watch the video so don't comment on it until you have. My guess is you won't watch it because it well and truly challenges your orange man bad narrative and the entire basis of this thread.

[Tug]

Let’s just hope we can get to a point were we can have an international body inspecting and verifying the Iranians aren’t producing material for a bomb……sound familiar??let’s hope for everyone’s sake the ceasefire holds and we move towards an Iran without nukes. We all know trump has a big mouth personally I try not to listen to deeply because it will allways lean towards self promotion.Ill side with the experts +we won’t really know till inspection is allowed.To me the real question is why?that’s really simple one person tore up an agreement to make himself look big ….now because of that action we are here trying to get something similar in place…..it’s that simple….

[Yagoda]

8 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

My guess is you won't watch it because it well and truly challenges your orange man bad narrative and the entire basis of this thread.

He is a troll. He wont.

[daveAustin]

6 hours ago, BLMFem said:

"The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm.

That’s ominous. If they didn’t, Iran will likely go full bore for the bomb, and Netanyahu and co will want to finish the job, regime change etc. This ain’t over. 

[JAG]

5 hours ago, 3NUMBAS said:

The entrances can be mined to stop em from being used 

Mines dropped, mines cleared, mines dropped, mines cleared.

That will mean constant air attacks, breaking the ceasefire and probably leading to aircraft shot down and casualties. Dragged ever deeper in.

 

Expect a lot more "F bombs" on the White House lawn!

[BLMFem]

28 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

You obviously didn't watch the video so don't comment on it until you have. My guess is you won't watch it because it well and truly challenges your orange man bad narrative and the entire basis of this thread.

I have watched the video and it's astounding that you can claim (presumably) with a straight face that it changes everything. What exactly has changed after a vid showing Mark Rutte nervously buttering up Trump, with Trump yapping on (the usual "tremendous" this and "fantastic" that) as he usually does, interspersed with a couple of guest appearances from Marko and Pete? 

I'll tell you what's changed; nothing.

 

One thing I did notice though is how worn out Trump looks. He really looks like he's running on fumes - low/no energy.

[BLMFem]

25 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

He is a troll. He wont.

At least I don't hate the US of A.

[dinsdale]

3 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

I have watched the video and it's astounding that you can claim (presumably) with a straight face that it changes everything. What exactly has changed after a vid showing Mark Rutte nervously buttering up Trump, with Trump yapping on (the usual "tremendous" this and "fantastic" that) as he usually does, interspersed with a couple of guest appearances from Marko and Pete? 

I'll tell you what's changed; nothing.

 

One thing I did notice though is how worn out Trump looks. He really looks like he's running on fumes - low/no energy.

If you watched it then you know you know what was leaked was an early assessment with very low confidence. This leaked assessment is what you've based this thread on. All you can do is display your derangement for Trump and not address anything in the video. 

[angryguy]

4 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

At least I don't hate the US of A.

Your posts indicate otherwise

[stevenl]

4 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

If you watched it then you know you know what was leaked was an early assessment with very low confidence. This leaked assessment is what you've based this thread on. All you can do is display your derangement for Trump and not address anything in the video. 

Could be true, could be a lie. Assessment could be right and could be wrong.

You're wrong for sure though in claiming this changes everything.

[coolcarer]

1 hour ago, candide said:

The agreement still technically exists on paper, but no one respects it. It's a kind of ghost treaty.

The Iranians would be so happy to hear that. the UN and IAEA who mentioned it in their latest report do not agree. you are arguing against them.

[Yagoda]

9 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

At least I don't hate the US of A.

Sure you do. Look at your user name and avatar.

[BLMFem]

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

If you watched it then you know you know what was leaked was an early assessment with very low confidence. This leaked assessment is what you've based this thread on. All you can do is display your derangement for Trump and not address anything in the video. 

I know what was said, I watched the video. Lips were moving, claims were made, all to support Trump's statements about the astounding success of the attack.

What exactly did you expect?

 

PS. Your compulsive and pathological use of the term "derangement" should have you worried. It's not healthy to be that obsessed, buddy.

 

[BLMFem]

5 minutes ago, angryguy said:

Your posts indicate otherwise

I would have asked you to provide proof but that would be off-topic.

[BLMFem]

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Sure you do. Look at your user name and avatar.

Right back atcha, pal.

[BLMFem]

8 minutes ago, angryguy said:

Your posts indicate otherwise

You joined AN on Monday at 08:53 PM, which is 49 hrs ago.😂

 

Hello, and welcome to AN. Always a pleasure to say hi to "new" members!

[Yagoda]

4 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Right back atcha, pal.

Got it. A symbol of American freedom demonstrates hate for America.

 

You are a total troll.

[dinsdale]

12 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Could be true, could be a lie. Assessment could be right and could be wrong.

You're wrong for sure though in claiming this changes everything.

I didn't say it changes everything. I said it calls into question the premise of this thread and as I said this thread is based on a leaked early assessment with a low confidence attached to it. 

[BLMFem]

5 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. A symbol of American freedom demonstrates hate for America.

 

You are a total troll.

Says someone who's avatar is a yellow snake and name is that of a former head of the Soviet secret police. 

Got it!👍

[dinsdale]

14 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

It's not healthy to be that obsessed

[nauseus]

36 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

I have watched the video and it's astounding that you can claim (presumably) with a straight face that it changes everything. What exactly has changed after a vid showing Mark Rutte nervously buttering up Trump, with Trump yapping on (the usual "tremendous" this and "fantastic" that) as he usually does, interspersed with a couple of guest appearances from Marko and Pete? 

I'll tell you what's changed; nothing.

 

One thing I did notice though is how worn out Trump looks. He really looks like he's running on fumes - low/no energy.

 

I'm not surprised. Busy time. Wonder how Joe would have fared?

[BLMFem]

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

I didn't say it changes everything. I said it calls into question the premise of this thread and as I said this thread is based on a leaked early assessment with a low confidence attached to it. 

So it changes nothing, my point exactly. It's just a rehash of earlier claims. And thanks for tricking me into wasting 19 precious minutes of my life.

 

PS. I did pick up one thing; whatever it is they're paying the NATO general secretary, it's not enough.

[BLMFem]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

 

I'm not surprised. Busy time. Wonder how Joe would have fared?

Not good. That job is not for anyone older than 70.

[darbie-foos]