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

[BLMFem]

4 hours ago, frank83628 said:

The guy on here are as equally pathetic as the threads they start and the news they believe

Dmitry, don't you have somewhere else you need to be?

[Harrisfan]

7 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

Childish, no surprise, true to form.

People who worry about wars are always miserable. Case in point. What a waste of time.

[Harrisfan]

Children also have more fun in their lives as do animals. Studying them rather than reading the daily news will make you more happy. A study found 85% of the things you worry about never happen.

[sharot724]

1 minute ago, Harrisfan said:

Children also have more fun in their lives as do animals. Studying them rather than reading the daily news will make you more happy. A study found 85% of the things you worry about never happen.

Worry about just what you can control, anything else is a waste of time.

[BLMFem]

He cannot admit that the attack was anything but a complete success. Politically impossible, hence the rage at any doubts about the outcome of the attack.

 

Why Trump needs the world to believe Iran’s nuclear program is ‘obliterated’

 

"There are two reasons why President Donald Trump needs the world to believe his adamant claims that Iran’s nuclear program has been obliterated.

First, his entire presidency is set up to reflect glory on his own strongman persona, fueling a narrative of courageous, unique and infallible leadership. Information that contradicts the myth is not welcome.

Second, any evidence that Iran retains the capability to manufacture nuclear weapons or to restart its program after daring US bombing raids would raise an uncomfortable question: Should the United States use military action again to try to finish the job and meet any future advances in Iran’s capabilities with more strikes?"

[Lacessit]

2 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

He cannot admit that the attack was anything but a complete success. Politically impossible, hence the rage at any doubts about the outcome of the attack.

 

Why Trump needs the world to believe Iran’s nuclear program is ‘obliterated’

 

"There are two reasons why President Donald Trump needs the world to believe his adamant claims that Iran’s nuclear program has been obliterated.

First, his entire presidency is set up to reflect glory on his own strongman persona, fueling a narrative of courageous, unique and infallible leadership. Information that contradicts the myth is not welcome.

Second, any evidence that Iran retains the capability to manufacture nuclear weapons or to restart its program after daring US bombing raids would raise an uncomfortable question: Should the United States use military action again to try to finish the job and meet any future advances in Iran’s capabilities with more strikes?"

"In time of war, the truth is so precious that it must always be attended by a bodyguard of lies" Winston Churchill.

 

 

[Furioso]

Iran now has no capability to quickly assemble a nuclear weapon. More bombing attacks likely from here on out. 

[Bkk Brian]

37 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Oh, cry me a river, Pete, you incompetent clown.

Why are there reporters present? These performance pieces are for an audience of exactly one anyway.

What did he say that you did not agree with?

[BLMFem]

They probably have lost the capacity to produce a nuclear device for some time but they haven't lost the capability to push Trump's buttons.😄

 

Iran Trolls Trump by Claiming Its Nuclear Program Is Back Up

 

"Iran has declared that its nuclear program will “resume without interruption”, despite President Donald Trump insisting that the regime’s nuclear ambitions had been obliterated after being bombed by the U.S. 

“The nuclear program of Iran will resume without interruption, and we are ready to restart enrichment; our program will not stop,” stated the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, according to reports from state media."

[BLMFem]

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

What did he say that you did not agree with?

A very short video totally taken out of context is proof of exactly what?

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, BLMFem said:

A very short video totally taken out of context is proof of exactly what?

Short and to the point. Why did you not agree with his point?

[BLMFem]

So this raises some questions; Did the US not now about this places just a few days ago, or is it so impenetrable they didn't even try?

 

Iran’s new hidden nuclear fortress Trump's bombs can't reach.

 

"Before the strike, 16 lorries were seen queuing up outside Fordow, and an expert on Iran’s nuclear programme told The Telegraph the regime had moved much of its highly enriched uranium to a secret location before the US was able to bomb its facilities.
Tehran had hidden sites housing “hundreds if not thousands” of advanced centrifuges capable of producing weapons-grade uranium needed for a nuclear bomb, according to Sima Shine, who has worked within the Israeli military establishment for 30 years.
Pickaxe mountain may be the perfect hiding place."

[BLMFem]

9 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Short and to the point. Why did you not agree with his point?

His point was buttering up Trump.

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

His point was buttering up Trump.

His point:

 

The skill and the courage it took to go into enemy territory, flying 36 hours on behalf of the American people... to take out a nuclear program is beyond what anyone in this audience can fathom. And then the instinct — the instinct of CNN... The New York Times is to try to find a way to spin it for their own political reasons

 

What is it you do not agree with?

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

His point:

 

The skill and the courage it took to go into enemy territory, flying 36 hours on behalf of the American people... to take out a nuclear program is beyond what anyone in this audience can fathom. And then the instinct — the instinct of CNN... The New York Times is to try to find a way to spin it for their own political reasons

 

What is it you do not agree with?

That's stupid.

Either the mission goal succeeded or it didn't regardless of the political baggage game you're cynically playing.

The goal was to wipe out Iran's nuclear program for a decade or more.

IF it's only for a month or two, then the mission FAILED.

We need to know the TRUTH. 

Not from Truth Social because that's all lies.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

That's stupid.

Either the mission goal succeeded or it didn't regardless of the political baggage game you're cynically playing.

The goal was to wipe out Iran's nuclear program for a decade or more.

IF it's only for a month or two, then the mission FAILED.

We need to know the TRUTH. 

Not from Truth Social because that's all lies.

Can you link where the goal was to wipe Iran's nuclear program for a decade or more.?

 

Who said its only for a month or two?

[BLMFem]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

His point:

 

The skill and the courage it took to go into enemy territory, flying 36 hours on behalf of the American people... to take out a nuclear program is beyond what anyone in this audience can fathom. And then the instinct — the instinct of CNN... The New York Times is to try to find a way to spin it for their own political reasons

 

What is it you do not agree with?

That he's saying the legitimate role the Sane Stream Media is playing in questioning the veracity of the statements that comes from the government is in any way a critique of the armed forces.

That's lame and pathetic, but as I said earlier it was for an audience of one.

[BLMFem]

7 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Can you link where the goal was to wipe Iran's nuclear program for a decade or more.?

 

Who said its only for a month or two?

Well, now you're just playing games. Move along, Brian.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, BLMFem said:

That he's saying the legitimate role the Sane Stream Media is playing in questioning the veracity of the statements that comes from the government is in any way a critique of the armed forces.

That's lame and pathetic, but as I said earlier it was for an audience of one.

He was referring to the report that was leaked and taken out of context by CNN. That's the point and to try and defend that very fact would be lame at this point seeing all the evidence that has now come to light to p[rove it was very wrong.

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Well, now you're just playing games. Move along, Brian.

Who made the false claims?

[jerrymahoney]

19 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

What is it you do not agree with?

So who was in charge of the entire operation? It wasn't Hegseth, Caine, or Rubio.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, jerrymahoney said:

So who was in charge of the entire operation? It wasn't Hegseth, Caine, or Rubio.

What has that got to do with what he said?

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

That he's saying the legitimate role the Sane Stream Media is playing in questioning the veracity of the statements that comes from the government is in any way a critique of the armed forces.

That's lame and pathetic, but as I said earlier it was for an audience of one.

What’s more lame and pathetic is bone spurs attempting to shield himself from criticism behind military personnel.

 

Criticism of Trump is not criticism of serving military personnel.

 

The man is a disgrace.

 

[Jingthing]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

What’s more lame and pathetic is bone spurs attempting to shield himself from criticism behind military personnel.

 

Criticism of Trump is not criticism of serving military personnel.

 

The man is a disgrace.

 

Especially considering his "bone spurs" past.

[DezLez]

32 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

His point:

 

The skill and the courage it took to go into enemy territory, flying 36 hours on behalf of the American people... to take out a nuclear program is beyond what anyone in this audience can fathom. And then the instinct — the instinct of CNN... The New York Times is to try to find a way to spin it for their own political reasons

 

What is it you do not agree with?

"What is it you do not agree with?"

The second sentence!

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What’s more lame and pathetic is bone spurs attempting to shield himself from criticism behind military personnel.

 

Criticism of Trump is not criticism of serving military personnel.

 

The man is a disgrace.

 

Here comes the Trump hate rather than facts about the report

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, DezLez said:

The second sentence!

NYT followed CNN in its reporting of the misleading preliminary assessment did it not?

[DezLez]

21 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Who made the false claims?

Trump by the looks of it!

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, DezLez said:

Trump by the looks of it!

Deflection to more Trump hate rather than facts. The claims below are false, fact

36 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

 

The goal was to wipe out Iran's nuclear program for a decade or more.

IF it's only for a month or two, then the mission FAILED.

 

 

 

[SunnyinBangrak]

23 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

He was referring to the report that was leaked and taken out of context by CNN. That's the point and to try and defend that very fact would be lame at this point seeing all the evidence that has now come to light to p[rove it was very wrong.

How is CNN sharing leaked classified documents? It was literally a few months ago the entire forum were wigging out and claiming safe classified document storage was the most important thing ever. Just such a dishonest cult.