Iran

[Vol8188]

you naively believe Iran will suddenly become quiet as a mouse because Trump is involved.

there is no massive difference. Iran still has some nuclear capabilities. no one has even hit their power plants, we have no clue what happened to the enriched uranium they had. unless you really take Trump 100% at his word that we obliterated their program. unless you buy into that wild absolute there is no reason to think this won't just be another reset mess in the ME.

It doesn’t have to be a matter of faith. The IAEA exists. Satellite imagery exists. Intelligence exists.

Without the means to enrich, the uranium itself lacks value. Have a nuclear reactor is not the same thing.

 

[LouderVol]

It doesn’t have to be a matter of faith. The IAEA exists. Satellite imagery exists. Intelligence exists.

Without the means to enrich, the uranium itself lacks value. Have a nuclear reactor is not the same thing.

all of those things existed before, and were supposed to stop them from getting enriched above the needs for civilian use. its not like the 60% is just over civilian use. I have seen ~10% for civilian use. so those systems you tout had approx 50% fudge factor.

you believe Iran no longer has the capability to enrich uranium for that reactor? And we will not allow them to?

 

[lawgator1]

Like CNN is not touting a party line? They could care less about accurate reporting.

WRT Iran, to try and get them to see a better way forward? Just whacked them over the head proving they really cannot do anything about future actions of that nature.

And present the carrot. 'Your unfrozen assets are available if you drop the nuke effort or we can continue to drop bombs as needed.'

May not work. Iran's leadership has proven to be irrational at times.

You are just dead wrong and you are parroting the lies by Hegseth that CNN was misrepresenting the initial assessments and their interim nature. In reality, CNN reported, accurately, and REPEATEDLY, the limits of that intelligence.

I have no confidence you will watch this, but you owe it to yourself if you are interested in the truth and the misrepresentations of Hegseht yesterday, when he repeatedly lied when he said CNN's reporting was dishonest or inaccurate. In reality, they frequently made it clear what the limits were on that intelligence.

Watch this, from the 2:45 mark, and tell me if you don't see what an abject piece of shot liar Hegseth was about this:

 

[DaddyChad]

You are just dead wrong and you are parroting the lies by Hegseth that CNN was misrepresenting the initial assessments and their interim nature. In reality, CNN reported, accurately, and REPEATEDLY, the limits of that intelligence.

I have no confidence you will watch this, but you owe it to yourself if you are interested in the truth and the misrepresentations of Hegseht yesterday, when he repeatedly lied when he said CNN's reporting was dishonest or inaccurate. In reality, they frequently made it clear what the limits were on that intelligence.

Watch this, from the 2:45 mark, and tell me if you don't see what an abject piece of shot liar Hegseth was about this:

The mental gymnastics you go through on a daily basis must have your brain like Simone Biles.

Have you finally come around to the conclusion that Midnight Hammer worked?

 

[lawgator1]

This is why I have no respect for Hegseth and never will. He's a complete fraud. Lied over and over to make it look like CNN was somehow misrepresenting and "spinning."

Hegseth is a jerk. A know nothing party hack.

 

[lawgator1]

The mental gymnastics you go through on a daily basis must have your brain like Simone Biles.

Have you finally come around to the conclusion that Midnight Hammer worked?

Did you watch the video, from the 2:45 mark?

Until you promise you did so, there is no conversation to be had.

 

[KB5252]

You are just dead wrong and you are parroting the lies by Hegseth that CNN was misrepresenting the initial assessments and their interim nature. In reality, CNN reported, accurately, and REPEATEDLY, the limits of that intelligence.

I have no confidence you will watch this, but you owe it to yourself if you are interested in the truth and the misrepresentations of Hegseht yesterday, when he repeatedly lied when he said CNN's reporting was dishonest or inaccurate. In reality, they frequently made it clear what the limits were on that intelligence.

Watch this, from the 2:45 mark, and tell me if you don't see what an abject piece of shot liar Hegseth was about this:

I'm not defending Hegseth but I read an article on CNN I believe, yesterday. It stated that early Intel is limited and based on the basic Intel (facts) they had there was not enough to say that great damage had been done.

But based on the plan and execution they were confident heavy to extreme damage to the facilities targeted.

As more Intel became available there were more facts from Intel to say with more confidence it was a successful mission.

The third round of Intel coming from sources will be the best assessment of actual damage. That takes the longest for obvious reasons.

I think CNN was a victim of its outset from a confirmation bias situation. Knowing a significant portion of their audience would receive the news of a failed mission favorably they ran with the initial assessments with little intelligence.

 

[85SugarVol]

.

 

[85SugarVol]

I'm not defending Hegseth but I read an article on CNN I believe, yesterday. It stated that early Intel is limited and based on the basic Intel (facts) they had there was not enough to say that great damage had been done.

But based on the plan and execution they were confident heavy to extreme damage to the facilities targeted.

As more Intel became available there were more facts from Intel to day with more confidence it was a successful mission.

The third round of Intel coming from sources will be the best assessment of actual damage. That takes the longest for obvious reasons.

I think CNN was a victim of is outset from a confirmation bias situation. Knowing a significant portion of their audience would receive the news of a failed mission favorably they ran with the initial assessments with little intelligence.

Won’t even matter if CNN “corrects” the record with updated information later - folks like LG will only ever remember/parrot the initial headline.

IDF Missile Strike on Hospital Kills 500
-CNN

No one cared or remembered when they admitted they’d fkd that ^ up - the headline had served its purpose.

 

[volinbham]

This is why I have no respect for Hegseth and never will. He's a complete fraud. Lied over and over to make it look like CNN was somehow misrepresenting and "spinning."

Hegseth is a jerk. A know nothing party hack.

they were - the headline they went with and the facts the omitted were definitely misrepresenting. I don't approve of Hegseth's approach but he's correct

 

[Vol8188]

all of those things existed before, and were supposed to stop them from getting enriched above the needs for civilian use. its not like the 60% is just over civilian use. I have seen ~10% for civilian use. so those systems you tout had approx 50% fudge factor.

you believe Iran no longer has the capability to enrich uranium for that reactor? And we will not allow them to?

Yes, those things existed and we knew they went above 60%. Not sure what your point is

Yes. Israel wouldn’t have agreed to a ceasefire if they believed Iran still had the ability to enrich uranium.

Why would you believe otherwise

 

[LouderVol]

Yes, those things existed and we knew they went above 60%. Not sure what your point is

Yes. Israel wouldn’t have agreed to a ceasefire if they believed Iran still had the ability to enrich uranium.

Why would you believe otherwise

depending on your world view I see several reasons they would stop. this is not a single thought, but rather just multiple options, it could be one, multiple, or none of them.

1. they ran out of options to continue the attack. which is why they needed us in the first place. with no more weapons, or targets they could hurt, there was no reason to keep striking things to strike them.
2. It was never really about taking all of their capacity. it was about making a strike to be seen. a much more violent version of those Iranian strikes that hit dirt around our bases. definitely more real, but the intent was never complete destruction. Israel needs a boogey man just as much as any other government for fear mongering control.
3. continuing to attack would have completely destabilized Iran and the region, creating another ISIS. Israel wanted to avoid that.
4. continuing to attack could have drug in other combatants.
5. continuing to attack, especially over other nation's airspace, could have impacted their nominally good relations with those neighbors.
6. there was some other goal in mind, and the nukes were just justification and distraction. getting Iran to stop funding Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis would be a major win, regardless of nukes.
7. they just wanted us involved. once they had that, they didn't need any more. the US had been pulling away from their support of Israel. public opinion was tired of funding them forever. once we get involved and the dollars start rolling our politicians fall in line with support for Israel as it becomes their meal ticket. the renewed dollars offsets any issue of public opinion.
8. they realized their attacks weren't having the impact they wanted on the nuclear program in Iran. and this is just a pause/reevaluation.

 

[Vol8188]

depending on your world view I see several reasons they would stop. this is not a single thought, but rather just multiple options, it could be one, multiple, or none of them.

1. they ran out of options to continue the attack. which is why they needed us in the first place. with no more weapons, or targets they could hurt, there was no reason to keep striking things to strike them.
2. It was never really about taking all of their capacity. it was about making a strike to be seen. a much more violent version of those Iranian strikes that hit dirt around our bases. definitely more real, but the intent was never complete destruction. Israel needs a boogey man just as much as any other government for fear mongering control.
3. continuing to attack would have completely destabilized Iran and the region, creating another ISIS. Israel wanted to avoid that.
4. continuing to attack could have drug in other combatants.
5. continuing to attack, especially over other nation's airspace, could have impacted their nominally good relations with those neighbors.
6. there was some other goal in mind, and the nukes were just justification and distraction. getting Iran to stop funding Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis would be a major win, regardless of nukes.
7. they just wanted us involved. once they had that, they didn't need any more. the US had been pulling away from their support of Israel. public opinion was tired of funding them forever. once we get involved and the dollars start rolling our politicians fall in line with support for Israel as it becomes their meal ticket. the renewed dollars offsets any issue of public opinion.
8. they realized their attacks weren't having the impact they wanted on the nuclear program in Iran. and this is just a pause/reevaluation.

lol I’m not reading that. I’m done here.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[lawgator1]

I'm not defending Hegseth but I read an article on CNN I believe, yesterday. It stated that early Intel is limited and based on the basic Intel (facts) they had there was not enough to say that great damage had been done.

But based on the plan and execution they were confident heavy to extreme damage to the facilities targeted.

As more Intel became available there were more facts from Intel to say with more confidence it was a successful mission.

The third round of Intel coming from sources will be the best assessment of actual damage. That takes the longest for obvious reasons.

I think CNN was a victim of its outset from a confirmation bias situation. Knowing a significant portion of their audience would receive the news of a failed mission favorably they ran with the initial assessments with little intelligence.

That mixes terms in a misleading way. CNN did not report that the mission "failed."

The question was whether the nuclear program was "obliterated," as Trump had claimed. That initial report suggested that the effect was real, but not to that level.

The Trump administration has since then engaged in classic straw man argument, misrepresenting the CNN reporting as claiming the mission didn't work at all, or minimally, and then attacking that mischaracterization they conjured up.

Its just very frustrating because it all goes back to the fact that Trump created this problem by making such broad, absolute statements, well before the facts were known.

 

[Vol8188]

That mixes terms in a misleading way. CNN did not report that the mission "failed."

The question was whether the nuclear program was "obliterated," as Trump had claimed. That initial report suggested that the effect was real, but not to that level.

The Trump administration has since then engaged in classic straw man argument, misrepresenting the CNN reporting as claiming the mission didn't work at all, or minimally, and then attacking that mischaracterization they conjured up.

Its just very frustrating because it all goes back to the fact that Trump created this problem by making such broad, absolute statements, well before the facts were known.

If this report went in opposition to the statements of the left, would cnn have shared it?

“Preliminary studies suggest covid vaccine may not actually prevent infection”-think they wouldn’t shared that headline?

 

[lawgator1]

If this report went in opposition to the statements of the left, would cnn have shared it?

“Preliminary studies suggest covid vaccine may not actually prevent infection”-think they wouldn’t shared that headline?

CNN has reported the intelligence claims that it was very successful, as well as the political appointee claims that it was successful, as those statements were made.

Please watch that above-posted video. It is there for all to see that when Hegseth or the administration claims that CNN has in any way misrepresented things, that is just flatly and obviously wrong.

 

[KB5252]

That mixes terms in a misleading way. CNN did not report that the mission "failed."

The question was whether the nuclear program was "obliterated," as Trump had claimed. That initial report suggested that the effect was real, but not to that level.

The Trump administration has since then engaged in classic straw man argument, misrepresenting the CNN reporting as claiming the mission didn't work at all, or minimally, and then attacking that mischaracterization they conjured up.

Its just very frustrating because it all goes back to the fact that Trump created this problem by making such broad, absolute statements, well before the facts were known.

That was the implication, that the mission wasn't effective and set it back "only a few months"

Where assessments now are painting a clearer picture that seen to validate significant damage. with more info yet to come, we will see.

I agree with your last paragraph but that is expected with Trump.

 

[Vol8188]

CNN has reported the intelligence claims that it was very successful, as well as the political appointee claims that it was successful, as those statements were made.

Please watch that above-posted video. It is there for all to see that when Hegseth or the administration claims that CNN has in any way misrepresented things, that is just flatly and obviously wrong.

You missed the point. They wouldn’t report preliminary data from anonymous people if it helped Trump

 

[marcusluvsvols]

This is the only reasonable answer to the stupid question. If he said " No"...Iran would start immediately trying to build another underground site that Israel cant destroy without a ground invasion. Hell they probably will anyway. The best predictor for future behavior...is past behavior. These dumb mofos likely get their azz handed to them again by 2035.

 

[GroverCleveland]

You are just dead wrong and you are parroting the lies by Hegseth that CNN was misrepresenting the initial assessments and their interim nature. In reality, CNN reported, accurately, and REPEATEDLY, the limits of that intelligence.

I have no confidence you will watch this, but you owe it to yourself if you are interested in the truth and the misrepresentations of Hegseht yesterday, when he repeatedly lied when he said CNN's reporting was dishonest or inaccurate. In reality, they frequently made it clear what the limits were on that intelligence.

Watch this, from the 2:45 mark, and tell me if you don't see what an abject piece of shot liar Hegseth was about this:

I try to watch CNN from time-to-time. They are slightly better than MSNBC in terms of piss-poor, slanted "reporting." I'll watch it later, but I'll watch the whole thing, not some particular slice of it.

But I can categorically say this. Anyone who deigns to get the "truth" from American media is wasting their time.

 

[hndog609]

This is the only reasonable answer to the stupid question. If he said " No"...Iran would start immediately trying to build another underground site that Israel cant destroy without a ground invasion. Hell they probably will anyway. The best predictor for future behavior...is past behavior. These dumb mofos likely get their azz handed to them again by 2035.

I don't know how he could possibly not answer that way without undercutting the legitimacy of this last bombing. If the reason you did what you just did wouldn't be enough of a reason to do again under the same circumstances is not a great position from which to argue.

 

[lawgator1]

That was the implication, that the mission wasn't effective and set it back "only a few months"

Where assessments now are painting a clearer picture that seen to validate significant damage. with more info yet to come, we will see.

I agree with your last paragraph but that is expected with Trump.

Thats what was reported to CNN by their sources on the asessment. Is CNN supposed to not include that statement to them because its is contrary to the Trump narrative being pushed by the administration?

Starting to see why Trump loves Putin and why Trump supporters have intolerance for media which does not fall in line with what TrUmp wants to hear.

 

[Orangeburst]

Thats what was reported to CNN by their sources on the asessment. Is CNN supposed to not include that statement to them because its is contrary to the Trump narrative being pushed by the administration?

Starting to see why Trump loves Putin and why Trump supporters have intolerance for media which does not fall in line with what TrUmp wants to hear.

do you think the leaker should be prosecuted?

 

[Orangeburst]

Israel Vows To Maintain Air Superiority Over Iran

Israel's defense minister ordered the IDF to devise a plan to keep Iran from restoring its ballistic missile capabilities and furthering its nuclear program.

www.twz.com