Iran

[Zues1]

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.

 

[lawgator1]

do you think the leaker should be prosecuted?

First, I believe it was three sources.

Second, I dont know what the secrecy requirements were on them, if any.

But, I'm sure that the Trump loyalists are working on that issue right now. Cannot embarrass Dear Leader and everyone must agree with what he says.

 

[Orangeburst]

First, I believe it was three sources.

Second, I dont know what the secrecy requirements were on them, if any.

But, I'm sure that the Trump loyalists are working on that issue right now. Cannot embarrass Dear Leader and everyone must agree with what he says.

I saw Top Secret and how would one know it is 3 sources when they havent been identified?

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN in a statement: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

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

First...those beautiful F15s look amazing with Israels desert camo on top as always. They have always been my favorite jet as an USAF kid. They are most similar to an FI5E Strike Eagle with their air to ground and air to air capabilities ..but are designated differently because some of their eletronics are Israeli and not US spec. Amazing aircraft. The most capable F15s likely still in service. Amazing aircraft and so beautiful IMO.

Second...that article shows that Iran already has excavators and dozers at one of the nuclear sites trying to repair the access tunnel areas. The article also states that Israel will continue to hold air superiority over Iran for months and maybe years...so I expect that equipment to be destroyed soon if they attempt to open those tunnels and restart any work at those nuclear enrichment sites. I am honestly amazed that Iran even has equipment there...but they are stupid as Hell so not really surprised. Unless they have communicated with Israel that they are only trying to rescue people trapped underground or something and Israel has given them permission to dig them out? Which seems unlikely. Why trust them not to try and smuggle enriched Uranium out of there especially at night when satellite and aircraft images are less accurate? I would think israel would tell Iran that they are going to destroy any equipment and vehicles that go onsite...the 2 claims of ongoing Israel air dominance/airspace and equipment on those sites seem to be totally at odds with eachother??

 

[Orangeburst]

First...those beautiful F15s look amazing with Israels desert camo on top as always. They have always been my favorite jet as an USAF kid. They are most similar to an FI5E Strike Eagle with their air to ground and air to air capabilities ..but are designated differently because some of their eletronics are Israeli and not US spec. Amazing aircraft. The most capable F15s likely still in service. Amazing aircraft and so beautiful IMO.

Second...that article shows that Iran already has excavators and dozers at one of the nuclear sites trying to repair the access tunnel areas. The article also states that Israel will continue to hold air superiority over Iran for months and maybe years...so I expect that equipment to be destroyed soon if they attempt to open those tunnels and restart any work at those nuclear enrichment sites. I am honestly amazed that Iran even has equipment there...but they are stupid as Hell so not really surprised. Unless they have communicated with Israel that they are only trying to rescue people trapped underground or something and Israel has given them permission to dig them out? Which seems unlikely. Why trust them not to try and smuggle enriched Uranium out of there especially at night when satellite and aircraft images are less accurate? I would think israel would tell Iran that they are going to destroy any equipment and vehicles that go onsite...the 2 claims of ongoing Israel air dominance/airspace and equipment on those sites seem to be totally at odds with eachother??

Penetration or no penetration, can you imagine the shockwaves from 6-12 MOPs? If those centrifuges were still there, which I believe they were, then they are trashed. I would imagine we have had a GSO satellite beamed in on that location for long time.

 

[Vol8188]

First, I believe it was three sources.

Second, I dont know what the secrecy requirements were on them, if any.

But, I'm sure that the Trump loyalists are working on that issue right now. Cannot embarrass Dear Leader and everyone must agree with what he says.

There shouldn’t be leaks in general. Fire all 3.

 

[volbeast33]

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.

CNN deserves every bit of it. Good on Hegaeth!

 

[KB5252]

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.

I'm not a trump supporter and generally watch CNN for this coverage...... Find it better coverage, but was pretty obvious they were the only ones running with this story. Their sources told them what they wanted to hear, even the military and intelligence had disclosed they were waiting on assessments. Trump does what he does and claims victory.

CNN ran it, the reporter was the same one that ran the Biden Laptop cover. Makes you wonder who the sources are and if they are credible or just running political cover....... Or at least it should.

It appears that source was likely the latter, but we'll know more down the road. Did CNN run it because they trust the reporter? Or because they knew that story would run well? Again it makes you wonder. Now ask this doesn't make me trust CNN any less, it does make me question that reporter and their sources. Ask these networks have those issues.


I watched the CNN video, hadn't seen that one, so CNN ran a story with incomplete information to counter Trump because he said obliterated. Instead of saying the jury was still out they countered his narrative completely with just as much data as Trump had.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Using this rational, Japan won WW2.

So American troops are occupying Iran right now and demilitarizing them? Cause that's what happened to Japan after the surrendered unconditionally. Iran agreed a ceasefire. Trying to equate those two things is comical.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

if Trump wanted regime change in Iran there would be regime change.

How so? Regime change would require troops on the ground. You think Trump can do that unilaterally? You think congress and the American people have the appetite for another full scale ground war in the middle east? Cause that's the only way to accomplish regime change in Iran. You're not removing the Islamic Regime in Iran with just bombs from the air.

 

[just bob]

How so? Regime change would require troops on the ground. You think Trump can do that unilaterally? You think congress and the American people have the appetite for another full scale ground war in the middle east? Cause that's the only way to accomplish regime change in Iran. You're not removing the Islamic Regime in Iran with just bombs from the air.

You answered your own questions....

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

You answered your own questions....

His post seemed to imply that regime change would be easy. As if it was something Trump could order whenever he wants like those air strikes. When in reality the only way it happens is with a full on ground war and that would require not only a declaration of war from Congress but the American public backing it as well. Those things Trump can't just command at a whim.

 

[just bob]

His post seemed to imply that regime change would be easy. As if it was something Trump could order whenever he wants like those air strikes. When in reality the only way it happens is with a full on ground war and that would require not only a declaration of war from Congress but the American public backing it as well. Those things Trump can't just command at a whim.

Perhaps you should read his post again.

 

[jmacvols1]

How so? Regime change would require troops on the ground. You think Trump can do that unilaterally? You think congress and the American people have the appetite for another full scale ground war in the middle east? Cause that's the only way to accomplish regime change in Iran. You're not removing the Islamic Regime in Iran with just bombs from the air.

Trump said he was not attempting regime change in iran. Had Trump wanted regime change then he would have done what it takes to accomplish it. Trump accomplished his goal in Iran by dismantling its nuclear weapons capabilities. A loss for Iran and win for the world.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Perhaps you should read his post again.

I read it quite clearly the first time. He said "if Trump wanted regime change in Iran there would be regime change" as if it's an easy thing to do that Trump just chose not to. If regime change was as easy as air strikes Trump would've done it. The reality is regime change requires far more POLITICAL CAPITAL than Trump has right now.

The American public has no appetite for a ground war in Iran so no Trump couldn't have gotten regime change "if he wanted".

 

[just bob]

I read it quite clearly the first time. He said "if Trump wanted regime change in Iran there would be regime change" as if it's an easy thing to do that Trump just chose not to. If regime change was as easy as air strikes Trump would've done it. The reality is regime change requires far more POLITICAL CAPITAL than Trump has right now.

The American public has no appetite for a ground war in Iran so no Trump couldn't have gotten regime change "if he wanted".

Perhaps you should comprehend it like a normal person....

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Trump said he was not attempting regime change in iran. Had Trump wanted regime change then he would have done what it takes to accomplish it. Trump accomplished his goal in Iran by dismantling its nuclear weapons capabilities. A loss for Iran and win for the world.

Those were his statements after the ceasefire. This is what he was saying before the ceasefire. Trump hints at regime change in Iran amid questions over damage from U.S. strikes on nuclear sites

And no Trump couldn't have gotten regime change if he wanted because regime change requires troops on the ground in Iran which is something the American public has no appetite for.

 

[Vol8188]

His post seemed to imply that regime change would be easy. As if it was something Trump could order whenever he wants like those air strikes. When in reality the only way it happens is with a full on ground war and that would require not only a declaration of war from Congress but the American public backing it as well. Those things Trump can't just command at a whim.

No it wouldn’t. The same way we killed their general, the same can be done with the rest. That doesn’t mean war.

These false claims from isolationist that the only thing you can ever do is cower or go to war, are a complete joke.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Perhaps you should comprehend it like a normal person....

What is abnormal about my comprehension? He said "if Trump wanted regime change there would be regime change" as if that choice was in Trump's control. You agree with me that regime change only happens if we invade Iran with troops on the ground. Such a choice would require a declaration of war from Congress and the support of the American public. Neither of those things are in Trump's control.

My comprehension was just fine. It's you guys that are pretending like regime change in Iran was something Trump could accomplish unilaterally whenever he wants.

 

[just bob]

What is abnormal about my comprehension? He said "if Trump wanted regime change there would be regime change" as if that choice was in Trump's control. You agree with me that regime change only happens if we invade Iran with troops on the ground. Such a choice would require a declaration of war from Congress and the support of the American public. Neither of those things are in Trump's control.

My comprehension was just fine. It's you guys that are pretending like regime change in Iran was something Trump could accomplish unilaterally whenever he wants.

Is it "If"? Is that the issue?

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

No it wouldn’t. The same way we killed their general, the same can be done with the rest. That doesn’t mean war.

These false claims from isolationist that the only thing you can ever do is cower or go to war, are a complete joke.

You do know they can replace the leadership right? If someone were to bomb the capital during the State of the Union (which is a plot to a TV show btw) and kill almost all of our leaders would the United States as we know it cease to exist? Would a non-democratic government take over?

Regime change has nothing to do with killing the current leadership. It's about changing the entire ideology of the government. Because if Iran stays a religious theocracy with a different group of Ayatollahs, what have you really accomplished?

To fully remove the Islamic regime in Iran you would need to militarily support the opposing regime. That means troops on the ground supporting them and fighting back against the Islamic regime loyalists. Unless the Iranian people remove the Ayatollahs themselves, it'll take a ground war from United States to change regimes.

 

[Dobbs 4 Heisman]

Is it "If"? Is that the issue?

No. The issue is thinking it's in Trump's control at all. As if he could decide whether or not there would be regime change. Regime change would require our entire nation to be on board cause it would involve another Iraq War type of commitment. Something no President can do unilaterally whenever he wants.

 

[Vol8188]

You do know they can replace the leadership right? If someone were to bomb the capital during the State of the Union (which is a plot to a TV show btw) and kill almost all of our leaders would the United States as we know it cease to exist? Would a non-democratic government take over?

Regime change has nothing to do with killing the current leadership. It's about changing the entire ideology of the government. Because if Iran stays a religious theocracy with a different group of Ayatollahs, what have you really accomplished?

To fully remove the Islamic regime in Iran you would need to militarily support the opposing regime. That means troops on the ground supporting them and fighting back against the Islamic regime loyalists. Unless the Iranian people remove the Ayatollahs themselves, it'll take a ground war from United States to change regimes.

You kill the leader until the new leader reflects the proper policies. The idea that it has to be someone completely new is a joke. Vance and Trump aren’t 100% the same. Biden and Harris weren’t either.

The idea that everyone in that chain of command from the top to the bottom are fully committed to the same policies is a joke

 

[jmacvols1]

Those were his statements after the ceasefire. This is what he was saying before the ceasefire. Trump hints at regime change in Iran amid questions over damage from U.S. strikes on nuclear sites

And no Trump couldn't have gotten regime change if he wanted because regime change requires troops on the ground in Iran which is something the American public has no appetite for.

Trump knew where the Ayatollah was hiding and could have bombed him, killed him if Trump wanted regime change. Regime change could have made things worse in Iran, cause chaos. Trump's goal was to destroy iran's nuclear weapons capabilities.

 

[Smokey123]

How so? Regime change would require troops on the ground. You think Trump can do that unilaterally? You think congress and the American people have the appetite for another full scale ground war in the middle east? Cause that's the only way to accomplish regime change in Iran. You're not removing the Islamic Regime in Iran with just bombs from the air.

What troops got used in 1953?