US Attacks Iran

Astyanax · 2025-06-22T00:44:35+00:00

So much for 2 weeks. Looks like he’s done mullah-ing it over about the mullahs in Iran. https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/21/politics/trump-iran-air-strikes POTUS will address the nation at 10 PM. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-address-nation-after-attacking-iran-nuclear-sites-2088874

CrashMan

I find it astonishing that anyone would find it controversial of Iran spreading terror and thru its proxies and publicly stating Death to America as an official line. Whatever.

CrashMan

px_eliezer_ For the DIA to say anything that’s not fully in sync with the administration

For the record these claims are still unsourced. That is a fact and not an opinion. Unsourced claims cannot be verified.

egeezer

@“CrashMan”#p43578
According to the WH press secretary, the report was Top Secret and leaked by a low level DIA employee.

The messaging by the Tulsi Gabbard DNI director, pontificated thusly;

The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamanei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003. The IC is closely monitoring if Tehran decides to reauthorize its nuclear weapons program. In the past year, we have seen an erosion of a decades-long taboo in Iran on discussing nuclear weapons in public, likely emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran’s decision-making apparatus. Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/congressional-testimonies/congressional-testimonies-2025/4059-ata-opening-statement-as-prepared

So we are left with these assessments from administration officials and Intel;
Iran was days away from nukes
Iran was months or years from nukes
Iran was not building nukes
Their Nuke capability was destroyed
Their Nuke capability was not destroyed

I think a phrase used recently applies to this situation;

They don’t know what the F&$# they’re doing.

CrashMan

px_eliezer_ It would be admission that their entire existence was a mistake

Another reason is it would loosen their grip of control on the Iran populace.

CrashMan

egeezer According to the WH press secretary, the report was Top Secret and leaked by a low level DIA employee.

See this is why something “leaked” by an anonymous source cannot be trusted. What state of review or completion was the report in? What was any context or caveats in the report? Selective leaks are untrustworthy. The motive of a leaker is unknown.

CrashMan

digitalfutur Iran would be in a much better, and stronger position, if it renounced its official policy (with internal action to implement), calling for the destruction of Israel. As long as that does not happen, military attacks on its nuclear program (people and/or infrastructure) will continue, as they should.

Iran has to renounce a lot more than its policy towards Israel to become taken seriously in the world. A good start would be free and open elections and changing its legal system away from sharia. Iran should continue to be isolated until things change.

One good thing that current events may help is influencing more countries in the region to join the Abraham accords. It’s been reported that the possibility of more countries coming online with that influenced the invasion and attack on Israel to muddy those waters. Now that Iran’s puppets are wrecked the path may be open.

egeezer

CrashMan What state of review or completion was the report in? What was any context or caveats in the report? Selective_leaks are untrustworthy.

Which is why the press briefing statements made to the public are no more trustworthy than the leaked report. We are only getting what they want us to believe.

Thane_Bitter

CrashMan Sharia, is there favourite toy, they will not put it down, they will not stop playing with it, and they certainly will not allow someone to take it away from them, nor will it stop them from forcing others to play with it. At least some Iranians are open about their dislike of their government, which means there is a slight chance that the current order of rule could change but that yoke of religious dominance will remain though perhaps with a bit of a cushion.

Compare the UN declaration of human rights and freedoms to the bastardized “Cairo version” which the Islamic nations prefer and want. The difference is day vs an endless night of hell. Rights and freedoms when filtered through the supremacy of their god is indentured servitude or outright death for those that don’t accept the same beliefs.

UDHR: (hosted on Wikisource) - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights
Cairo Declaration (Copy hosted by the University of Minnesota) - http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/cairodeclaration.html

Astyanax

CrashMan I find it astonishing that anyone would find it controversial of Iran spreading terror and thru its proxies and publicly stating Death to America as an official line. Whatever.

Not really in this crowd when between the USA, Israel, and Iran one chooses Iran as the least evil of the three.

Astyanax

egeezer So we are left with these assessments from administration officials and Intel;
Iran was days away from nukes
Iran was months or years from nukes
Iran was not building nukes
Their Nuke capability was destroyed
Their Nuke capability was not destroyed

I think a phrase used recently applies to this situation;
They don’t know what the F&$# they’re doing.

So much for the accusation the POTUS surrounds himself with sycophants.

Dks01

px_eliezer_ It would mean an existential crisis based in their theology equal to that of Israel and Zionism.

Somewhat-Reticent

Somewhat-Reticent
InternetJeff the allies fought for freedom and ~~not~~ Imperialism

Delude self not, despite Marketing.

Astyanax You’re welcome.
( Pity your quoted quote apparently failed to show my strikethrough formatting. )

I suppose I should note the Allies included ‘former’ colonies, which likely contributed to a more sophisticated colonial management style.
The Axis approach seems rather crude in comparison.

GrumpyCanadian

Astyanax Don’t lump me in with that “crowd”; I wouldn’t agree with that assessment. My belief is that we — both individually and collectively as nations and alliances — are each “evil” in our own way, at different times and to varying degrees. Furthermore, I don’t think anyone has any factual basis upon which to refute that claim/accusation.

Astyanax

Somewhat-Reticent ( Pity your quoted quote apparently failed to show my strikethrough formatting. )

We all saw what you said and didn’t find it necessary to reformat it. This site should have carried it over though.

Somewhat-Reticent I suppose I should note the Allies included ‘former’ colonies, which likely contributed to a more sophisticated colonial management style.

I fail to see how Japan became some sort of American “colony” and was taken over for the sole purpose of conquest to exploit it of its resources especially after attacking us first unprovoked.

The whole point of our involvement in World War II was to stop raging imperialism going on around the world at the time.

It’s pathetic this has to be explained to grown adults.

takeahike

digitalfutur Iran would be in a much better, and stronger position, if it renounced its official policy (with internal action to implement), calling for the destruction of Israel.

px_eliezer_ The current leaders (or even their henchmen) will never do that, not in a million years. It would be admission that their entire existence was a mistake.

Astyanax

GrumpyCanadian Don’t lump me in with that “crowd”

How could you think such a thing? 😉

GrumpyCanadian I wouldn’t agree with that assessment. My belief is that we — both individually and collectively as nations and alliances — are each “evil” in our own way, at different times and to varying degrees. Furthermore, I don’t think anyone has any factual basis upon which to refute that claim/accusation.

That’s just giving Iran a backhanded moral equivalence of “everyone’s bad” and Israel and the USA are no better. That assessment doesn’t hold water either.

Try holding that “No Kings” nationwide protest in Iran but call it “No Ayatollahs” instead and see if the protesters are treated the same.

Somewhat-Reticent

Astyanax I fail to see … this has to be explained …

Indeed. As noted, “more sophisticated”. 😉

InternetJeff

As all this applesauce is being spread around, I saw an amazing news clip yesterday. I have not been able to find a copy of it online yet, but its mere description should be amazing.

The clip was a side-by-side comparison of a CNN talking head who had insinuated some time before Operation Midnight Hammer (in the left video pane first) that Iran was reportedly “years” from a nuke. The implication is was that there was no basis to degrade their capability yet.

Then in the video clip on the right, after Operation Midnight Hammer, the video plays where it is now suggesting that Iran can now recover and produce a nuke in mere “months”. The implication is that our military action was ineffective… or something.

Hilarious.

telcodad

InternetJeff CNN talking head who had insinuated some time before Operation Midnight Hammer (in the left video pane first) that Iran was reportedly “years” from a nuke. The implication is was that there was no basis to degrade their capability yet.

InternetJeff it is now suggesting that Iran can now recover and produce a nuke in mere “months”.

Well, obviously, the operation cleared out a lot of old equipment, making room for newer, faster, nuke-making equipment to be installed now. 😉

Somewhat-Reticent

telcodad Well, obviously, the operation cleared out a lot of old …

… bombs before the “Use By or Dispose of” date? (And motivated relocation…)

« Previous Page Next Page »