Trump bombs Iran

[DigitalDrifter]

This will make the deportation issue more important in terms of keeping smuggling terrorists out.

As it should.

 

[percysunshine]

Well that was quick.

Bbbbut but but...he said two weeks. That's not fair.

 

[shockedcanadian]

John Bolton is having an orgasm.

Naw, more like blue balls. Here is a quote from him in which he stressed the that time is short to attack Iran...from 2015!

The Reckless Man's Case for Bombing Iran

Reading John Bolton's dangerously casual argument for yet another war in the Middle East

www.theatlantic.com

Which brings me to John Bolton’s Thursday New York Times op-ed, “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” Bolton was both a booster, and a minor architect, of the war in Iraq. As George W. Bush’s undersecretary of state in late 2002, he told the BBC that, “We are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass destruction and production facilities in Iraq.” He added that, “the Iraqi people would be unique in history if they didn’t welcome the overthrow of this dictatorial regime,” and that although building a democracy would prove a “difficult task,” the people of Iraq “are fully competent to do it.” So competent, in fact, that “the American role [in post-war Iraq] actually will be fairly minimal.”

...........................

In the section of his op-ed in which he calls for war, Bolton writes:

The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel’s 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required. Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed.
Rendering inoperable the Natanz and Fordow uranium-enrichment installations and the Arak heavy-water production facility and reactor would be priorities. So, too, would be the little-noticed but critical uranium-conversion facility at Isfahan. An attack need not destroy all of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, but by breaking key links in the nuclear-fuel cycle, it could set back its program by three to five years. The United States could do a thorough job of destruction, but Israel alone can do what’s necessary. Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran’s opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

 

[westwall]

Oh no....They declared bio-war with COVID....Time to start bombing the **** out of them right now.

I agree, but war with China is a loser.

 

[theHawk]

This is very much far different, and you know it.

President Trump ran on never allowing Iran to get a nuke.

If you don’t like that, you should had voted for Kamala who would definitely allow them to have one. She probably would had delivered more free pallets of billions of US dollars in cash to help make it happen.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Let's see which MAGAs go toxic.

 

[TimFitz]

Iran strike like Hiroshima, Trump says as NATO chief calls him 'daddy'

RECAP: Trump compared the Iran strikes to the two nuclear bombs dropped on Japan at the end of WWII, claiming his strikes also ended a war by pushing Iran to the negotiating table.

www.dailymail.co.uk

We will see where this leads.

I don’t think there was really ever any doubt Trump would this.

Netenyahu had wanted for over the past twenty years to bomb Iran and all he needed was the consent of the US.

All previous US presidents said no.

He found the perfect idiot in Trump to say yes.

Not only did he say yes, but decided to join in this attack.

A dumb move that may change everything in the Middle East.

We will see.

The fool went and did it.

Netanyahu succeeded in drawing him into their shooting war.

The consequences are innumerable, and none of the m are even slightly promising.

Expect a new outburst of anti American terrorism.

Oil prices will spike, especially if Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz.

And, thank to theman with no plan, we will be dragged into the disgrace that is the Israeli ehtnic clensing in Gaza.

 

[Darkwind]

So imagine a U.S. President who says, "I'm gonna give these bastards two weeks to decide that they are going to STOP enriching uranium, and give up their pursuit of a nuclear weapon."

Then that bastards in question say, emphatically, "We will NEVER agree to those things!"

Well, the "two weeks" is no longer relevant. The President has his answer.

Nobody knows how this will play out. I think we Americans have been lulled into the presumption that Iran or its proxies cannot actually harm us, which is foolish and incorrect.

I think Iran will attack a Viking cruise ship, killing a couple hundred old, white, Americans. What a crushing blow that would be.

In fact, Iran has always had the ability to harm us because we have done a terrible job of closing our borders for the past 30+ years.

The media has reported on this issue, but they usually bury the story in a 10-second slot during the 11pm news. This lets them claim, “But we did air it,” while barely informing the public.

Over the past four years, who knows how many Iranians have crossed our border? I can tell you the number isn’t zero.

If they manage to do that with a nuclear weapon…

We cannot allow Iran to possess a weapon of mass destruction, especially a nuclear one.

That is the only reason I would support limited action. I believed that Trump knew Israel could win a war with Iran easily, and that supporting from the sidelines was the best strategy. I was wrong about that one.

Now we’ll see what happens, but I object to any further involvement. Boots on the ground are absolutely out of the question.

We cannot afford another war. We are completely broke.

 

[TimFitz]

President Trump ran on never allowing Iran to get a nuke.

If you don’t like that, you should had voted for Kamala who would definitely allow them to have one. She probably would had delivered more free pallets of billions of US dollars in cash to help make it happen.

There is no question whatsoever that Iran will get the bomb.

 

[theHawk]

What is that?

 

[pknopp]

Is it possible to ever elect someone who is not a psychopath?

 

[MarathonMike]

Also you don’t get to bomb a country just because they won’t “behave”.

We can bomb any country we want. Fortunately, we use that option only when it serves our interests, our allies and the rest of the world.

 

[The Duke]

 

[Blaster]

I agree, but war with China is a loser.

We are in a trade war with China.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The Irans mullahs could have surrendered.

 

[The Duke]

Trump will address the nation at 10.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Please be aware that may be an AI generated image.

 

[el midgetron]

Just another thing the Democrats did, that Trump is undoing.

 

[Polishprince]

Thanks for making us all less safe, Donny.

How does a nuke-free Iran make America "less safe"?

Not only is this one less thing for America to worry about, it sends a message to other bad actors like North Korea that misbehavior will not be tolerated.