The Iran Nuclear Program thread
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
So…another historic thread will start to wind down…
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
Hopefully.
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
But I'm very, very interested in the future behavior of the mullahs. If it doesn't squelch the proxies the job is not done yet.
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
They'll turn inwards on their own population to prevent any progressive reform in Iran
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
Yeah, it’s a bit optimistic but still a pretty clear eyed look at where things are.
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by Mik
If you'll recall, this was exactly my objection to our involvement - possible failure to destroy Fordow.
Now, it is absolutely true that some powers will try very hard to portray that as true, whether it is or not. Finding the truth might be difficult, but we'll be keeping an eye on the sites.
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
In all likelihood it’s somewhere in between. What do they mean by months? 3? Or 120?
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
6 said the report.
While the question of who/what to believe is ever present, before the Defense Intelligence Agency report was leaked congressmen were already publicly complaining that the Administration canceled a planned briefing.
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
I thought they were years away from a bomb, according to Tulsi?
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
Trump has spent the last couple of hours making multiple posts how the bombs obliterated everything.... which probably means they didn't... sigh...
-
wrote 22 days ago last edited by
Our problem is no believable source.
-
wrote 21 days ago last edited by
Iranian government have arrested 700 people to suppress dissent.
-
wrote 21 days ago last edited by
@Mik said in The Iran Nuclear Program thread:
Our problem is no believable source.
Do you miss the day when Obama announced "we got Bin Laden" on TV and the world just believed him?
-
wrote 21 days ago last edited by
@Mik said in The Iran Nuclear Program thread:
Our problem is no believable source.
That's the problem, we don't have a clue who's telling the truth. Or even if anyone knows what the truth is. Every news station trots out their retired 3 or 4 star general (I don't even listen to colonels) or atomic energy PhD and no two has the same opinion about anything.
I am somewhat partial to Rebecca Grant PhD over at Fox, though. She gets all excited and squeaky when she's talking about Tomahawk missiles being fired off.
-
@Mik said in The Iran Nuclear Program thread:
Our problem is no believable source.
That's the problem, we don't have a clue who's telling the truth. Or even if anyone knows what the truth is. Every news station trots out their retired 3 or 4 star general (I don't even listen to colonels) or atomic energy PhD and no two has the same opinion about anything.
I am somewhat partial to Rebecca Grant PhD over at Fox, though. She gets all excited and squeaky when she's talking about Tomahawk missiles being fired off.
wrote 21 days ago last edited by@Tom-K said in The Iran Nuclear Program thread:
She gets all excited and squeaky when she's talking about Tomahawk missiles being fired off.
Now we finally get to learn what the dash means in your name! "AHAW"
-
wrote 21 days ago last edited by
Well, missiles are rather phallic.
-
wrote 21 days ago last edited by