General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat we should be hearing today in the news...everywhere:
1) Assessments of the Iran bombing show there was no fallout, which means the mission was a failure.
2) Why did it fail? In all probability, a Russian mole in Trump's organization gave an eye wink to Russia, and Russia told Iran to move the missiles before the strike. And who was Trump's intelligence director? Tulsi Gabbard. A known Russian sympathizer. Poor Trump has to learn the hard way. Here he was thinking that she would be an asset for him with Putin, and in the end, he couldn't trust her judgement because, well, when she said that Iran was not a direct threat to the USA, was it because it was true? Or because she was protecting Russia's best interest? What a quandary he created for himself.
3) Oil prices are due to go up because Iran retaliated by shutting down the Strait of Hormuz.
In the end, Trump just did a pile on of his shit-show.

sop
(14,955 posts)spanone
(139,503 posts)
stillcool
(34,370 posts)last night I saw something about over a thousand dead. Guess I haven't looked hard enough?
malaise
(285,959 posts)That is what we should be heRing
cachukis
(3,298 posts)blowback with the release of radiation?
Maybe someone in Pentagon was forward thinking. The goods, it seems, were removed.
Is there something else at play?
We had a clear flight in. The Israelis had cleared the way. The Iranis, after listening to the bragadaccio had to anticipate.
Could our intelligence be now so lame as to not inform trump?
Did he go in to upstage the Israelis?
Did he go to thumb his nose at Putin, whose economy is heavily in debt?
I am trying to read clues from sidelines.
Baitball Blogger
(50,318 posts)The way Fox News covered the Israelis strategic bombings in Iran.
cachukis
(3,298 posts)become?
Baitball Blogger
(50,318 posts)Success to playing an illusion of a tough guy.
Grins
(8,542 posts)As soon as the orange clinical narcissist and Grand Master of the Art of the Deal said he would decide in two weeks - move yer ass!
I also wouldnt put it past him and MANY in his mid-administration that he would have told Putin in advance - it wouldnt have been the first time!
PJMcK
(23,869 posts)Putin (and others) now have informants in many important levels of our government. Trump has destroyed our national security system. This is why our former allies cannot trust the U.S. anymore. Trump's government cannot keep any secrets.
louis-t
(24,396 posts)that he says is failing and about to go bankrupt but his buddy is going to lower gas prices and save his business.....
NNadir
(36,112 posts)The bombing was a failure simply because it should not have been carried out.
There is a significant chemical risk with bombing an enrichment plant because uranium hexafluoride is extremely corrosive and toxic.
Iran has a right to enrich fuel.
JT45242
(3,448 posts)It's probably easier to list who isn't an asset or at least compromised by Putin in the administration or rethugs in Congress
SCantiGOP
(14,513 posts)Iran has not, and probably cannot, shut down the Strait of Iran.
Bernardo de La Paz
(56,800 posts)Iran got tipped off or was very prudent. Perhaps they were listening in on Kegsbreath's Signal chat. Or Gabbard let buddy Putin know.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,985 posts)by YOUR account, not only does Iran have nuclear weapons, but they have full-on MISSILES.
Which is SO WEIRD, since I see many posts on DU claiming that Iran doesn't have a bomb, let alone a missile, and its uranium enriching is for purely chemistry experimentation.
I am SO confused. I have been assured that Iran barely has a book of matches. Now you're telling me they have nuclear-tipped missiles?
And you're SO SURE of this that you think all news outlets should be informing us of this?
I'm working today, so have a couple of tokes for me, OK?
Baitball Blogger
(50,318 posts)If there was no sign of radiation, then it meant he failed or ... maybe Iran doesn't have any radioactive material and it's all a bluff?
Either way, the attack was Trump's folly.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,985 posts)Nuclear-tipped MISSILES. You said so.
Baitball Blogger
(50,318 posts)I never said nuclear-tipped missiles, though I can see why you made that assumption.
Trump attacked Iran because he believed that Iran was close to having a nuclear bomb. His words exactly:
"I dont care what she said, Trump told reporters. In his view, Iran was very close to having a nuclear bomb.
Trumps statement aligned him with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has described a nuclear-armed Iran as an imminent threat, rather than with his own top intelligence adviser. Trump was expected to meet with national security officials in the Situation Room on Tuesday as he plans next steps."
I think most people would agree that the fear is that Iran would deliver that "nuclear bomb" through missiles, once they put it all together. Though there is no indication that they were in the process of doing it. It's just a fear. And that's what Trump used to attack, despite going against the intelligence.
However, there is no question that what Iran does have is the uranium needed to make a nuclear weapon. And if Trump had succeeded in his claims of destroying the facilities and the supplies, there should have been evidence of radiation. But there was none.