On Iran, Trump Made the Only Decision Possible

[rangerrebew]

On Iran, Trump Made the Only Decision Possible
Bombing Iran was the correct choice: regime change is not.
by Gary Anderson
June 23, 2025, 10:06 PM
 
Over the last decade, I made three assumptions about the Israel–Iran situation. Two of them were right and the third was wrong. What I got right was that (1) Iran would never voluntarily give up its quest for nuclear weapons and (2) when Israel believed that Tehran was close to getting the bomb, it would strike. You can do two things regarding Israel. You can threaten to incinerate Israel, and you can have a nuclear weapon. You cannot do both simultaneously; the Israelis have a 100 percent track record in that regard.

The assumption I got wrong was that Israel had a penetrating weapon capable of taking out the centrifuges. I think our intelligence agencies thought so, too. Thus, the Israelis crossed the Rubicon with their strikes and took us with them because only we have the appropriate bunker busters. (RELATED: MOPping Up Iran)

President Trump did the right thing.

He knew that if the critical centrifuges were not destroyed — and I hope they were — that Iran would double down on its bomb making efforts. He tried negotiations, although he probably knew they would not work, but for world and domestic opinion, he tried and was rebuffed. His two-week ultimatum was obviously misdirection to lull the Iranians into a false sense of security.
The question now is, where do we go from here? The administration says that it is a one-time, limited strike, but warns that if Tehran retaliates, there will be further action. The Iranians almost certainly will. Revenge is a given in that part of the world.

https://spectator.org/on-iran-trump-made-the-only-decision-possible/

[rangerrebew]

So why did democrats try to impeach him - AGAIN?

[Bigun]

On Iran, Trump Made the Only Decision Possible
Bombing Iran was the correct choice: regime change is not.
by Gary Anderson
June 23, 2025, 10:06 PM
 
Over the last decade, I made three assumptions about the Israel–Iran situation. Two of them were right and the third was wrong. What I got right was that (1) Iran would never voluntarily give up its quest for nuclear weapons and (2) when Israel believed that Tehran was close to getting the bomb, it would strike. You can do two things regarding Israel. You can threaten to incinerate Israel, and you can have a nuclear weapon. You cannot do both simultaneously; the Israelis have a 100 percent track record in that regard.

The assumption I got wrong was that Israel had a penetrating weapon capable of taking out the centrifuges. I think our intelligence agencies thought so, too. Thus, the Israelis crossed the Rubicon with their strikes and took us with them because only we have the appropriate bunker busters. (RELATED: MOPping Up Iran)

President Trump did the right thing.

He knew that if the critical centrifuges were not destroyed — and I hope they were — that Iran would double down on its bomb making efforts. He tried negotiations, although he probably knew they would not work, but for world and domestic opinion, he tried and was rebuffed. His two-week ultimatum was obviously misdirection to lull the Iranians into a false sense of security.
The question now is, where do we go from here? The administration says that it is a one-time, limited strike, but warns that if Tehran retaliates, there will be further action. The Iranians almost certainly will. Revenge is a given in that part of the world.

https://spectator.org/on-iran-trump-made-the-only-decision-possible/

BS! 100% USDA choice grade!

[cato potatoe]

Maybe, after Netanyahu painted him into a corner.  The long-planned Israeli sneak attack was not the only decision they could have made.  Inserting a poison pill demand midway through our negotiation was not the only decision we could have made.  If conservatives are going to try and push lies about how this started, it's going to age as well as the justification for Iraq.  We do not control the flow of information.

[berdie]

Maybe, after Netanyahu painted him into a corner.  The long-planned Israeli sneak attack was not the only decision they could have made.  Inserting a poison pill demand midway through our negotiation was not the only decision we could have made.  If conservatives are going to try and push lies about how this started, it's going to age as well as the justification for Iraq.  We do not control the flow of information.

I doubt Netanyahu "painted him into a corner". After all, we are usually the ones telling him to pull back. DJT gave Iran specific time parameters. They chose to ignore him. If any "painting" was done...it was done by Iran.

[roamer_1]

I doubt Netanyahu "painted him into a corner". After all, we are usually the ones telling him to pull back. DJT gave Iran specific time parameters. They chose to ignore him. If any "painting" was done...it was done by Iran.

Yep. It was the right thing to do. But if Israel don't cut the head off...

[Smokin Joe]

The only reason to enrich large quantities of Uranium past the 3-5% needed for nuclear reactors is to build weapons.

Iran had reached 60%. The Hiroshima bomb was 80%. Note: 90% is considered "weapons grade" for modern, missile launched weapons. Iran was also working with Heavy water: deuterium, which makes that water "heavy" is used in the making of Hydrogen Bombs.

They were known to be well within range of having the materials to build not one, but numerous atomic weapons.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

This buys time, but until there is a change in the management in Iran, it is a stopgap, not a cure.