Trump: evacuate Tehran

[trixare4kids]

How are you ever going to survive Trump until January 2029?
I find it amusing there are millions and millions of disgruntled voters who must live with the idea such a politician was elected by the majority of the voters and is now the most important leader of the entire world.
Talk about giving the Opposition the middle finger for four years.

They won't. They'll mock those whose side BEAT them and call it a win.
The rest of us, will of course laugh at the desperation and their cheap fake for a win.

 

[jaypatriot]

Only 1312 more days left for the entitled butthurts who lost the election.
What I want to know is when do they get started looking inward at their own failure to communicate an intelligent message the voters will buy?

I hope they never get to that point.
The only message they have to their people is:
TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!
Along with finding ways to demean everything he does regardless if it is good for the country.
What a miserable existence.

 

[trixare4kids]

I hope they never get to that point.
The only message they have to their people is:
TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!
Along with finding ways to demean everything he does regardless if it is good for the country.
What a miserable existence.

Crybabies can't accept they lost and still feel entitled to thinking they should have it their way.
In what world do they live?

 

[ElChupacabra]

If Trump is inflaming the fears of Iran and the Mullahs, then he is motivating them to avoid having their entire infrastructure and theocratic system destroyed.
That seems pretty smart to me. Who wants to see their entire region destroyed by Israel and America.
But I don't expect you to agree with me because that would mean you are supporting Trump's strategy.

Or because that's just a monumentally stupid idea. How well has US intervention worked in the Middle East?

 

[jaypatriot]

Or because that's just a monumentally stupid idea. How well has US intervention worked in the Middle East?

I hope I have the chance to show you that you were wrong.
Better for Israel, America , the Middle East, and the World.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

Really? Is he preannouncing a nuclear attack or just yapping on Truth Social. In either case how totally irresponsible of him.

Yeah, I don't like this and what it portends. And the last thing I want is for the US to be involved in it.

And it's starting to feel more and more like a long shot. What I hope he means is there's intel that it's gonna get bad there and he's just telling people get out. It's not us, but what's not us really?

I'm an old hippie. I am no fan of war.

 

[ElChupacabra]

I hope I have the chance to show you that you were wrong.
Better for Israel, America , the Middle East, and the World.

Can you point to a US Middle East military endeavor that's yielded that result?

 

[jaypatriot]

Can you point to a US Middle East military endeavor that's yielded that result?

Yes. Israel as a shining example of how a country can grow out of a desert and be the most influential and technologically advanced country in the Middle East.
Hopefully, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the UAE will see the benefits of partnering with such a successful nation once Iran is no longer the center of terrorist threats in the region.

 

[jaypatriot]

Yeah, I don't like this and what it portends. And the last thing I want is for the US to be involved in it.

And it's starting to feel more and more like a long shot. What I hope he means is there's intel that it's gonna get bad there and he's just telling people get out. It's not us, but what's not us really?

I'm an old hippie. I am no fan of war.

Let's hope you end up being a fan of successful geopolitics.

 

[reflechissez]

I don't think she realizes that the B-2 is one of the most sensitive and highly guarded platforms in our arsenal and nobody - not even our closest allies - has access to it. There are quite literally only a handful of them in existence. Foreign military are not even allowed inside the cockpit.

Yet she's always so certain about her unsubstantiated "knowledge."

 

[ElChupacabra]

Yes. Israel as a shining example of how a country can grow out of a desert and be the most influential and technologically advanced country in the Middle East.
Hopefully, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the UAE will see the benefits of partnering with such a successful nation once Iran is no longer the center of terrorist threats in the region.

None of those were the products of US military action, so I'll assume you have no examples.

 

[trixare4kids]

I'm an old hippie. I am no fan of war.

You and me both, brother.

Trump has been saying for almost ten years, Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. He's like us, an old hippie rooting for world peace. It is a true blessing to know most of the country agree with Trump on this issue.

Another reason I voted for Trump. I was a former Democrat as was he, and what kind of peace-loving Democrat with any common sense would be rooting for Iran having a nuclear weapon and be adamantly against Trump for trying to end this madness? Trump has given them a fair warning. More than a fair warning. It's up to them now as to what they want to do. I suggest they choose peace.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

Let's hope you end up being a fan of successful geopolitics.

Well I'm following on and there are some interesting doors from this point. There are some deals that may involve a regime change etc. So yeah hopefully we see something positive but man the stakes are high. This is a thing we've been anticipating for for a long time.

 

[ElChupacabra]

You and me both, brother.

Trump has been saying for almost ten years, Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. He's like us, an old hippie rooting for world peace. It is a true blessing to know most of the country agree with Trump on this issue.

Actually he isn't, since he's sending forces to the Middle East to engage in a conflict that another nation started despite his own intel chief stating they do not have nuclear weapons and are not close to obtaining them.

Another reason I voted for Trump. I was a former Democrat as was he, and what kind of peace-loving Democrat with any common sense would be rooting for Iran having a nuclear weapon and be adamantly against Trump for trying to end this madness? Trump has given them a fair warning. More than a fair warning. It's up to them now as to what they want to do. I suggest they choose peace.

No one is rooting for Iran to have nuclear weapons. He was attempting to negotiate then was easily convinced by Netanyahu they had to attack and here we are. That it would be so easy to convince an "old hippie rooting for world peace" this easily makes it sound like maybe he wasn't so peace loving after all.

 

[reflechissez]

You and me both, brother.

Trump has been saying for almost ten years, Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. He's like us, an old hippie rooting for world peace. It is a true blessing to know most of the country agree with Trump on this issue.

Another reason I voted for Trump. I was a former Democrat as was he, and what kind of peace-loving Democrat with any common sense would be rooting for Iran having a nuclear weapon and be adamantly against Trump for trying to end this madness? Trump has given them a fair warning. More than a fair warning. It's up to them now as to what they want to do. I suggest they choose peace.

Did anyone tell you about what Obama negotiated with Iran while he was in office? Did anyone tell you what Taco did to that agreement?

 

[reflechissez]

Actually he isn't, since he's sending forces to the Middle East to engage in a conflict that another nation started despite his own intel chief stating they do not have nuclear weapons and are not close to obtaining them.


No one is rooting for Iran to have nuclear weapons. He was attempting to negotiate then was easily convinced by Netanyahu they had to attack and here we are. That it would be so easy to convince an "old hippie rooting for world peace" this easily makes it sound like maybe he wasn't so peace loving after all.

My god, they're so clueless.

 

[Pyrite]

Well, since the US is the one telling them to evacuate, we obviously will be taking responsibility for providing safe haven to the refugees.

And....there went the covfefe....

 

[Pyrite]

Iran is a rogue terrorist funding and supporting state. Nuclear weapon in thir hands would e be dangerous for the entier region, not just Israel. ( I nearly added the stupid 'right?' but had enough sense to stay my hand).

Post #174


How do you propose preventing Iran from achieving nuclear weapons?

Be specific. Provide details.

 

[maxparrish]

This is an interesting point in that the "fix it" part isn't one the US has been any good at since the end of WW2, though that was a very different war than the ones the US has engaged in since then. While the lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan is that trying to fix what you break tends not to end well in regards to "nation building", the consequences of breaking something can sometimes be less than ideal as well. It's why I find regime change a very precarious business.

Risking the lives of US soldiers without some long term solution to the reason for invading doesn't really help sell this kind of venture well to the American people either. The wars people tend to support are those where the objectives and results are clear, and nation building isn't one of those as the two examples you mentioned proved out. In this scenario the stated goal could be to destroy Iran's nuclear capability, but it's clear that would require more than just destroying their facilities. If the US joins Israel on this endeavor then there's the question of what the joint goal is too, because Israel seems keen on eliminating the regime. Lacking a plan for what comes next makes this a really risky proposition.

For reasons that elude me, the precepts and principles of war taught in college introductory military history courses (my college's ROTC) never seem to take root at the higher levels of policy making. If it did, politicians and generals would insist on having a grand strategy, a theater strategy, an operational level plan, and a set of objective benchmarks for success or failure (or in between). Yet it seems we have gone in without having much strategy or planning at all - at least beyond the immediate operational needs.

Nor does it seem that the institutional lessons learned are lasting, limited to recalling those lessons acquired in the last Gulf war (1990), but no earlier. Vietnam taught a lot of hard lessons about insurgency warfare between 1964 and 1o 1969, one of them being the pointlessness of using body counts from search and destroy missions as a benchmark for success, rather than focusing on winning the hearts and minds of innocent and terrified civilians in such a war.

In short, the US belatedly accepted in 1969 that the British already had already shown how to successfully fight counter-insurgencies in Malaysia - you must clear areas and protect. Only by protecting villages and populations from retribution can trust be established and eventually give confidence in the population to join militias and cooperate. Leaving a population open to retribution after the American forces leave is a good way to never succeed. (Note, after 69 the VC was effectively neutered so the NVA took over as a conventional force and the nature of the war changed).

Yet, in spite of these learnings, the allied occupying forces in Iraq were clueless. The General that took over at the beginning of the Iraq war of occupation, Gen. John Abizaid, wasn't old enough to be in Vietnam, and his combat experience was limited to Grenada and the Gulf War. Hence, a generation of officers if they were taught counter-insurgency doctrine they never had the vision or leadership in Iraq to use it properly - not until after three years of insurgency, in 2006, a field commander named McMaster revitalized the doctrine and made it effective - to everyone's amazement.

When it comes to strategy and operational planning, no war should be entered into without a clear grasp of realistic objectives and costs, as well as a pre-determined red line where it is no longer worth fighting. And if one is to fight a war, one does not dither and oscillate over the employment of force. You hit as hard and fast as you can limited only by what you know you will never do. If you fail, you will know it quite early and you don't stick around, having done your best you withdraw or sue for peace.

Half-measures rarely work and only prolong the agony of war.

 

[Hamish Howl]

Post #174


How do you propose preventing Iran from achieving nuclear weapons?

Be specific. Provide details.

Easy.

B2s with ground penetrators. Israel has already hit their knowledge base*, all you have to do now is wreck the gear.

We can do it. The only question is how committed we are - or should be - to this course of action.


* This is a polite way of saying Israel dropped ordinance on the scientists heads while they were sleeping.

 

[jaypatriot]

Well I'm following on and there are some interesting doors from this point. There are some deals that may involve a regime change etc. So yeah hopefully we see something positive but man the stakes are high. This is a thing we've been anticipating for for a long time.

I think few people would actually think the Israelis would actually pull the trigger on Iran. Now that they are doing it, it's more like, "It only makes sense that now was the right time."
I wonder how Israel is going to get their hands on a bunker buster bomb(s) and, more importantly, who is going to deliver it. Can they rent a B2 bomber from somewhere and hire a pilot to fly it?

 

[jaypatriot]

Actually he isn't, since he's sending forces to the Middle East to engage in a conflict that another nation started despite his own intel chief stating they do not have nuclear weapons and are not close to obtaining them.


No one is rooting for Iran to have nuclear weapons. He was attempting to negotiate then was easily convinced by Netanyahu they had to attack and here we are. That it would be so easy to convince an "old hippie rooting for world peace" this easily makes it sound like maybe he wasn't so peace loving after all.

You do understand the U.S. sent heavy naval forces to the Middle East to attack Houthis who were attacking Red Sea shipping and U.S.naval vessels. Houthis are a client of Iran. So, by extension, we are in a war with Iran.

 

[Pyrite]

Easy.

B2s with ground penetrators. Israel has already hit their knowledge base*, all you have to do now is wreck the gear.

We can do it. The only question is how committed we are - or should be - to this course of action.


* This is a polite way of saying Israel dropped ordinance on the scientists head while they were sleeping.

(I've read about the scientists/technicians.)

There are some questions whether the GBU-54 MOP would be able to take out the most-hardened facilities (or able to do so quickly):

Israel's trying to wipe out Iran's nuke program. It won't be an easy kill.

Iran has many scientists with nuclear expertise and has stored its most critical facilities in bunkers that may be beyond the reach of Israel's bombs.

www.businessinsider.com

June 13, 2025

...However, military and nuclear experts say firepower alone won't be enough to completely wipe out Iran's nuclear program....[Iran] has stored its most critical facilities in bunkers buried deep underground.

This makes the facilities particularly challenging targets that, from the air, can only be reached by the largest bunker busters, which Israel lacks, or repeated strikes in the same spots.

Natanz, home to Iran's largest uranium enrichment site, is located several floors underground in the center of the country. The Israel Defense Forces said its airstrikes damaged an underground area of the facility that contains an enrichment hall with centrifuges, electrical rooms, and additional infrastructure.

Satellite imagery captured on Friday revealed what appears to be significant damage at Natanz, but only on the surface.

Iran's other main enrichment site, Fordow, is buried even deeper in the side of a mountain and is the country's most "hardened" facility, said Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow for proliferation and nuclear policy at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute think tank.

In comments shared with Business Insider, Dolzikova said Fordow has not been affected by the Israeli strikes, nor have other locations. "Should Iran make a decision to produce a nuclear weapon, it would likely do that at hardened and potentially still secret sites," she said....

The likely best weapon for the job is the US military's GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, one of the most powerful non-nuclear bombs and the largest bunker buster in America's arsenal at 15 tons. These munitions can only be carried by the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber and the B-21 Raider in development.

Israel doesn't have bomber aircraft capable of carrying the largest bunker-buster munitions. The IDF shared footage showing its fighter jets — F-35s, F-16s, and F-15s — taking off and landing during the strikes. Weapons experts pointed out that some of the aircraft appear to be carrying 2,000-pound guided bombs. Israel's F-15I, though, can carry 4,000-pound anti-bunker bombs.

Military analysts with RUSI estimated in March that the Fordow site could be as deep as 260 feet underground, likely beyond the reach of even America's MOP. Damaging it would almost certainly require repeated strikes, likely over days or weeks....

 

[Sweden]

Post #174


How do you propose preventing Iran from achieving nuclear weapons?

Be specific. Provide details.

Why do you ask? Be specific. Provide details.

 

[Hamish Howl]

(I've read about the scientists/technicians.)

There are some questions whether the GBU-54 MOP would be able to take out the most-hardened facilities (or able to do so quickly):

Israel's trying to wipe out Iran's nuke program. It won't be an easy kill.

Iran has many scientists with nuclear expertise and has stored its most critical facilities in bunkers that may be beyond the reach of Israel's bombs.

www.businessinsider.com

June 13, 2025

...However, military and nuclear experts say firepower alone won't be enough to completely wipe out Iran's nuclear program....[Iran] has stored its most critical facilities in bunkers buried deep underground.

This makes the facilities particularly challenging targets that, from the air, can only be reached by the largest bunker busters, which Israel lacks, or repeated strikes in the same spots.

Natanz, home to Iran's largest uranium enrichment site, is located several floors underground in the center of the country. The Israel Defense Forces said its airstrikes damaged an underground area of the facility that contains an enrichment hall with centrifuges, electrical rooms, and additional infrastructure.

Satellite imagery captured on Friday revealed what appears to be significant damage at Natanz, but only on the surface.

Iran's other main enrichment site, Fordow, is buried even deeper in the side of a mountain and is the country's most "hardened" facility, said Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow for proliferation and nuclear policy at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute think tank.

In comments shared with Business Insider, Dolzikova said Fordow has not been affected by the Israeli strikes, nor have other locations. "Should Iran make a decision to produce a nuclear weapon, it would likely do that at hardened and potentially still secret sites," she said....

The likely best weapon for the job is the US military's GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, one of the most powerful non-nuclear bombs and the largest bunker buster in America's arsenal at 15 tons. These munitions can only be carried by the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber and the B-21 Raider in development.

Israel doesn't have bomber aircraft capable of carrying the largest bunker-buster munitions. The IDF shared footage showing its fighter jets — F-35s, F-16s, and F-15s — taking off and landing during the strikes. Weapons experts pointed out that some of the aircraft appear to be carrying 2,000-pound guided bombs. Israel's F-15I, though, can carry 4,000-pound anti-bunker bombs.

Military analysts with RUSI estimated in March that the Fordow site could be as deep as 260 feet underground, likely beyond the reach of even America's MOP. Damaging it would almost certainly require repeated strikes, likely over days or weeks....

Point of order: There are no secret sites. Our intel weenies spend an awful lot of time looking at satellite images to watch for massive amounts of earth-moving activities.

If you have a million cubic feet of installation, that means a million cubic feet of mountain had to go somewhere.

And I am operating under the assumption that the final blow will be delivered by our B2s...And we can most certainly reach them. Might take a few tries.