• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Launches War On Iran

Then why are you here Anthony? Seriously why are you even in this thread of you cant even be bothered to understand anything about the topic.

You dont even know what she said but you know lefties?

Lololololololololololololololol

Ok
Cheerleaders should at least bring pompoms.
 
lol


Boost your confidence by remembering that Trump decided to switch from the most secure IT infrastructure on the plane to use use fee Wi-Fi from Starlink.
wcgw?

It's not like the best an brightest minds of our enemies are trying to get info out of DC computers.


You can also boost your confidence by remembering Trump only hires the best people

Manafort’s alleged crimes have piqued the interest of almost everyone — except apparently Fox News — but especially computer security researchers who worked to uncover Manafort’s James Bond-inspired email password: “bond007.”



Rest assured that Trumpco personnel continue to take OPSec seriously and have ALWAYS taken OpSec seriously

The Justice Department on Friday unveiled criminal charges against three Iranian hackers employed by Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corp. for targeting and compromising the electronic accounts of Trump campaign aides and others.​
 

Do we want to know what you do for a living?
 
Our coup started all of this. Because those damned Iranians decided it was their oil under their ground. Not Britain’s.
So, your approach would be what? Let them build nukes, and don't do anything until after they used them to kill millions of "infidels", which they've already said they will do?
 
The French were all for it.

It was Eisenhower and Churchill who didn't think it was a wise move.
Interesting. I was aware of Operation Vulture but not discussion of using three atom bombs to relieve the French surrounded at Dien Bien Phu.

But I read your Wikipedia reference a little differently. Eisenhower did not want American pilots to drop the bombs. Churchill wanted nothing to do with the intervention requested by Eisenhower. Basically, without Britain and Congressional consent Eisenhower would not sign off on Operation Vulture.

An article published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, discusses both Operation Vulture planning and Dulles offer to Bidault. The Americans were gung ho. The French not so much.

According to Bidault, the American took him aside during an intermission and asked him whether atomic bombs could be effective at Dien Bien Phu. If so, Dulles allegedly went on, his government could provide two such bombs to France. Bidault said he turned down the suggestion flat, on the grounds that the bombs would destroy the garrison as well as the Viet Minh, while dropping them farther away, on supply lines, would risk war with China. When informed a few months later of Bidault’s claim, Dulles said he could not recall making such an offer and insisted there must have been a misunderstanding.

Bidault’s version is supported by senior French official Jean Chauvel in his memoirs, and by French general Paul Ely in his diary, which was kept on a daily basis. Ely, a key player on Indochina strategy in these months, wrote that he was of two minds about “the offer of two atom bombs. The psychological impact would be tremendous, but the [military] effectiveness would was uncertain, and it carries the risk of generalized warfare.”
-- “We might give them a few.” Did the US offer to drop atom bombs at Dien Bien Phu? Fredrik Logevall, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, February 21, 2016

What's the truth? As with most controversies probably somewhere between. Good article. Read it if you have the chance.
 
1. Trump is absolutely a moron.
2. However, it is not wrong that the (public, at least) purpose of this bombing was to KEEP Iran from getting to "nuke", not (again, so far as we are publicly aware) degrade extant nuke weapons.

They're saying this was the plan and that the whole "decide in 2 weeks" press release was camouflage, to surprise Iran.

So...TACO was lying or was TACO was using strategy, hiding his true intentions in order to better position our outcome?
 

The US trained the Shah’s secret police. If we didn’t want the Shah to brutally oppress his people, why did we train the secret police doing that oppression?
 
Is it President Gabbard? Nope.

Of course, if she'd been the lone voice in favor of the attack, that's what you'd be calling Trump.
Is that the official standing of the United States, that Iran is not working towards a nuclear weapon? Again, nope.

You foolishly want to pick out minority opinions and isolated information in your quest to mislead and misinform, right out of the leftist playbook.
I told you, I know your tactics better than you do.
 
Why would you believe Trump? He has to be up to ~ a million lies (lifetime) by now.

I haven’t said I believed Trump about anything. Lol…What the hell are you even talking about?!

If I endorsed something Trump claimed or stated that I believed something Trump said, you’re free to quote it, but you won’t be able to because such a post doesn’t exist.
 
If they don’t then they’re not fulfilling their oaths. And if you don’t pressure your representative then you’re not fulfilling your obligation as a citizen.

I think with everything thing that's wrong with Trump and disagree with Trump...I think this is a good call on his part.
 

“A day after President Trump declared that Iran’s nuclear program had been “completely and totally obliterated” by American bunker-busting bombs and a barrage of missiles, the actual state of the program seemed far more murky, with senior officials conceding they did not know the fate of Iran’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium.

“We are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel and that’s one of the things that we’re going to have conversations with the Iranians about,” Vice President JD Vance told ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, referring to a batch of uranium sufficient to make nine or 10 atomic weapons. Nonetheless, he contended that the country’s potential to weaponize that fuel had been set back substantially because it no longer had the equipment to turn that fuel into operative weapons.“

It’s going to be hilarious when we find out they failed even by their own made up objectives.
 

Funny how many people routing against their home countries success and security. Tribalism must be very strong for a lot of people.
 
Yeah sure, can you show your posts against Biden's Somalia invasion and authorize use of lethal force?


Did you ever figure out if you actually wanted to see my posts or not?