• 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

Behind closed doors, middle east leadership and oil sheikhs are on a weekend drunk celebrating this event.
No doubt. They will make a bunch of money as prices likely soar.
Quite honestly, the only possible credible nuclear threat in the region is Israel.
I agree. I don’t trust Bibi at all - if backed into a corner, I don’t doubt he’d use his nukes. He’s proven he’s willing to commit horrific atrocities.
Look, you're a smart guy. I know you don't actually believe that.
You trust Bibi not to use his nukes if cornered? I don’t.
They’re functioning uranium processing facilities. There are probably trucks coming and going there all the time.
Or they took all the uranium out of there ahead of the attack and now have any important stuff moved somewhere else and all we did was damage facilities - which is good, I guess?

We don’t even know the extent of the damage that was done…and we dropped what % of our supply of “bunker buster” bombs?

In another thread I saw where maybe we had 20? And used 14?
 
That is false.

“(a)In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced—
(1)
into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2)
into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3)
in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation;
the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth—
(A)
the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B)
the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C)
the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.”



“(a)Not later than 48 hours after any incident in which the United States Armed Forces are involved in an attack or hostilities, whether in an offensive or defensive capacity, the President shall transmit to the congressional defense committees, the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representativesa report on the incident, unless the President—
(1)
otherwise reports the incident within 48 hours pursuant to section 1543 of this title; or
(2)
has determined prior to the incident, and so reported pursuant to section 1549 of this title, that the United States Armed Forces involved in the incident would be operating under specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 1544(b) of this title.”


“(b)Termination of use of United States Armed Forces; exceptions; extension period
Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 1543(a)(1) of this title, whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress(1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.”


You are lying.

This is the first part of the code, which you intentionally left out:


(c)Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

--

This part, at the beginning of the code, tells the President WHEN he has the authority to send troops into harm’s way without Congressional approval.

The parts you are quoting are the procedural rules that apply AFTER the President has sent troops into harm's way.

We have not been attacked. The military strike yesterday was an illegal act of war conducted without Congressional approval.

Trump must be immediately impeached and removed from office.
 
Last edited:
To the bolded:

I recon'ed some Trump Media sites after the attack, and I believe I've detected some fracturing in Trump's base over this. It seems some MAGA actually are pacifist, outside of their support for Trump.

I now suspect if Trump continues military actions, for example further "bombing runs", he will alienated some of his base.
The test will be if Netanyahu keeps banging the drum to "finish the job" and try to take out the regime. If the extent of the US attack is limited to these bombings he might be spared the scorn of the MAGAverse who don't want any involvement in foreign conflicts. I don't think there's much argument about the Islamic regime in Iran is less than ideal, but without a real sense of what comes after it there's the risk of inviting a lot of chaos in the vacuum its absence will create, and that's exactly the kind of scenario some in the MAGAverse and liberals are looking to avoid.
 
That isn’t in the realm of possibility. They tried something stupid like that once - when they mined the Gulf. Didn’t end well for them. And of course the pirate terrorists haven’t succeeded in stopping trade either.

If you're speaking of during the Iran-Iraq War, it brought Oil prices to $112 buck a barrel!
 
Which Iran said would happen.

33 years of trying to get at Iran and bibi found his gullible morons in Maga

the existential terror of active warfare plays into the hands of authoritarians and incumbents


Trump, Netanyahu, and Khamenei play themselves in a heartwarming story of authoritarians working together to prop each other up despite their differences
 
Other than the multiple attacks on US troops in 2024 by Iran controlled militias.

"Heightened effects"
Other than the multiple attacks on US troops in 2024 by Iran controlled militias.

When you jump-in in the middle of a conversation, you might consider looking back to understand the subject of the conversation.

In this case, it was in reference to the actions linked below.

Here:

 
Well, the surface entrances to these facilities are certainly destroyed so they won’t be making any new fuel for their reactors anytime soon.

There was/is but just not what you imagined. These facilities processed raw uranium ore to serve as fuel for reactors. The ore is radioactive but in this state it’s so minor that the ore is safe to handle and nothing is going to happen to you unless you eat it. The levels of radioactivity you’re imagining are a consequence of fission in a reactor.

No, I'm speaking of the highly-enriched weapons' grade uranium these centrifuges were supposedly producing.

Where is it?
 
I just read about that. No radiation cloud or dust from our attack.

This was a fools errand and trump was the perfect patsy..and maga who in all of the ironies whined about neo cons just bend over and take another trump lie as usual.

Id tell Maga to feel some shame but really they dont.
A bit of that, but likely driven by wanting to side with who he thinks is winning and will ultimately "win". The question is what "winning" actually means, which has been a mixed bag of goals from eliminating Iran's nuclear program which this does not do to regime change that this doesn't do either.
 
I'm sure the preferer being beaten to death because they took off their headpiece in public. Ask any woman, I'm sure they'd agree with you.
Our coup started all of this.

Because those damned Iranians decided it was their oil under their ground. Not Britain’s.

We put their autocrat back in power twice.

And then we got the Mullahs.

Cause and effect.

Another mess WE MADE.

All we had to do is watch them and wait for a handful more years for enough of the old bastards to die off.

trump just empowered the mullahs. Again.
 
Sure, they had no nuclear program. The left knows this because Iran said so, LOL. They had inspections! You can look here, here, and here... but you can't ever look over here. That's fine with the lefties. Oh, these facilities deep in the mountains? UH? What facilities?
And we probably got the Iraqi WMDs Bush could never find too, huh?
 
Dueling Outcomes?


Cool Your Jets.

Caine, dressed in military uniform, offered sober and meticulous details and a timeline of the strikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities. He urged patience, saying the battle damage assessment “is still pending, and it would be way too early for me to comment on what may or may not still be there.”

That Hegseth is an "architect" of the Iran Nuclear Strikes, is about as alarming as it gets.
 
Last edited:
Not much. It would have been a cave in, no time for ejecta.

I can't imagine the collapse beating the expellation of the initial combustion gases, but Fair enough.

I was surprised to see such well-formed holes, to be honest.
 
If Iran indeed has enriched materials, it wasn't in Fordow. Which again - is my point.
Le sigh. I’ll try to explain this simply for those who aren’t familiar with the science. Iran has enriched uranium. That is what these facilities do because you can’t just throw rocks into a nuclear reactor. The radioactivity of uranium is very minor until it is used as fuel in one of Iran’s 5 nuclear reactors located elsewhere. Until then, you’re not going to detect it over background radiation because it’s such a common element. It’s everywhere. Hell, we’ve been making glassware and jewelry with it since the 18th century.

But it becomes extremely radioactive when you bombard it with neutrons in a reactor. The highly desired byproduct of this - for a nuclear weapons program - is plutonium. We don’t know where Iran is storing that but there is no doubt they have it.
 
I agree that MOP’s are unlikely to do the job in terms of destroying the subterranean facility but, even if they had, it wouldn’t result in detectable radiation for the reasons I articulated. And that’s simple chemistry and geology of what Iran is known to have there.

Then with all of this, if we agree to your supposition, how do we know the highly enriched materials were indeed down there? If at all? Or, if somewhere else?
 
Back
Top Bottom