Iraq was not a few months away from having nuclear weapons. Originally Posted by Jacky SThat is true, Iran is much closer by enriching to 60% U-235. Trump still has diplomacy with Iran as an option. The Yahoo/Bannon link is from yesterday, 6/18/25. Incredibly the deal Trump wants with Iran is similar to the Obama deal that he cancelled in 2018.
Hell NO unless you want your life upended. If they close the Straight of Hormuz gasoline will double or triple in price. It will crash the economy as you know it. You'll see gas rationing here in the US and elsewhere. The going rate for a girl will go up significantly. The purchasing power of your currency will be transfered to those who hold gold as the people who hold onto the worthless currency thinking it's "real" money become poorer by default.
So the question is not if the US should furnish the required “bomb” to get the job done, but should the US actually do the deed.
Originally Posted by Jacky S
We should not drop the actual bomb but support supply and assist Israel in every way possible with exception of crossing into Iran airspace unless needed (“needed” i.e. rules of engagement inside Iranian borders definition pending lol) Originally Posted by Michael8219The problem is that the 30,000 lbs MOP can only be carried by the B-2 apparently. So if the Iranians need to be dug out with conventional munitions, the only ones that can do it is the USAF.
The problem is that the 30,000 lbs MOP can only be carried by the B-2 apparently. So if the Iranians need to be dug out with conventional munitions, the only ones that can do it is the USAF. Originally Posted by texassapperWhat do you think about Michael's idea of leasing B-2's to Israel? I can think of several reasons why that probably wouldn't work, but you'd know better than I do.
The problem is that the 30,000 lbs MOP can only be carried by the B-2 apparently. So if the Iranians need to be dug out with conventional munitions, the only ones that can do it is the USAF. Originally Posted by texassapperCorrect.
What do you think about Michael's idea of leasing B-2's to Israel? I can think of several reasons why that probably wouldn't work, but you'd know better than I do. Originally Posted by Tiny
We’d NEVER allow even an ally access to our most sensitive equipment like the B2. There’s no level of trust that would allow for that. So NO it ain’t happening.
We need another war in the Middle East like we need a hole in the head. The problem is that the administration doesn’t want to come clean on the intelligence regarding Iran. It’s a catch 22 so Netty put Trump between the proverbial rock and hard place.
If Iran is as close to a bomb as Israel claims - months away - then the threat is immediate and existential and therefore we should just bombs away on the mountain till it falls in. There’s no reason to really deliberate on whether or when.
Or (what I believe is far more likely) Iran is far away from making a bomb - let’s call it 2-3 years - then the US has plenty of time to deal with them and possibly even reinstate the Obama deal with Trump branding so he can claim it’s his and Iran would not get a bomb anytime soon.
Netty knows the answer is the latter so acting now forces Trump’s hand and that’s why he acted now - unnecessarily. If the White House actually was honest about the intelligence answer (not give the actual underlying knowledge) that Iran isn’t that close the answer would be obvious to everyone. But they won’t be clear. Today Karoline Lies said Iran is within weeks. Everyone knows that’s false. Well except for Trump supporters because they actually think she tells the truth. Originally Posted by 1blackman1