Did you know that US strikes did not destroy Iran nuclear programme, says intelligence assessment?

[msc545]

As usual, Trump's mouth is biger than his bite.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckglxwp5x03o

[MisterWack]

To add insult to injury his Press Secretary confirmed the leak to be from the Pentagon saying it was a ‘low level loser’, though denied the classified material was accurate…

Now tell me dear users of GAG, how does Pete Hegseth (a Trump loyalist) who runs the Department of Defense which controls The Pentagon, who also hired Trump loyalists to work there get an inaccurate document made classified then leaks to the public?

Obviously, the document is accurate and since the truth doesn’t align with President Donald J Trump’s feelings and what he thought would be an ego boost turned flaccid, he had to have his Press Secretary do a little cleaning up. Pathetic leadership we have here.

It was a document created by and leaked by Trump loyalists.
Let Trump’s fanbase / tea drinking book club figure out how to pin at as a ‘Libtard’ or a Deep State Conspiracy while all of us who have brains will comprehend what went on and question not the integrity of the leak, but the integrity of The Office of President of The United States of America. Truly great work.

Oh and do I even need to remind you all, of how Pete Hegseth leaked two classified talks to reporters AND family members? Clearly this Department is downright despicable with incompetence plaguing it.

[MisterWack]

And I want to add this from the archives: trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/.../
Donald J Trump pulling US out of Iran Nuclear Deal 2018 which happens to be the same year he axed the Pandemic Response Plan that Obama made. Just a reminder he blundered far worse than just Iran.

[lightbulb27]

it's unfortunate someone just back stabbed the govt and possibly country, putting more military at risk. that person (s) will be in trouble. who knows, maybe someone sent out a broacast text? you know how tight security is around those places... it's unreal... this was intentional.

I'm not shocked of damage assessment, I'd heard the pre-assessments and bombs often don't get the job done.

reality is... if they don't reach an agreement and it's not finished... more bombs drop or deeper war. why are left people so giddy... TDS.

I'm sure a lot of damage was done. was the uraniaum burried and destroyed, time will tell.

be careful what you are wishing for...

then there's the risk they get a nuke and use it. they have every reason to at this point, even some rogue actor. how secure are those sites now that we took out some of their military. you recall Iraq right? want ISIS and their buddies with a bunch of uranium?

huge risks.

[msc545]

No, the real risk is that the US has a nuke which of course it does and Trump decides to use it. That is a much greater risk than anything going on with the Iranians.

[lightbulb27]

that seems far fetched to me. everything he's done has been to limit loss of life.

[msc545]

No - he has caused loss of life and risk of life repeatedly.

[Anonymous]

But but the propoganda princess said it was false... and then said it was classified. I don't think she's smart enough to realize telling us it was classified is admitting it's real.

[Anonymous]

You trust the BBC? They recently censored a band

[msc545]

Censoring a band is not the same as censoring political news.

[Opinion Owner]

The BBC has a long history doing that.

[msc545]

Okay, provide some evidence. You can like it here

[Opinion Owner]

en.m.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_songs_banned_by_the_BBC
How do you not know that the BBC was set up to be the propaganda wing of the British empire and state which it continues to be to this day hence why the British public have to pay £169.50 per year to own a tv all to fund the BBC nationally and internationally. It's very much like Russia today or Al Jazeera.

[Opinion Owner]

www.theguardian.com/.../bbc-reckons-with-bias-accusations-over-israel-and-palestine-coverage

www.google.com/.../when-the-bbc-did-fake-news

www.independent.co.uk/.../...edators-a6896246.html

[msc545]

Compared to what the media in the US routinely does, that stuff is nothing at all.

[Opinion Owner]

The US government wishes it could get taxpayers to pay to watch television and fund a global propaganda television network that supports the us government. Probably the only thing the British have America beat in regards to

[ProbablyClueless]

I saw that. It's such a strange, pointlessly discrediting comment to make and conclusion to reach. Especially since there's since been a ceasefire and Iran has come to the negotiating table. Most people would agree that this is way better outcome than having the nuclear sites get blown to the smithereens.

Destroying the fissionable material and centrifuges, best case scenario, would spew radioactive material out into the environment. This way, at least we can manage and contain the destruction of the material. But all the media and Pentagon want to do is contradict the President to act like this is somehow a reflection of incompetence.

[goaded]

A week ago there wasn't any "fire" to cease!

[ProbablyClueless]

Very true, but Israel would have done their attack regardless of who was in the White House. Remember back in 2012 or whatever when they did the same thing? Obama was in office at the time.

[msc545]

@ProbablyClueless Contradicting the President is a reasonable thing to do, considering he always lies.

[ProbablyClueless]

@msc545 all the same; their comments were based on an extremely preliminary report prepared after minimal evaluation. It’s bad form to speak when one contributes so little

[msc545]

Agreed.

[888theGreat]

Everyone but Trump knew that. Why doesn't media ask him why are you bombing again if you destroyed program the first time? Trump said assessments were wrong after they told him. He has dementia folks or is an Idiot. One or the other. Not to mention a perv.

[jshm2]

You should always believe the opposite of whatever Trump is saying.

[NathanDavis]

what I know is that a true assessment would never come from Trump

[exitseven]

I did not know that. I am shocked. What was not explained was how this so called intelligence was obtained since the facility was 300 feet under ground.

[Syntosi]

US intelligence report was leaked and then inadvertently confirmed to be true when the white house admitted that the report was classified and the person who leaked it would be found and prosecuted for leaking it.

There is also the fact that the bombs they dropped was not rated to destroy targets that deep and that there are reports of Iran moving the nuclear material away from the site long before the strike happened. Lastly there was experts pointing out even before the strike (and after) that a strike such as this would have a very small chance of success.

I think the report from US intelligence said that realistically the program was just delayed by a few months at most.

Also, I think there is supposed to be a regular inspection of the facility by the UN coming up and if Iran denies their entry then I predict that they will be fairly close to developing their nuke so that is going to be fun to find out.

[exitseven]

@Syntosi The bomb was rated to take out that target. It took more than one bomb. The first bomb only goes so deep but the bomber makes a second pass and drops a second bomb that finishes the job.
There was no indication that fissionable material was taken offsite. Satellite surveillance did not show anything. Since to attack was a complete surprise there would be no reason to do this.
This report was leaked and reported by the fake news who should be discounted as having no credibility.

[msc545]

Your objection is well-taken, but it cuts both ways.

I think the things that were supposedly destroyed were deep enough not to be affected, but it is admittedly difficult to tell one way or the other without actually going there and looking. I guess it is possible that a spy might have taken a look but of course we will never know.

[msc545]

@exitseven The attack was NOT a surprise since Trump had been publicly threatening it for weeks beforehand. They had plenty of time to remove things, and I think that's exactly what they did.

[exitseven]

Trump told then they had 2 weeks. the attack was the next day. This was done purposely. There was not enough time to remove the material. It does not fit into a suitcase.

[msc545]

I am unsure what they removed and when. There were reports of a lot of trucks and soldiers at the sites as soon as Trump began shooting off his mouth.

[exitseven]

The bunker busters are rated to detonate and a predetermined depth. Once the first one happens the second one is deployed to explode even deeper and it finishes the job.

[msc545]

Yeah I know things like this always work well in theory but don't work very well in practice. The companies that build them sell them for a hell of a lot of money to the government and as a result overrate their performance considerably. It's not like the military as an independent testing bureau to see how well these things work before they buy them. Why do you think our defense budget is a trillion plus dollars a year? How much of the stuff you buy do you think actually works as advertised?

[Syntosi]

Should we talk about how Trump wants to bomb Iran again? Does not sound to me like the first one did it. Sounds like something that someone else might have already been saying.

[goaded]

How did it get classified as Top Secret if it didn't exist?

[Jackblue]

Well at least it set them back, if they build up we will bomb them again. Then perhaps they will block the Straight of Hormuz, frankly that is exactly what Trump (i suspect) and I hope they will do. America has its own energy, but China will be crippled and the US will crush them in the AI war.

[msc545]

It did not set them back, and if they block the strait, it will just wreck oil prices.

[Jackblue]

It set them back by a few months at least. China gets its oil via the straight.

[msc545]

Maybe a few months. Big deal.

[Pterodon]

Oh yes they did. Israeli intelligence proved it. The White House is launching a probe into this blatant lie.