Started By
Message

re: New strikes happening now…keep it up 47!

Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:36 pm to
Posted by DeltaDoc
The Delta
Member since Jan 2008
16868 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:36 pm to
Let’s nuke 90 million people to keep them from getting nukes. Makes complete sense.
Posted by kilo
No block, no rock
Member since Oct 2011
30259 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:37 pm to
quote:

You should be able to figure that one out.


You're a geopolitical savant.




Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
174385 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:37 pm to
quote:

Let’s nuke 90 million people to keep them from getting nukes. Makes complete sense.

Of course. 5D chess
Posted by kilo
No block, no rock
Member since Oct 2011
30259 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:40 pm to
quote:

Do you think it's a good idea to trigger another world war?


I know you wont be a willing participate.
This post was edited on 6/10/26 at 10:46 pm
Posted by wackatimesthree
Member since Oct 2019
14025 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:42 pm to
quote:

Do you think it's a good idea to trigger another world war?


What I think is that allowing Iran the opportunity to obtain nuclear weapons—which they bragged directly to US officials they had enough uranium to make 11 bombs with—is much more likely to trigger WWIII than any short term strategy Trump might employ to break Iran.

What exactly do you think China would do in that scenario? Nuke us? They're too far away to do much else.

They would most likely launch cyber or other tech attacks, refuse to trade with us, and maybe bomb some US bases thousands of miles away.

If that. They might just tell Iran to stop assing around and live to fight another day.
This post was edited on 6/10/26 at 10:44 pm
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
174385 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:46 pm to
quote:

What I think is that allowing Iran the opportunity to obtain nuclear weapons—which they bragged directly to US officials they had enough uranium to make 11 bombs with

Conveniently there is no evidence this conversation took place.
Posted by wackatimesthree
Member since Oct 2019
14025 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:50 pm to
quote:

Conveniently there is no evidence this conversation took place.


You mean other than the direct testimony of the eyewitnesses who were there?

You can believe Iran if you want.

That would be reasonable, since they've certainly never lied about anything.

I can't really find any credible source that says that the conversation was fabricated. CBS finds it credible. Do you know of a source that disputes it?
This post was edited on 6/10/26 at 10:51 pm
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
174385 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 10:57 pm to
At most they claimed they had the materials. There is no evidence to suggest they were capable of weaponizing it. And there is a big engineering gap to weaponize enriched uranium.
Posted by Tunasntigers92
The Boot
Member since Sep 2014
28169 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:21 pm to
47 got himself into an Israeli issue he can't get out of, thanks for wrecking the fricking global market Zion Don.
Posted by SDVTiger
Cabo San Lucas
Member since Nov 2011
98806 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:26 pm to
How is the global market wrecked

You need to drink some cranberry juice for your issue
Posted by wackatimesthree
Member since Oct 2019
14025 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:27 pm to
So the non-answer is a "no," now we're pivoting, I see.

There's no reason to dispute the conversation, so now we're going to pretend that when they said, "We have enough 60% enriched uranium to make 11 bombs," that doesn't imply their intention to do so.

quote:

And there is a big engineering gap to weaponize enriched uranium.


Is there now? Well, let's examine some facts:

1. Iran's uranium has been 60% enriched since 2021, and that has been verified by the IAEA.

2. Anything greater than 20% enriched is considered "highly enriched" by the IAEA.

3. As of the verification of this 60% enriched uranium, Iran officially became the only non-nuclear state in the world to have uranium enriched to such a great degree.

4. A common misconception is that 60% enrichment is only two-thirds of the way to a bomb. In reality, enriching raw uranium up to 60% accounts for roughly 99% of the total physical effort (measured in Separative Work Units, or SWUs) required to make weapons-grade material. Jumping from 60% to the 90% weapons-grade level is a minor technical step that experts warn can be achieved in as little as one week to 10 days. (Source, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation)

5. Nonproliferation experts from organizations like the Arms Control Association have repeatedly noted that 60% enriched uranium has no practical or credible civilian application. While low-enriched uranium (3% to 5%) fuels standard commercial power plants and mid-enriched uranium (20%) can power medical research reactors, a 60% concentration exists almost exclusively as a stepping stone to a nuclear weapon.

What's your next pivot? I can't wait.
Posted by Tunasntigers92
The Boot
Member since Sep 2014
28169 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:37 pm to
quote:

How is the global market wrecked


Trade wars
Unpredictability of trade policy
Pressure on the federal reserve
Labor market constraints
Monumental fiscal deficits
Posted by SDVTiger
Cabo San Lucas
Member since Nov 2011
98806 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:38 pm to
Is that what CNN told you

Posted by Tunasntigers92
The Boot
Member since Sep 2014
28169 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:41 pm to
You are fricking incorrigible
Posted by SDVTiger
Cabo San Lucas
Member since Nov 2011
98806 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:41 pm to
You are a Krassenstein bro irl
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
174385 posts
Posted on 6/10/26 at 11:56 pm to
quote:


What's your next pivot? I can't wait.

No need to pivot. We have no evidence they have the tech needed to weaponize the uranium.
Posted by RohanGonzales
Pronoun: Whatever
Member since Apr 2024
11017 posts
Posted on 6/11/26 at 12:25 am to
quote:


No need to pivot. We have no evidence they have the tech needed to weaponize the uranium.


You have no evidence that the next democrat president wouldn't have helped them complete what Obama helped them try to accomplish.

Now it will take a LOT longer when the next democrat starts that shite up again.

Tell us how a democrat would never ever be on their side.

Posted by scrooster
Resident Ethicist
Member since Jul 2012
44340 posts
Posted on 6/11/26 at 12:34 am to
quote:

That’s probably the only command center they had.

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted by TigerDoug
Lees Summit
Member since Mar 2017
861 posts
Posted on 6/11/26 at 12:34 am to
quote:

What's your next pivot? I can't wait.


Oh Powerbottom....take the L.
Just like you take the D
Posted by Tunasntigers92
The Boot
Member since Sep 2014
28169 posts
Posted on 6/11/26 at 12:37 am to
YEAH BUDDY!!! That'll make em sign the peace treaty!!!!!
first pageprev pagePage 6 of 7Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram