- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Ok its time to start dropping bombs again on Iran.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 9:49 am to UtahCajun
Posted on 5/21/26 at 9:49 am to UtahCajun
quote:
No one cares if he strikes Iran's nuclear facilities. He did it last year and the move was highly popular and according to the admin, was highly successful.
But to begin a protracted conflict, just because an ally was gonna do it anyway, with no clear goals set, was foolish.
I hear you. I'm torn on this. I have a family member in the Navy who is part of the blockade. I want to be supportive, but I'm also not necessarily happy that his life has been put at risk for dubious reasons.
I think clear goals were set: regime change, eliminate the nukes, etc.
But we were too overconfident in our ability to achieve them.
1
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:18 am to RT1941
quote:
How could anyone know the exact volume when Iran refuses to allow international inspectors access to their facilities?
But you're wrong. They were allowing 3rd party UN inspectors access to storage. We know exactly what type of material they had.
The fact that they moved some material last year and would not disclose to inspectors as to why they moved it or their intentions with the moved material is why we struck the facility they moved it to last summer.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:26 am to TulsaSooner78
quote:
They told Steve Witkoff that they have about 1000 lbs of 60% enriched uranium.
They also said they sunk multiple US aircraft carriers.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:31 am to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
They also said they sunk multiple US aircraft carriers.
They told that privately to US officials in Iran on inspection?
Context matters.
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 10:32 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:39 am to UtahCajun
quote:
Are you saying Iran has had nuclear material for 50 years now.
Nope. Pretty sure he is saying...
quote:
they have been doing what they have done the last 50 years just bullshitting wasting time.
Which is obviously true.
quote:
Surely they must have a bomb by now
Very likely pretty close. We will likely never know. But i trust the leadership in place now, the same leadership that the Globalist that have been in charge of America for the last 25+ years absolutely despise, to make the right call for the American people.
People are so scared of another forever war like Vietnam or GWOT that will only enrich our MIC and kill young American patriots. That has not happened and will not happen.
Fast forward 3 years from now and 500 Marines have been killed due to a boots on the ground nation-building campaign like GWOT, THEN and only then will it be time to criticize this move.
You nor I know what our leaders have in the form of intelligence, you only think that it looks similar to the path we have taken multiple times now as a country, yet everyone fails to acknowledge that that was under completely different leadership.
Everyone also fails to acknowledge that this "war" isn't only about Iran, when in fact it is about maneuvering and securing ourselves as the no.1 superpower in the world while hurting China. This has always been about China no.1, Iran is 2nd. This is critical to the understanding of what we THINK is going on right now. None of us really know because we don't have the intelligence in hand.
I believe our current President, VP, and SOS are making the right call based on the intel that they have.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:46 am to pankReb
quote:
If he doesn’t, then the TACO-screaming people will scream TACO. If he does, then the TACO-screaming people will scream about him bombing Iran.
Only caveat is whether he said he would bomb Iran in 48 hours. Or whatever other deadline he backs himself to. TACO is only possible if there are threats being made.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:50 am to TulsaSooner78
quote:
I hear you. I'm torn on this. I have a family member in the Navy who is part of the blockade. I want to be supportive, but I'm also not necessarily happy that his life has been put at risk for dubious reasons. I think clear goals were set: regime change, eliminate the nukes, etc. But we were too overconfident in our ability to achieve them.
Hmm. That’s tough. Appreciative
of your family member’s service. You are spot on.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:51 am to Champagne
quote:
We must be out of bombs is all I can think.
My understanding was that we used a lot of standoff weapons like Tomahawks and JASSMs in the initial bombing and they take time to replenish. I think they are concerned about losses if they have to start doing more missions further into Iranian airspace.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:52 am to dnm3305
quote:
Very likely pretty close. We will likely never know
But we do know
link to us.gov concerning Iran's nuclear material
The important part of that link is this:
A 2025 public U.S. intelligence assessment stated that "Iran is not building a nuclear weapon" and that the now-former Supreme Leader had "not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003." IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi stated on March 4, 2026, that the agency "never had information indicating that there was a structured systematic [Iranian] program to build or
This part rules out all of the "but Iran is making a nuke" part.
quote:
the Globalist that have been in charge of America for the last 25+ years absolutely despise
Dude, military action against a foreign country, deposing the leader of another, wanting to buy a country, etc, etc is "globalism". What are you talking about here?
quote:
Everyone also fails to acknowledge that this "war" isn't only about Iran, when in fact it is about maneuvering and securing ourselves as the no.1 superpower in the world while hurting China
So...globalism is what it is about.
quote:
This has always been about China no.1, Iran is 2nd. This is critical to the understanding of what we THINK is going on right now. None of us really know because we don't have the intelligence in hand.
Our admin told us what this was about within hours of the first strikes. Rubio got up and said "We knew Isreal was going to strike and we knew Iran would retaliate so we decided to join with Isreal".
That is what it is about.
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 10:54 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 10:58 am to LSUPilot07
I feel like tomorrow afternoon is a good possibility. Markets close, plus a holiday on Monday.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 11:02 am to TygerTyger
“ They can have tons of nuclear material and not have the tech or ability to make a bomb. But you have GOT to know that they are trying their damndest to get there.”(quote TT).
Pakistan has it, right on their border. A 9th grader can see the writing on the wall in regard to Jihadist Islam. They have to go. Period.
Pakistan has it, right on their border. A 9th grader can see the writing on the wall in regard to Jihadist Islam. They have to go. Period.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 11:11 am to UtahCajun
quote:
But to begin a protracted conflict, just because an ally was gonna do it anyway, with no clear goals set, was foolish.
A part of Iran's retaliation was going to be OUR bases in the ME regardless. So why not be proactive? We were going to be drawn in no matter what, imo.
We could have pressured Isreal to not start this, but can you really blame them for having the desire and the willingness to do so? Could we even have prevented them had we tried? Maybe. But who really knows for sure?
Posted on 5/21/26 at 11:39 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
What was the reason for the conflict?
Enriched uranium?
Ballistic missiles?
Supporting proxies?
Regime change?
JCPOA was just fine and I bet you Trump would take that with a different name right now.
Don't forget that the military buildup began immediately following Donald's redline that was delivered via that stupid social media post where he promised we would save the Iranian people and told the regime, "You better not!".
Well, they did. Now, here we are publicly negotiating with a dude who still openly advocates for the continued brutal suppression of the Iranian protesters. Yet, our main points of contention have become "the dust" and "the strait". The people? Nah......frick em!
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 11:41 am
Posted on 5/21/26 at 11:45 am to RCDfan1950
quote:
Pakistan has it, right on their border. A 9th grader can see the writing on the wall in regard to Jihadist Islam.
Would a Sunni Pakistan necessarily give the tech to a Shi’a Iran?
Posted on 5/21/26 at 11:59 am to Robcrzy
quote:
Iran’s psycho leaders are playing Neocon Trump like a fiddle.
Wouldn't a neocon be excited to keep attacking Iran and want to put boots on the ground?
Everything Trump has done says he doesn't want that. But you guys are like a dog with a bone. You find something you think is clever and mindlessly repeat it no matter what evidence proves you wrong.
The mission in Venezuela lasted a couple hours. If you're good at math, you'll realize that 2 hours is far less than the 20 years actual neocons spent in the ME.
You guys regularly cry out, 'TACO!,' when Trump postpones an attack during negotiations, but then immediately call him a neocon in the next breath.
Hopefully one day you will realize how stupid you all sound by using words you clearly don't understand.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 12:09 pm to deuceiswild
quote:
A part of Iran's retaliation was going to be OUR bases in the ME regardless. So why not be proactive? We were going to be drawn in no matter what, imo
Well, I guess our globalist ways cause globalist dangers.
We could have easily drawn those bases down.
quote:
We could have pressured Isreal to not start this, but can you really blame them for having the desire and the willingness to do so? Could we even have prevented them had we tried? Maybe. But who really knows for sure?
But there is no question as to why Isreal was dead set on attacking? Why does no one ask that? I posted a link already that stated Iran was not even close to nukes so that was not a reason.
They are gaining good Christian land in Lebanon from it. Maybe there was that. I have no idea at all why they wanted to, but I can see they benefitted.
This post was edited on 5/21/26 at 12:11 pm
Posted on 5/21/26 at 12:10 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
He's not a neocon. He's far too transactional, but he has placed himself in a quagmire that is putting him in a reactive position which is not good if you want to force a deal. Bombing is not going to give him enough leverage....and heprobably cannot get his hands on the uranium without having to use direct force, so he sits at a stalemate.
Meanwhile domestically if he does not do something significant to alleviate gas prices Republicans will pay a price. The only saving grace for MAGA is that as ineffective and emasculated as the Republicans are, the opposition is quite incompetent at the moment.
Meanwhile domestically if he does not do something significant to alleviate gas prices Republicans will pay a price. The only saving grace for MAGA is that as ineffective and emasculated as the Republicans are, the opposition is quite incompetent at the moment.
Posted on 5/21/26 at 12:40 pm to UtahCajun
You think ALL uranium sites have been disclosed by the Iranians? How naive.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News