- 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
1
Posted on 5/8/26 at 8:57 am to AGGIES
quote:
Well we (the American people) have DNI Gabbard on record saying that there was no threat
Link?
Posted on 5/8/26 at 8:57 am to udtiger
quote:
speaking on the condition of anonymity
quote:
There it is...
Anonymous sauces sayz!!!!
We have found our first person to get off their knee and start spreading their commanded thoughts like a good little drone this morning.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 8:58 am to Centinel
Posted on 5/8/26 at 8:58 am to Eurocat
quote:
A confidential CIA analysis
Hmmm....
Yet it went immediately public.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:01 am to CleverUserName
The problem is we have no way of knowing if the leakers are just deep state scumbags trying to undermine Trump or legitimate good guys who are realists and sick of the politicization of intel and gaslighting about this conflict.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:01 am to Powerman
“ We have yet to establish that they were a threat to the United States”.(quote PMan).
$10/gallon gas would definitely affect the US via world economic collapse which will happen if the Strait is closed and run by the Jihadist. For starters the Dems would take over Congress and that alone means that the Mullahs take down this Nation from within. Dems would open the border to another ten million Muslims.
Trump will be forced to take out the IRGC. Soon. Whatever it takes.
$10/gallon gas would definitely affect the US via world economic collapse which will happen if the Strait is closed and run by the Jihadist. For starters the Dems would take over Congress and that alone means that the Mullahs take down this Nation from within. Dems would open the border to another ten million Muslims.
Trump will be forced to take out the IRGC. Soon. Whatever it takes.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:03 am to Powerman
quote:
Our intelligence director said as much
No she didn't.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:03 am to AGGIES
quote:
You ok with links to media articles?
If you're going to post some gotcha article from her March 18th testimony, no. Because she in no way said Iran was not an imminent threat. No matter how much you (or the msm) spin it.
I watched the entire testimony myself. I don't need a media "assessment" made to fit a particular narrative. She was very clear in what she said.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:04 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
The problem is we have no way of knowing if the leakers are just deep state scumbags trying to undermine Trump or legitimate good guys who are realists and sick of the politicization of intel and gaslighting about this conflict.
Or, as usual, columnists who make up bullshite and claim they have connections in the administration when they simply sat down and hammered out another gossip column.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:05 am to udtiger
quote:
quote:
Three current and one former U.S. official confirmed the outlines of the intelligence analysis, speaking on the condition of anonymity
There it is...
Every damn time.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:06 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
The problem is we have no way of knowing if the leakers are just deep state scumbags trying to undermine Trump or legitimate good guys who are realists and sick of the politicization of intel and gaslighting about this conflict.
We pretty much do, based on who they leaked to. Anyone who actual cares isn't going to leak to the Washington Post. Now if you have a political narrative to push, WaPo is your one stop shop.
This post was edited on 5/8/26 at 9:07 am
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:06 am to CleverUserName
I don't know about WaPo, but whenever you see something from Natasha Bertrand of CNN or Ken Dilanian of MSNOW, they are pushing an intel agency agenda.
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:08 am to Powerman
quote:
We have yet to establish that they were a threat to the United States
Aside from hundreds of dead Americans over the last 40+ years
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:08 am to Eurocat
quote:
Three current and one former U.S. official confirmed the outlines of the intelligence analysis, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter
Hmmm, where have I heard this before??
I wonder if they were a part of the Intelligence officials who said that the Hunter laptop was Russian disinformation?
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:09 am to Centinel
In March, she was also very clear in what she DID NOT say…. She would not go on record saying there was an imminent threat.
She did go on record and say the Iranian regime had made no efforts to try to rebuild their enrichment capability since Operation Midnight Hammer.
That testimony contradicts Trump’s claim that if we didn’t hit them within two weeks they would have had a nuclear weapon.
What do you have that says otherwise?
She did go on record and say the Iranian regime had made no efforts to try to rebuild their enrichment capability since Operation Midnight Hammer.
That testimony contradicts Trump’s claim that if we didn’t hit them within two weeks they would have had a nuclear weapon.
What do you have that says otherwise?
This post was edited on 5/8/26 at 9:11 am
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:15 am to NoEmpathy
quote:Actually is not relevant to (the stated reasons for) the current war.
Aside from hundreds of dead Americans over the last 40+ years
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:19 am to AGGIES
quote:
She did go on record and say the Iranian regime had made no efforts to try to rebuild their enrichment capability since then.
This does not equal to Iran not being a threat.
quote:
That testimony contradicts Trump’s claim that if we didn’t hit them within two weeks they would have had a nuclear weapon.
So when iran tells negotiators they have 460 Kilograms of uranium enriched 60% it's to be ignored?
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:19 am to AGGIES
quote:
What do you have that says otherwise?
Absolutely nothing
This is just "trust me bro" at this point
Posted on 5/8/26 at 9:23 am to JellyRoll
quote:Ignored? No. Believed? A different story.
So when iran tells negotiators they have 460 Kilograms of uranium enriched 60% it's to be ignored?
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News