- 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: Whether you agree or disagree with Tucker…
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:12 pm to DeltaDoc
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:12 pm to DeltaDoc
I am not going to read through the other ~10 threads about this guy because I had really never heard of him until the talk of his resignation. I watched the interview. This guy is REALLY MAGA. If anyone thought he was insulting President Trump then you didn’t watch it. If anything, he confirmed what most of the President’s supporters believe about him. He basically says that the Iranian regime is scared of Trump, they call off their proxies concerning American interests when he is in office, and this ‘war’ does NOT have the hallmarks of the President’s beliefs concerning war or Iran.
If the things he says about Israeli ‘intelligence’ is true, then a lot of things begin to make sense…such as the President’s recent post about Israel bombing energy facilities and the comments last year when he said “they (Israel) don’t know what the frick they’re doing” (during the 12 day war).
If the things he says about Israeli ‘intelligence’ is true, then a lot of things begin to make sense…such as the President’s recent post about Israel bombing energy facilities and the comments last year when he said “they (Israel) don’t know what the frick they’re doing” (during the 12 day war).
0
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:35 pm to TankBoys32
quote:
I'm about a hour into the interview and it's pretty crazy people on here are completely ignoring the facts that Iran had no nuclear abilities or the ability to enrich nukes.
quote:
PARIS, March 9 (Reuters) - Almost half of ?Iran's uranium enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons-grade, was stored in a tunnel complex at Isfahan and is probably still there, U.N. nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said on Monday.
The tunnel complex is the only ?target that appears not to have been badly damaged in attacks last June by Israel ?and the U.S. on Iran's nuclear facilities.
The IAEA estimates ?that when Israel launched its first attacks in June, Iran had 440.9 kg of 60% uranium. If enriched further, that would provide the explosive needed for 10 nuclear weapons, according to an IAEA yardstick.
"What we believe is that Isfahan had ?until our last inspection a bit more than 200 kg, maybe a little bit more than that, ?of 60% uranium," IAEA chief Rafael Grossi told reporters in Paris.
You sure about that?
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:45 pm to BayouCowboy
quote:
You sure about that?
Of course he is. He claims we are ignoring "facts" afer listening to Kent for an hour.
what you posted, what our negotiators were told directly, all the intel of the US and Israel be damned.
Dudes got da facts...... from Kent..... who was privy to none of the above.
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:48 pm to BayouCowboy
the same article says
""The widespread assumption is that the material is still there. So we haven't seen - and not only us, I think in general all those observing the facility through satellite imagery and other means to see what's going on there - movement indicating that the material could have been transferred," Grossi ?said." -- Sounds like they really don't know one way or the other.
Then also it says, "All three Iranian uranium-enrichment plants known to have been operating - two at ?Natanz and one at Fordow - were destroyed or badly damaged in June." So what capabilities do they still have after the June attack?
""The widespread assumption is that the material is still there. So we haven't seen - and not only us, I think in general all those observing the facility through satellite imagery and other means to see what's going on there - movement indicating that the material could have been transferred," Grossi ?said." -- Sounds like they really don't know one way or the other.
Then also it says, "All three Iranian uranium-enrichment plants known to have been operating - two at ?Natanz and one at Fordow - were destroyed or badly damaged in June." So what capabilities do they still have after the June attack?
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:49 pm to jammajin
quote:
what our negotiators were told directly
Those same negotiators told us, 20 years ago, that Iraq had tons of yellow cake Uranium and a myriad of weapons of mass destruction. We went to war for more than two decades over that information.
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:52 pm to TankBoys32
""The widespread assumption is that the material is still there. So we haven't seen - and not only us, I think in general all those observing the facility through satellite imagery and other means to see what's going on there - movement indicating that the material could have been transferred," Grossi ?said." -- Sounds like they really don't know one way or the other.
which is why our negotiators sat down to negotiate with them directly........ and were told some of it does still exist...... enough to supply 11 weapons..... and we can go frick ourselves if we think they will give it up..
which is why our negotiators sat down to negotiate with them directly........ and were told some of it does still exist...... enough to supply 11 weapons..... and we can go frick ourselves if we think they will give it up..
Posted on 3/19/26 at 3:54 pm to OccamsStubble
quote:
Those same negotiators told us, 20 years ago, that Iraq had tons of yellow cake Uranium and a myriad of weapons of mass destruction. We went to war for more than two decades over that information.
right. so you'd rather believe Joe Kent because he said something something.
I get it. You want to believe who you want to believe and I want to believe who I want to believe.
The great news for you is there's no way for you to be "wrong" here.
Some people need to be protected from their own stupidity. You just happen to be one of those people
Either way I don't know what this has to do with Kent being in any sort of position to know or opine about anything of consequence..... which was the point of his very obnoxious resignation
This post was edited on 3/19/26 at 4:01 pm
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:00 pm to TankBoys32
quote:
""The widespread assumption is that the material is still there. So we haven't seen - and not only us, I think in general all those observing the facility through satellite imagery and other means to see what's going on there - movement indicating that the material could have been transferred," Grossi ?said." -- Sounds like they really don't know one way or the other.
Then also it says, "All three Iranian uranium-enrichment plants known to have been operating - two at ?Natanz and one at Fordow - were destroyed or badly damaged in June." So what capabilities do they still have after the June attack?
Iran stated in negotiations with U.S. envoy Witkoff that they had 460kg of 60% enriched uranium, enough to make 11 nukes. To get to 90% enough for true weaponsm grade can be achieved in weeks . 3-5% enrichment is required for energy. Beyond 20% is approaching propulsion and 60% is "near weapons grade". The challenge is miniturization to put on a warhead and then delivery system with a survivable re-entry vehicle. That can take significantly longer. The question is, with their alliances with Russia and China and an already successful MRBM program, how long before they reach ICBM and MIRV capability?
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:05 pm to BayouCowboy
"Iran stated in negotiations with U.S. envoy Witkoff "
see now guys like Occam are going to question whether this happened or not...... all in an attempt to prop up Kent because he said OMB.
this is the slippery slope they go down to anti American ism (and then pitch a fit when you point it out).
They don't like Orange. Somebody said something bad about Orange. So we support that somebody until it becomes clear that somebody knows nothing more than they do (or is as full of shite). But we can't admit Orange is better so we need to trash the messengers/message.
And they will take this right past the point of logic you are pointing out and into "20 years ago blah blah blah"
see now guys like Occam are going to question whether this happened or not...... all in an attempt to prop up Kent because he said OMB.
this is the slippery slope they go down to anti American ism (and then pitch a fit when you point it out).
They don't like Orange. Somebody said something bad about Orange. So we support that somebody until it becomes clear that somebody knows nothing more than they do (or is as full of shite). But we can't admit Orange is better so we need to trash the messengers/message.
And they will take this right past the point of logic you are pointing out and into "20 years ago blah blah blah"
This post was edited on 3/19/26 at 4:06 pm
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:13 pm to jammajin
quote:
"Iran stated in negotiations with U.S. envoy Witkoff "
see now guys like Occam are going to question whether this happened or not...... all in an attempt to prop up Kent because he said OMB.
Kind of hard to refute considering the Iranian spokesperson has been on every major network saying the same thing.
The only question is what defines "imminent"? OBL wasn't an imminent threat to mainland U.S. until he was and he just flew planes into buildings.
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:21 pm to TankBoys32
quote:
I'm about a hour into the interview and it's pretty crazy people on here are completely ignoring the facts that Iran had no nuclear abilities or the ability to enrich nukes. Like Kent points out, Rubio admitted that the only reason we attacked was because Israel was going to attack and a retaliation would have been against our military in the region.
They don’t care.
They were antiwar before because their champion was and now they’re interventionist because he changed his mind, it’s as simple as that.
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:26 pm to tide06
Da Joos.
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:30 pm to DeltaDoc
Link?
I’m not sure where to find it.
I’m not sure where to find it.
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:32 pm to BayouCowboy
And then people stood around with their stick in their hand while the buildings fell.
In this case we are dealing with nuclear material ( 60. %)in the hands of people who have openly said they will use to wipe cities off the map
In this case we are dealing with nuclear material ( 60. %)in the hands of people who have openly said they will use to wipe cities off the map
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:45 pm to TankBoys32
quote:and you are ignoring the amount of enriched uranium Iran admitted they had.
people on here are completely ignoring the facts that Iran had no nuclear abilities or the ability to enrich nukes.
Why would you do that?
Posted on 3/19/26 at 4:57 pm to DeltaDoc
quote:
who on here actually has the intellectual balls
I have intellectual balls. It took them awhile to become this, but they are very intellectual. Years of studying, learning different languages, meeting other intellectuals...it's been a long road. My left one decided to get a PHD art history, while my right one got his Masters in International Finance. Sure, they have to go wherever my penis wants them to go, but when they get there, they are constantly acting more "superior" than anyone else around. They both like to read poetry out loud when I am playing with them, which is really distracting.
Posted on 3/19/26 at 5:09 pm to nealnan8
He's disappeared. Kent's half life has been reached.
when he gets the next set of talking point topics to run the US down in their operation vs. Iran he'll be back.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News