Pragmatist2025

Whatever the case may be, besides political optics, why is it a bad thing that he has said there may be an offer and I will consider it? (IF these are the details)

I only ask because some see it as a ‘gotcha’!, and others see it as a ‘no way’ situation. The President has been consistent about the nuclear weapons situation. This was THE stated goal from the beginning. If this was achieved along with the strait being back to normal, what are the downsides?

I think Schamerhorn and others have presented similar bills and they were also snuffed out. Apparently, if you oppose this, you are ignorant and are lying about it. BTW, this is funded by the BBB. It is essentially oil company welfare.

quote:

---

What is the threat?

---

If Central Bank Digital Currency is ever realized, we will find out.

quote:

---

LB Abdul Carter

---

Needs to be Skattebo’d in practice.

The U.S. has done itself no favors after massive investments in China over the last 20 years (though that has greatly tapered off).

quote:

---

We've just been using up the old shite to make room for the new shite...and more new old shite.

---

The ‘more new old shite’ part kinda made me laugh. But kidding aside, there is only so much knowledge about weapons/systems available to the general public, thus my original question.

quote:

---

if they complete enrichment.

---

This is actually a very important topic.

Intelligence had long indicated last year that the facilities capable of enriching to weapons grade was Fordow, the underground facility and Natanz (sp?), while another was capable of some sort of finishing process/conversion. I think these were the ones that the U.S. targeted.

Iran actually complied with snap inspections (24 hour or less notice) under JCPOA according to the IAEA at these locations. The ‘24 day notice’ applied to other facilities if it was thought that there was suspicious activity. These two conditions are often conflated.

The IAEA did not detect unusual radiation at these other facilities. Experts argued for and against that the 24 day period was not enough time to ‘scrub’ the material. It is supposed that this was one of the main reasons that the President was keen to withdraw from JCPOA (along with sunset clauses for compliance).

Limited inspections after the withdrawal continued (non compliance) and Iran basically withdrew shortly after the President lost re-election and eventually ceased all inspections (I think). The IAEA lost track of how much uranium they had and exact levels of enrichment. The military actions last summer may have been justified but an interesting fact is that the main intelligence (that actually contradicted US intelligence) presented by IAEA (and used by Israel) was an AI produced document that gave a probability assessment, not direct knowledge.

If the third facility was rendered inoperable last year or in this year’s war and the other two facilities’ centrifuges were rendered inoperable, then they don’t have the capabilities that have been mentioned and there is also no evidence that they have a delivery system that is capable of the required payload.

Sorry for the essay, but in my opinion this makes the President’s statement of ‘obliterated’ last summer a very pivotal and probably the most consequential statement as it pertains to the present state of events.

I vote troll.

quote:

---

this is a data grab

---

Just wait until more major data centers get humming. What could go wrong?

quote:

---

Just paid $3.86 here in Louisiana

---

There is a 30 to 40 cent fluctuation depending on access to different areas. Nearby, it is $4.19 but in a more metro area it is $3.96 & $3.89.

quote:

---

Maybe this will motivate Trump to quit stalling and finish the freaking mission.

---

The question remains, “what is the mission and why hasn’t it been able to be achieved nearly 3 months in?” It would appear that the IRGC is likely running things and an air campaign is proving to be not the solution to their extermination that it was thought to be.