Middle East Conflict | Netanyahu orders strikes on Gaza (p1161)

Just watched Trump’s briefing and he mentioned hopefully we won’t need to use these bombs again.

Thought it sounded like a thinly veiled threat maybe towards Russia Al be it he comes across pro Russian.
 
inbetween said:
It's interesting to look at the Fordow facility. It is built to be impregnable to deep penetrating bombs, it has very tight layered perimeter security and it has its own air defences. It's so secure that the Americans probably failed to destroy it and that's through deploying multiple B-2 bombers and 30,000lb bombs.

This is the kind of thing that is exclusive to critical nuclear weapon installations or other things that are absolutely critical militarily. Just have a look at AWE Aldermaston or RNAD Coulport on Google Maps. To compare I live near an nuclear fuel processing facility at Springfield (Preston) here in the UK and it never had this level of security, it just has a fence.

Why does Iran require this level of security to protect a nuclear powerplant fuel enrichment facility? Nuclear power accounts for 1% of Iran's energy generation so why are they even arsed if it gets bombed? Why have the IAEA previously declared that Iran has approached >60% enrichment where the typical nuclear fuel enrichment is <4%?

Why does a country with ample sunlight, oil and gas reserves even need expensive nuclear power?

I call bullshit on your statement that Iran are not attempting to make a nuclear bomb. They have been attempting to make a nuclear bomb for decades and I'm sure they have already succeeded but Israel would destroy that capability in a heartbeat which is perhaps now where we are. They want one to exert regional influence through nuclear blackmail alongside potentially achieving the below although they'd get blown up in return.

FjzCAYyUoAA_TIR.jpg
Click to expand...

Not to mention the statement: "... on a country that is declared by the IAEA and the US's own intelligence community to be not conducting a nuclear weapons programme" is greatly misrepresenting the IAEA's position.

This is the IAEA's resolution they passed on 12th June, people can read it for themselves:

It is quite unambiguous that Iran is in breach of its obligations and that the only reasonable explanation is that it is moving towards building a weapon:

(m) Noting, in this context, the Director General’s serious concern regarding the rapid
accumulation of highly enriched uranium by Iran, the only State without nuclear weapons that is
producing such material, which the Director General notes the Agency cannot ignore given the
potential proliferation implications,

(n) Regretting Iran’s failure to provide the Agency with technically credible explanations
regarding undeclared nuclear material, despite the Director General’s ongoing efforts to obtain
progress from Iran on resolving outstanding Safeguards issues and improving cooperation with
the Agency, including through the high-level meetings between the Agency and Iran in Tehran in
April 2025 and the full implementation of the Joint Statement between the IAEA and Iran of 4 March 2023, recalling that both sides have recognized that such engagements could pave the way for wider agreements among parties,

(o) Reiterating its concern that Iran has still not provided necessary, full and unambiguous
cooperation with the Agency and has not taken the essential and urgent actions as decided by the
Board in its June and November 2024 resolutions, with the consequence that Safeguards issues
remain outstanding despite numerous interactions with the Agency since 2019, with serious
implications for the Agency’s ability to ensure verification of the non-diversion of nuclear
material required to be safeguarded under Iran’s NPT Safeguards Agreement to nuclear weapons
or other nuclear explosive devices
Click to expand...

Just because there's no evidence Iran has an official nuclear weapons program does not mean Iran are completely faultless and haven't done anything wrong.

Misinformation is rife on all sides of the political spectrum at the moment over this, I see so much bullshit posted as fact on here that a five-minute Google search shows not to be remotely true.

People need to go and read the actual agency reports if you want to come to an informed conclusions - they make them public for a reason.
 
Gobshiight said:
The maddest religious cunts in the world right now, Israel, have nukes and they never use them. Iran having them purely as a deterrent would make for a much more stable Middle East

Instead, we're looking at a potential escalation where hundreds of thousands of civilians could lose their lives
Click to expand...
Agreed, we need this to protect us from the two biggest psychopathic nations that's America and Israel.
 
Gobshiight said:
The maddest religious cunts in the world right now, Israel, have nukes and they never use them. Iran having them purely as a deterrent would make for a much more stable Middle East

Instead, we're looking at a potential escalation where hundreds of thousands of civilians could lose their lives
Click to expand...
I'm still waiting for the nuclear war we were promised when India and Pakistan got them.
 
i kne albert davy said:
Once its penetrated in 200ft and 2 ton of explosives gone off I doubt there's much of the complex left, think the Yanks are pretty certain they won't need to go back.
Click to expand...
Sky reported prior to the American attack Iran was busy removing “stuff” out of the sites, it leads us to think the attack has probably failed to do what America wanted.
Unfortunately if Iran responds with attacks on American bases throughout the region, we would be drawn into the conflict as a NATO member, unless Starmer keeps us out of it. ?

The Pentagon to give a briefing shortly.
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
Sky reported prior to the American attack Iran was busy removing “stuff” out of the sites, it leads us to think the attack has probably failed to do what America wanted.
Unfortunately if Iran responds with attacks on American bases throughout the region, we would be drawn into the conflict as a NATO member, unless Starmer keeps us out of it. ?

The Pentagon to give a briefing shortly.
Click to expand...
America starts a war and then asks for NATO's help again. I can't imagine Trump asking for NATO's help though. After all, he has the biggest, baddest army in the world. He couldn't possibly need the help of some random country.
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
Sky reported prior to the American attack Iran was busy removing “stuff” out of the sites, it leads us to think the attack has probably failed to do what America wanted.
Unfortunately if Iran responds with attacks on American bases throughout the region, we would be drawn into the conflict as a NATO member, unless Starmer keeps us out of it. ?

The Pentagon to give a briefing shortly.
Click to expand...
Would expect those trucks were tracked and the subject of some the cruise missiles launched.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
L
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I do draw a distinction, although it’s arguably marginal. Firstly, I don’t believe Trump is motivated by what it says in a book written centuries ago, and nor do I believe Netanyahu does, whereas I believe the decision makers in Iran are guided by religious dogma.

I’m not saying it’s necessarily any more reprehensible, but it cannot be said to be rational to base the use of a nuclear weapon based on interpretation of an ancient book. To me, that is the apotheosis of irrationality.

That said, I’m not sure Trump is operating in the realms of rationality either, but for very different reasons.
Click to expand...
The USA used several in 1945.
 
inbetween said:
A NATO reaction would require an attack on American soil which is what happened with 9/11 and the subsequent venture into Afghanistan, NATO didn't take part in Iraq.

I think the Iranian response will be extremely measured because they're running out of capability to actually respond.
Click to expand...
Bloody hope you are right mate!
 
If Iran does retaliate will the US response be measured - especially if key targets are placed within hospitals, schools etc.

Israel "justify" strikes on such targets by saying that they are in a war to exist. The US can make no such claim. At some point boots on the ground will be needed and I am not sure that the US MAGA supporters are ready for that.
 
If Iran retaliate it will be because Russia and/or China told them to. Otherwise they will stay quiet and take the peace.
I wonder if they will change their terrorism supporting ways now the world order is changing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top