(06-25-2025 09:04 AM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  Let me get this straight. They are complaining that maybe the attack didn't do as much damage as they initially reported? So, they are basically asking Trump to bomb them again? Wow.

Nobody is complaining. A Pentagon intelligence report on the attack was leaked. It said that the attack may have only set them back a couple months.

More will likely be known in the near future.

(06-25-2025 09:10 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 09:01 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 08:36 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 08:29 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 06:46 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Gee, Tom, you sound gleeful that maybe the strike wasn't as effective as hoped.

Are you pulling for the Iranians over Trump?

Btw, that supposed negative assessment came from "Pentagon intel," and Hegseth himself said yesterday that the sites were "obliterated." And he watched in real time.

Do you think the "Pentagon" somehow had boots on the ground since then to counteract his lyin' eyes?

First, GFY.
Second, yes, we either have assets there (likely spies) in addition to all sorts of intelligence such as intercepting communications, etc. That's what the leaked Pentagon report is.
Lastly, if you think anyone can confidently make an assessment on an underground target merely from a satellite image, you're dumber than I thought.

Why so gleeful at the possibility the mission wasn't as successful as hoped?

Why so angry all the time? You've had a burr under your saddle ever since Nov. 5.

Also, your first instruction to me is anatomically impossible.

And we, meaning Amercians, most likely do not have assets there. The Israelis might.

As to your last comment, please contact Hegseth and tell him he's dumb, too, since he contradicted that report. Do you think Hegseth doesn't have access to all sources within the Pentagon, including wherever the contradicting report came from? It's not just eyes on the real-time explosion, genius.

And if Hegseth doesn't know, then how would the unknown Pentagon sources know?

1. Not gleeful.
2. Not angry any time, unless my sports team loses.
3. We have all sorts of intelligence assets covering that area most likely, and yes, many are likely tied to Israel and other allies. That doesn't have to mean people directly on the ground. I heard a retired general explain all of it last night. Hertling I believe. He said the first report on such matters is almost always wrong.
4. Hegseth is an unqualified hack. And no, he didn't know what the ******* assessment was right after the attack. Nobody did.

You sound happy about the potential results being less than reported. Otherwise, you sound angry most of the time. Your problem, not mine.

Hegseth made comments well after the actual event. My point was, he has access to any intel that anybody else has, PLUS he saw the event.

The idea that you think Hegseth is an unqualified hack makes me laugh. Austin was a lot better, right? I don't recall you calling Austin a hack.

You don't know what I sound like, gramps. That's you're ******* problem here.

And yes, pretty much everyone without their head up trump's ass knew and have said that a drunk fox news host was not in any way qualified to run our largest government agency.

(06-25-2025 09:14 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 09:10 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 09:01 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 08:36 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 08:29 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  First, GFY.
Second, yes, we either have assets there (likely spies) in addition to all sorts of intelligence such as intercepting communications, etc. That's what the leaked Pentagon report is.
Lastly, if you think anyone can confidently make an assessment on an underground target merely from a satellite image, you're dumber than I thought.

Why so gleeful at the possibility the mission wasn't as successful as hoped?

Why so angry all the time? You've had a burr under your saddle ever since Nov. 5.

Also, your first instruction to me is anatomically impossible.

And we, meaning Amercians, most likely do not have assets there. The Israelis might.

As to your last comment, please contact Hegseth and tell him he's dumb, too, since he contradicted that report. Do you think Hegseth doesn't have access to all sources within the Pentagon, including wherever the contradicting report came from? It's not just eyes on the real-time explosion, genius.

And if Hegseth doesn't know, then how would the unknown Pentagon sources know?

1. Not gleeful.
2. Not angry any time, unless my sports team loses.
3. We have all sorts of intelligence assets covering that area most likely, and yes, many are likely tied to Israel and other allies. That doesn't have to mean people directly on the ground. I heard a retired general explain all of it last night. Hertling I believe. He said the first report on such matters is almost always wrong.
4. Hegseth is an unqualified hack. And no, he didn't know what the ******* assessment was right after the attack. Nobody did.

You sound happy about the potential results being less than reported. Otherwise, you sound angry most of the time. Your problem, not mine.

Hegseth made comments well after the actual event. My point was, he has access to any intel that anybody else has, PLUS he saw the event.

The idea that you think Hegseth is an unqualified hack makes me laugh. Austin was a lot better, right? I don't recall you calling Austin a hack.

You don't know what I sound like, gramps. That's you're ******* problem here.

And yes, pretty much everyone without their head up trump's ass knew and have said that a drunk fox news host was not in any way qualified to run our largest government agency.

I'm obviously talking about the tone of your typed words, Einstein.

Show me your proof about Hegseth. The Pentagon seems to have been running pretty well the last few months.

As opposed to the withdrawal from Afghanistan. You criticized that, right?

You also ignored the question about Austin.

(06-25-2025 09:05 AM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Iran wouldn’t be at the negotiation table if the mission failed to reach its goal. Some sources “familiar” with the intelligence running to the legacy media is nothing more than the the same kind of sources that ran to the media on numerous times to create a narrative against Trump on numerous occasions

This is a big tell from my perspective. It's more about what they didn't say than what they did. The fact that they didn't come out and say America's attempted attack on the glorious republic of Iran failed to penetrate their defenses is telling. Instead they said they would rebuild. It's the most defeated response I've ever seen come out of that regime.

(06-25-2025 09:14 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 09:10 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 09:01 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 08:36 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 08:29 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  First, GFY.
Second, yes, we either have assets there (likely spies) in addition to all sorts of intelligence such as intercepting communications, etc. That's what the leaked Pentagon report is.
Lastly, if you think anyone can confidently make an assessment on an underground target merely from a satellite image, you're dumber than I thought.

Why so gleeful at the possibility the mission wasn't as successful as hoped?

Why so angry all the time? You've had a burr under your saddle ever since Nov. 5.

Also, your first instruction to me is anatomically impossible.

And we, meaning Amercians, most likely do not have assets there. The Israelis might.

As to your last comment, please contact Hegseth and tell him he's dumb, too, since he contradicted that report. Do you think Hegseth doesn't have access to all sources within the Pentagon, including wherever the contradicting report came from? It's not just eyes on the real-time explosion, genius.

And if Hegseth doesn't know, then how would the unknown Pentagon sources know?

1. Not gleeful.
2. Not angry any time, unless my sports team loses.
3. We have all sorts of intelligence assets covering that area most likely, and yes, many are likely tied to Israel and other allies. That doesn't have to mean people directly on the ground. I heard a retired general explain all of it last night. Hertling I believe. He said the first report on such matters is almost always wrong.
4. Hegseth is an unqualified hack. And no, he didn't know what the ******* assessment was right after the attack. Nobody did.

You sound happy about the potential results being less than reported. Otherwise, you sound angry most of the time. Your problem, not mine.

Hegseth made comments well after the actual event. My point was, he has access to any intel that anybody else has, PLUS he saw the event.

The idea that you think Hegseth is an unqualified hack makes me laugh. Austin was a lot better, right? I don't recall you calling Austin a hack.

You don't know what I sound like, gramps. That's you're ******* problem here.

And yes, pretty much everyone without their head up trump's ass knew and have said that a drunk fox news host was not in any way qualified to run our largest government agency.

Yet you had no problem with a drunk old bag that had her head up so many asses all she can see is shite.....

running congress

Trump just said in a live presser at the Hague that they now have multiple ground reports from the Iran bombing that those sites were "obliterated."

(06-25-2025 09:25 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 09:05 AM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Iran wouldn’t be at the negotiation table if the mission failed to reach its goal. Some sources “familiar” with the intelligence running to the legacy media is nothing more than the the same kind of sources that ran to the media on numerous times to create a narrative against Trump on numerous occasions

This is a big tell from my perspective. It's more about what they didn't say than what they did. The fact that they didn't come out and say America's attempted attack on the glorious republic of Iran failed to penetrate their defenses is telling. Instead they said they would rebuild. It's the most defeated response I've ever seen come out of that regime.

couldn’t agree more … it’s tuck tail and figgle out who’s who on their end so they can try to start anew … at least that’s what they see as ‘best method’…

the world sitting by w/o outrage has to be the worst of all … hate it for those fkbag ragheaded cunTTTs!!!

Remember when I made the analogy of Iran being as dumb as ants. That when you destroy an ant hill they go back to starting all over again. That's what Iran is saying they will do and again like we do with ant hills we destroy them again and that's what Iran wants us to do with their messaging about rebuilding

It's downright hilarious to see Tom & Elvis run with the "we didn't do much damage", based on a report from the same media hack that came out with the "Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation".

Foll me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 63,592 times, our names are Tom & Elvis.

(06-25-2025 08:50 AM)TripleA Wrote:  ^^ Someone please explain this in simple terms to Tom. Thanks.

Ok, how about this. Furdow was basically given a bunker buster enema.

(06-25-2025 09:35 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(06-25-2025 08:50 AM)TripleA Wrote:  ^^ Someone please explain this in simple terms to Tom. Thanks.

Ok, how about this. Furdow was basically given a bunker buster enema.

Thanks for the laugh.

And Trump just used the "obliterated" word again.

Wow, Hegseth got up to the podium and absolutely blasted that report minimizing the possible results. Ground confirmation now says otherwise.

General Jack Keane just said the Israelis are the ones on the ground, he has talked to them, and their initial assessment is that Iran's nuclear program has been set back at least 2 years, and maybe more, and that the strikes accomplished exactly what was intended.

(06-25-2025 09:52 AM)TripleA Wrote:  General Jack Keane just said the Israelis are the ones on the ground, he has talked to them, and their initial assessment is that Iran's nuclear program has been set back at least 2 years, and maybe more, and that the strikes accomplished exactly what was intended.

Uh oh. Tom & Elvis are gonna be big mad!

(06-25-2025 09:52 AM)TripleA Wrote:  General Jack Keane just said the Israelis are the ones on the ground, he has talked to them, and their initial assessment is that Iran's nuclear program has been set back at least 2 years, and maybe more, and that the strikes accomplished exactly what was intended.

Good news - at least to those without TDS who are now weeping and gnashing their teeth.

Even complete success does not end Iran's nuclear threat because they can attempt to rebuild. Hopefully, the regime will declare victory and end their ambition. If not, I think they will wait until another Dem occupies the President's chair.

(06-25-2025 09:34 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  It's downright hilarious to see Tom & Elvis run with the "we didn't do much damage", based on a report from the same media hack that came out with the "Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation".

Foll me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 63,592 times, our names are Tom & Elvis.

Yep. I couldn’t recall which other, from the available mountain, hoax it was that this “reporter” was behind.

The idea that some low level pentagon “source” is going to have better intel than our Sec Def or the POTUS is just head shakingly hilarious. And this same fake source had this confidential intel within what? 12 hrs?

Only a fool hoping for Americas failure would believe that. 4 30,000# bombs in one relatively small area will have them digging around in the rubble of a blown up mountain for enough years that they’d be better off starting over at another site.

Then we can bomb that one into oblivion too.

(06-25-2025 06:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So....NOT obliterated? No way trump could have been wrong...or lying...or spouting off before he knew the facts. He probably saw a big explosion on TV and turned in for the night.

Quote:But sources familiar with the Pentagon's intelligence assessment say Iran's centrifuges are largely "intact" and the impact was limited to above-ground structures.

Entrances to two nuclear facilities were sealed off, and some infrastructure was destroyed or damaged, but much of the facilities, which are deep underground, escaped the brunt of the blasts.

The anonymous sources told US media it is estimated that the attack only set Iran back "a few months, tops", and that any resumption of its nuclear programme may be based on how long it takes the country to dig out and make repairs.

Sources also confirmed to CBS that some of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile was moved before the strikes, according to the intelligence assessment.

The US 30,000lb (14,000kg) Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb was thought to be the only weapon capable of destroying Iran's underground enrichment facilities.

US strikes did not destroy Iran nuclear programme, says intelligence assessment

Can't wait to see who gets fired for likely telling the truth...LOL

Then, go back and bombed it out again and again until everyone’s appetite is satiated.

I could be wrong, but I think I heard Trump say in the presser today that RedWingTom is a moron.

Obama military strikes without congressional approval: 2016 only.

Total bombs dropped, by country:

Syria - 12,192
Iraq - 12,095
Afghanistan - 1,337
Libya - 496
Yemen - 35
Somalia - 14
Pakistan - 3

Total = 26,172

Source: Council on Foreign Relations