Trump Team Weighs Options, Including Airstrikes, to Stop Iran’s Nuclear Program

[u/200-inch-cock]

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/trump-iran-plan-nuclear-weapons-def26f1d

[u/biglyorbigleague]

I have to assume Israel is drawing up similar plans.

[u/seattlenostalgia → u/biglyorbigleague]

I'll get shit on for this, but it may not be a bad idea. Air striking Iranian nuclear capabilities would be a short term geopolitical headache but future generations everywhere would thank us for it.

Imagine if we had done the same in North Korea. Now that they have nukes they're basically a thorn in everyone's side forever, and there's no way to get rid of them or even meaningfully pressure them to do anything.

[u/Bunny_Stats → u/seattlenostalgia]

But how does bombing a facility today solve the problem "for future generations?" Their nuclear enrichment facilities are deep underground, the Iranians have been preparing for US airstrikes on their enrichment sites for over 20 years. You can bomb the entrances and exits, which would slow production, but then what? Do you just keep bombing the same entrances and exits every month forever? Do you think bombing them indefinitely makes it more or less likely that Iran hardens its attitude and feels it needs nukes to defend itself?

This is not a problem that can be solved by bombing. You either need to negotiate with the regime so that they feel sufficiently safe that they don't need nukes, or else you need to go for a full ground invasion, which would be on a massively larger scale than either Iraq war. There is no easy middle-ground.

[u/Airedale260 → u/Bunny_Stats]

Because Iran clearly doesn’t give a shit about deterrence; they’re a massive geopolitical headache that has already used weapons to try and murder noncombatants, simply because they exist.

And yes, you can absolutely post-hole the shit out of it, or launch some kind of short-term raid (similar to what the U.S. did with Osama) and get back out. Wrecking everything Iran’s worked for over the past, what, 10-15 years or so is one HELL of a message, and if they try anything else, then bombing the shit out of Kharg Island until Iran collapses is doable.

Negotiation won’t work; between mutual distrust and the shit Iran has pulled over the years (decades) with us and our allies means there is no way to come to a solution both sides can live with.

*-Kharg Island is a location off the coast in the Gulf which carries about 90% of Iran’s oil to the world market. Taking it out would completely wreck Iran’s economy, and if it’s done on top of hitting their nuclear sites? It won’t be overnight, but the regime will be toast.

[u/Ind132 → u/Airedale260]

(similar to what the U.S. did with Osama)

How about "similar to what the US tried in Iran during the 'hostage crisis' "?

Because Iran today is more like Iran then, as opposed to Pakistan.

[u/Bunny_Stats → u/Airedale260]

And yes, you can absolutely post-hole the shit out of it, or launch some kind of short-term raid (similar to what the U.S. did with Osama) and get back out.

You watch too many movies my friend. Slipping in a couple of helicopters to take on a terrorist with a couple of bodyguards and no state support is in no way comparable to entering the heavily fortified military bases under which the enrichment facilities are built. No offence, but this isn't a feasible option. It's like suggesting North Korea could "raid" Fort Knox.

[u/Airedale260 → u/Bunny_Stats]

You misunderstand a couple of key points. My argument isn’t that it would be easy, but rather that it’s not either “massive invasion and occupation” or nothing; you can do the “objective raid/invasion” bit and then get back out without an occupation.

It would still be a big challenge, since it would likely require something along the lines of multiple carrier groups, amphibious assault ships, the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions, the entire Ranger regiment, and detachments from special forces backed up by a metric fuckton of airpower, but unlike the North Koreans (or anyone else), the U.S. has the logistical capability to actually pull such an operation off, since we have a global reach.

It wouldn’t be easy, but it’s certainly possible for the U.S. to pull it off. More so if certain allies in the region (some combination of Kuwait, the UAE, the Saudis, etc) allow us to stage out of their territory and/or allow us to use them as regrouping points.

[u/Bunny_Stats → u/Airedale260]

Keep in mind we aren't talking about a single facility here, we're talking about multiple enrichment sites across a half-dozen military bases that are spread throughout the interior of Iran. This would not be a small operation.

For comparison, it took six months to prepare the supplies necessary for the first Gulf War, which didn't step foot in Iraq and only focused on liberating Kuwait. While you could skimp and get away with fewer supplies in your limited-invasion plan, do you really want to risk having the entire 82nd and 101st divisions left in the middle of Iran without enough supplies to get them out? If not, you're going to need a pretty substantial build up above and beyond what's necessary to ensure you have the spare capacity to handle unexpected problems, like say an Iranian drone slipping through and hitting an ammo dump, and that takes time.

Meanwhile, Iran is two weeks away from building a nuke if they go all-out.

In a race as to who would be ready first, I would not be confident betting on the US.

[u/seeyaspacetimecowboy → u/Bunny_Stats]

I would not bet against the world's premier areal strike force that loves sitting around and wargaming every possible "how do we bring fury and fire precisely where we want it, when we want it" scenario with its titanic budget. Israel infiltrated and completely trashed Iran's capabilities from land bases in a restricted geographic origin.

The USAF can bomb Iran from Arkansas.

[u/Bunny_Stats → u/seeyaspacetimecowboy]

And that's precisely why Iran has spent the last 20 years making sure it's enrichment facilities are deep underground, safe from any airstrike.

[u/seeyaspacetimecowboy → u/Bunny_Stats]

safe from any airstrike.

Similar to ships safe from any icebergs.

[u/Baderkadonk → u/Airedale260]

Negotiation won’t work; between mutual distrust and the shit Iran has pulled over the years (decades) with us and our allies means there is no way to come to a solution both sides can live with.

Are we ignoring the deal Obama negotiated for Iran to cease nuclear development? Negotiations would have worked if Trump hadn't pulled out of the deal.

Maybe these countries end up being such a problem for us because the only "solution" people like you can come up with is: more bombs. Just keep attacking countries to "avoid war." Maybe they'll learn to love the United States if we just kill enough of them.

[u/Airedale260 → u/Baderkadonk]

I mean they took our diplomats hostage for over a year, then bombed a synagogue in 1994 because they hate Jews, and generally want to export their system of government to other countries (their particular take on Shi’a Islam is spreading it by force).

Then there’s the decades long support for Hamas and Hezbollah, including sponsoring attacks that killed hundreds of Americans. And the deal only tried to delay them getting a bomb, not give it up (read: kicking the can down the road until Obama was no longer in office)…amid public opposition from both sides of the aisle.

[u/Neglectful_Stranger → u/Baderkadonk]

Negotiations would have worked if Trump hadn't pulled out of the deal.

They really wouldn't, the deal was garbage.

[u/[deleted] → u/seattlenostalgia]

Aren’t most of them underground now?

[u/Positron311 → u/[deleted]]

Bunker busters are a thing

[u/Astrocoder → u/Positron311]

Conventional bunker busters wont get their sites. The only one that MIGHT is the 30,000 pound bunker buster bomb the US created. Iranian sites are buried deep in rock.

[u/MISSISSIPPIPPISSISSI → u/Astrocoder]

You can also keep dropping them in the same spot.

[u/Bullet_Jesus → u/MISSISSIPPIPPISSISSI]

Has that ever been tested? All I've read is that it could work in theory.

[u/Skeptical0ptimist → u/Bullet_Jesus]

I believe that IDF strike on Hezbollah headquarters which killed Nasralah was a dozen of bunker buster bombs dropped on the same coordinate repeatedly.

[u/WulfTheSaxon → u/Skeptical0ptimist]

Yep, reportedly 2,000 lb bombs.

[u/MISSISSIPPIPPISSISSI → u/Bullet_Jesus]

Good question. There is always this baddie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-57A/B_MOP

[u/cathbadh → u/Astrocoder]

The Americans have the ability to repeatedly hit the same location, so they would work. Israel unfortunately doesn't have the resources to hit more than one or two sites a single time.

[u/tribblite → u/cathbadh]

And you don't have to destroy the bunker, you can also just mangle the tunnel and all the rock above it. I don't think it's that easy to build deep tunnels in gravel.

[u/Ginger_Anarchy → u/tribblite]

Also the psychological effects of the US showing they know exactly where the facilities are would probably cause them to panic and try to move facilities elsewhere, which takes a while.

[u/darito0123 → u/Astrocoder]

nah ur right, there is no way to "bunker bust" an actual mountain, there are ways to close off entrances for a time etc but its not something that can be sealed off forever with airstrikes

[u/DontCallMeMillenial → u/[deleted]]

EW surveillance can still find that easily.

[u/Jugaimo → u/seattlenostalgia]

I mean striking a nation’s nuclear missile sites is an outright act of war. I don’t think Iran will respond too kindly to such an attack.

[u/Big_Muffin42 → u/seattlenostalgia]

I like the idea in theory.

But I do worry about potential fallout. Or other side effects

Chernobyl had a radioactive cloud float into Germany. It nearly leaked into the water system which would have made Europe basically uninhabitable.

[u/CaptainDaddy7 → u/Big_Muffin42]

You got a source for that? I just googled it and couldn't find anything. 

[u/TexasPeteEnthusiast → u/Big_Muffin42]

Destroying a nuclear weapon's site would not create the kind of radioactivity that Chernobyl produced, nor would it create the kind of fallout that successful detonation of a nuclear weapon would produce.

[u/Nerd_199 → u/biglyorbigleague]

Their are going to, it just matter of when.

Iran is really weak right now with the assinations of the Iranian general in 2020.

Hamas and Hezbollah is getting wrecked by Israel, and Syria which would transfer weapons between the proxy, have fallen

[u/MisterVS → u/biglyorbigleague]

I believe the plans are already there and Bibi needs US direct involvement to succeed since America has the type of bunker buster type ordnance to cause meaningful damage to the mountain buried facilities. Wow, that was a long sentence.

[u/Anonymmmous → u/biglyorbigleague]

Aren’t a lot of their facilities underground and well fortified?

[u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

Between this and Mexico, anti-war Trump sure is talking about starting a lot of wars.

[u/topofthecc → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

I've been wondering what would happen if the US bunker busted the Iranian nuclear program and just left things at that. What could they do to retaliate? Their allies are getting annihilated everywhere, their attempts to hit Israel have looked pathetic, and their own people loathe them.

[u/cathbadh → u/topofthecc]

It would take a MAJOR air campaign, with repeated air strikes over the course of days. This would involve hitting fortified and deeply buried sites repeatedly to ensure your bombs hit deep enough, because you'll never be able to verify if it worked or not. These bunkers are deep enough that Israel would not be able to do much about them without their own nuclear weapons. This would follow with strikes on at least one site in or next to a civilian population center. If done wrong, this would risk radiological exposure. It would also require sustained attacks on Iranian air defenses, air bases, and every rocket and missile base they have.

What could they do to retaliate?

Attack Israel, end oil production for the Saudis and all of our regional allies, causing a global economic crisis, and launch terror attacks against us everywhere. They'd also have piles of radioactive debris that could be attached to dirty bombs.

Their allies are getting annihilated everywhere, their attempts to hit Israel have looked pathetic, and their own people loathe them.

This all correct, and it wouldn't be difficult (just expensive and time consuming) for the US to cripple their nuclear ambitions. It would not be without cost to us and our allies however.

[u/riko_rikochet → u/cathbadh]

Yea I feel like people are forgetting the old adage about backing a wild animal into a corner. What can Iran do in a "conventional" war? Not a whole lot. What can Iran do to burn down the world if their leaders decide they have nothing left to lose? A whole lot.

[u/VultureSausage → u/riko_rikochet]

It's honestly a little worrying seeing people having learned nothing from Iraq. The destabilising effects of that war are still playing out.

[u/I-Make-Maps91 → u/VultureSausage]

Because for all the anti war/populist bluster, these are still a bunch of neocons. Look at the actual policy, not the rhetoric, and it's privatization, deregulation, and tax cuts that primarily help the wealthy while giving a sop to the middle class.

[u/VultureSausage → u/I-Make-Maps91]

I'm well aware, I'm just bemused that people are falling for literally the same rhetoric as with Iraq.

[u/I-Make-Maps91 → u/VultureSausage]

I used to be, now I'm just sad. Once of my favorite social studies teachers, a guy who had a pretty big impact on how I view public service and civic responsibilities, regularly writes in to the local paper about how we aren't giving Trump enough credit for all the good he does.

Trump is everything I thought we were warned against in his class.

[u/GoodByeRubyTuesday87 → u/cathbadh]

It’s interesting about the Saudi oil part, or honestly most middle eastern oil production. Reminds me of North Korea having tons of missiles and artillery armies directly as Seul in case a war breaks out, like the US + SK could likely win a conventional war against NK but they could nearly destroy all of sooty Korea in the process.

Iran is half pretending to be a normal global country right now, they have the capacity to do a lot worse. They’re a parish as is, but they could do a lot more damage.

[u/Sabertooth767 → u/topofthecc]

The only thing they could do is what they're doing now: fund terrorism.

Why do we negotiate with these people?

[u/burnaboy_233 → u/Sabertooth767]

If Iran was to bomb the straight of her moose, well, pretty much the global economy will collapse

[u/mysterious_whisperer → u/burnaboy_233]

“straight of her moose” is great

[u/Airedale260 → u/burnaboy_233]

Speech to text or just auto correct having a very bad day?

[u/burnaboy_233 → u/Airedale260]

Speech to text, thing is pretty annoying

[u/mysterious_whisperer → u/burnaboy_233]

I had it pegged as an intentional joke or a reference I didn’t recognize. Pretty sure I’m always going to think of it as “her moose” now.

[u/Ghost4000 → u/topofthecc]

They'd probably seek friends anywhere they could, I wonder if we'd consider this a win if it meant an Iran propped up by China, like North Korea.

[u/classless_classic → u/Ghost4000]

This. Suddenly Iran has Chinese drone technology, which is then funneled to terrorists to attack on US soil.

[u/VirtualPlate8451 → u/topofthecc]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing

[u/Bullet_Jesus → u/topofthecc]

They'll just build deeper bunkers and we'll be back here in a decade.

[u/WorksInIT → u/Bullet_Jesus]

Okay. So target every government and military building. We don't have to limit ourselves to nuclear facilities.

[u/thingsmybosscantsee → u/WorksInIT]

You do realize you're talking about war, right?

[u/Bullet_Jesus → u/WorksInIT]

So we've gone from striking Iranian nuclear facilitates, to striking Iranian government and military facilities, what's next? Infrastructure?

[u/WorksInIT → u/Bullet_Jesus]

I think that would be good enough. At least until.they establish a new government after we've addressed the current one.

[u/Bullet_Jesus → u/WorksInIT]

So we just keep blowing up Iranian governments until we get one we like?

[u/WorksInIT → u/Bullet_Jesus]

Sounds like a plan to me.

[u/Bullet_Jesus → u/WorksInIT]

Damn if it's that easy I'm surprised prior administrations have ever had any difficulty with foreign policy.

[u/WorksInIT → u/Bullet_Jesus]

Yes, the previous administrations have handled Iran poorly. The only language terrorists understand is violence. Trying to reason or negotiate with them is a waste of time. Military action is the only thing that can actually address Iran.

[u/IHerebyDemandtoPost → u/WorksInIT]

I can’t think of a single time a regime was toppled with air power alone.

The US leveled about 85% of North Korean buildings during the Korean War. They weathered the storm.

The US dropped several times more explosives on North Vietnam than they did on North Korea, and they won the war.

And in both of these examples, it wasn’t an air-only campaign.

If you want to topple the regime, you need boots on the ground. Either American boots, or preferably, someone elses.

[u/WorksInIT → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

It depends on if we can identify where their leadership is. If we can, then we should be able to target them with airstrikes. I'm patient.

[u/Remarkable-Medium275 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

Isolationists really should have packed it up once Rubio got picked for Sec State.

The only reason why the GOP leadership pretends to be isolationist about Ukraine is because of Trump's beef with them.

[u/karim12100 → u/Remarkable-Medium275]

Yeah choosing Rubio was a bit ironic with how hard Trump attacked Liz Cheney as a chicken hawk.

[u/wf_dozer → u/Remarkable-Medium275]

because of Trump's beef with them.

you mean Trumps debt to the Russians. Zelensky has always been nice to and deferred to Trump. It's only putin's desire to reabsorb Ukraine into Russia that drives Trump's policy.

[u/FridgesArePeopleToo → u/wf_dozer]

Zelenasky was the one that Trump tried to extort to interfere in the 2020 election and he didn't go along with it

[u/McCool303 → u/Remarkable-Medium275]

I’d wager the piles of Rubles funneled to the GOP via the NRA and citizens united. Has a lot more to do with the GOP’s Ukraine policy than fear of Trump. Yet another damning story that was swept under the rug in the circus sideshow of Trumps first term.

[u/autosear → u/McCool303]

Interesting that the article doesn't say how much money was "funneled to the GOP". Last I checked it was about $2500 over the course of years, the vast majority of which was NRA membership dues from US citizens living in Russia.

[u/CCWaterBug → u/autosear]

I never saw any significant numbers either, I remember a friend was pushing that bug money angle and the number was so low that I told him that those dollars couldn't even buy me, nothing close to an entire party.    The nra influence is because of their members, not their dollars.

[u/djm19 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

This was always such nonsense by the pro Trump crowd. He had to be restrained from starting multiple new wars, aside from the bombing campaigns he dramatically escalated.

[u/TheLeather → u/djm19]

Plus hid data about civilian casualties from drone strikes.

But thanks to nonsense spewed by the likes of Tucker, Kirk, etc. Trump was seen as a “dove.”

[u/CorndogFiddlesticks → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

All wars are negotiations that ended poorly.....

[u/IHerebyDemandtoPost → u/[deleted]]

So, for the last several years, I’ve been repeatedly told how the neocons are all with the Democrats now, and the new Trump-lead Republicans are isolationists who want to stop getting involved around the world and playing the world police, usually while making excuses why we can’t afford to help Ukraine.

[u/theclansman22 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

You were lied to about this and a good many other things. Project 2025? Of course Trump doesn’t support that! Grocery prices? Trump will reduce them! Taxes on tips? Trump is going to eliminate them! Healthcare? Trump has a plan and it’s the best plan!

[u/hawkeye877 → u/[deleted]]

I think the point he's making is not a policy statement on Iran, but a comment on how one of big points of Trump's campaign was to end "endless wars."

[u/wf_dozer → u/[deleted]]

You sound like Rumsfeld before Iraq and Afghanistan. It's never that easy and it always involves ground troops if you actually want to get it done. Then we are there for 20 years.

[u/djm19 → u/[deleted]]

He was in a better position before he tore up the Iran Nuclear agreement.

[u/WulfTheSaxon → u/djm19]

The US was in a better position before that agreement that Iran violated from Day 1 and which just served to fund their exploits.

[u/mclumber1 → u/[deleted]]

I think it's important to understand why Iran would want nukes in the first place. What's crazy to me is that the US fought a literal war against Vietnam, in which tens of thousands of Americans, and millions of Vietnamese died in, yet we've been able normalize relations.

In the 45 years since the fall of the pro-US government in Iran, the US and Iran are still enemies.

[u/psunavy03 → u/mclumber1]

Because since then, the US and Vietnam have found shared interests. Nations normalize relations because they have shared interests and fight when those interests are irreconcilable. This isn't about finding excuses to hold hands and sing "Kumbaya."

[u/IHerebyDemandtoPost → u/mclumber1]

Despite the war, Vietnam‘s historic enemy, China, who has invaded them many times over the centuries, is ascendant. (A simple Google search tells me Vietnam has been invaded 23 times from China. That might not be accurate, but it’s a lot.)

[u/HarryPimpamakowski → u/[deleted]]

Yes. It’s ridiculous that we get to decide which states are nuclear and which ones aren’t. Especially at Israel’s bidding (a country that clandestinely developed its own and isn’t a party to the treaty on  non proliferation) 

Who’s the only country that has actually used nuclear weapons? Oh that’s right, US! 

Besides, we had a plan in place that was scrapped by Trump. Diplomacy was an option. Iran having nukes might actually prevent a hot conflict between it and Israel. 

[u/WulfTheSaxon → u/HarryPimpamakowski]

Iran was already violating that “plan”.

[u/HarryPimpamakowski → u/WulfTheSaxon]

When was that? Before or after we exited it in 2018 and re-applied sanctions?

[u/WulfTheSaxon → u/HarryPimpamakowski]

Before. Since literally Day 1 they were hiding how close to a bomb they’d already gotten, despite a central pillar of the deal being fessing up to all past activity so that Western intelligence could get an idea of what and who to look out for if it resumed, and to get an accurate estimate of their breakout time – which was massively overestimated due to the lies.

As one visible example, they publicly filled the calandria of their reactor with cement… and kept a secret spare set of calandria tubes. They already had a final, component-tested design for a miniaturized nuclear warhead and had started building production-scale facilities when they paused the program in 2004 and sent it deeper undercover.

[u/Hefty_Musician2402 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

What?! But I was told that Trump is peaceful and leaves other countries alone and that’s why I should vote for him! Bamboozled again!

[u/McCool303 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

[u/homegrownllama → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

Honestly speaks to both how well his campaign capitalized on having their cake and eating it too. Somehow both anti and pro use-of-force at the same time. Both more pro-Israel and pro-Palestine.

Although that may also just be the voters being misinformed, but gotta give some credit to the campaign.

[u/Soccerlover121 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

There wouldn’t be a war because they can’t hit us with nukes. That’s the point. They can throw a tantrum and hit Israel or try to, but all their shit will be shot down. 

[u/IHerebyDemandtoPost → u/Soccerlover121]

So let’s get this straight:

Biden is pro-war because when, after finally ending Afghanistan*, he assists Ukraine and Israel, when they were attacked by others.

Trump is anti-war while he is considering to bomb a middle-East nation and send special forces into our next-door neighbor.

*and he ended the secret drone war, that Obama was much attacked for, and Trump expanded (which nobody seemed cared about), but Biden never got any credit for ending it.

[u/Command0Dude → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

It's funny-sad how easily social media can turn reality upside down.

[u/TheLeather → u/Command0Dude]

Fucking mind boggling to watch.

One specific thing I can think of was when tensions were at a high point with Iran after Solemani was killed by a drone strike, Fox News and other right wing outlets were dusting off the ‘ol “If you aren’t with us, you’re against us.” Flash forward later and those same commentators were trying to portray Trump as some sort of “dove.”

[u/mark5hs → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

It's not like Iran can fight back

[u/VultureSausage → u/mark5hs]

They can hit Saudi Arabia's oil. That'll hurt quite a bit.

[u/Grumblepugs2000 → u/VultureSausage]

Dude they couldn't even defend Assad or Hezbollah. They are extremely weak and we need to take the opportunity before they can turn the table 

[u/VultureSausage → u/Grumblepugs2000]

The Houthi rebels in Yemen have managed to be quite a nuisance for shipping with a fraction of Iran's resources and they're not right next to the Strait of Hormuz.

[u/ApexSimon → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

I know that was the narrative, but did anyone actually believe it?

[u/IHerebyDemandtoPost → u/ApexSimon]

I had people swearing up and up down that Trump was anti-war. Makes me wonder why I even participate in online political discussions.

[u/theclansman22 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

People on this forum swore up and down that Trump had nothing to do with and did not support project 2025 too. I will give republicans credit, they did a good job of telling voters exactly what they wanted to hear to get their votes (trump said he was going to reduce grocery prices!). Now they have to deliver and I think a lot of people are going to be disappointed.

[u/Generic_Superhero → u/theclansman22]

I think a lot of people are going to be disappointed.

Doubtful. They will be told why Trumps failure to deliver on all his lies totally isn't his fault and they will roll with it.

[u/Diamasaurus → u/Generic_Superhero]

Get ready to hear echoes of the "obstructionist Democrats" from the first two years of Trump's first term.

[u/Bullet_Jesus → u/Diamasaurus]

Plus a lot of "bet the Dems are glad they kept the Filibuster" as if the Senate being a legislative graveyard is good for the country.

[u/Pinball509 → u/Diamasaurus]

I remember when democrats were blamed when the GOP couldn’t elect a house speaker in 2023. “Why aren’t you helping!”

[u/IIHURRlCANEII → u/Pinball509]

“Dems are contributing to a dysfunctional government just as much as Republicans.”

God I hated that shit.

[u/TheLeather → u/Pinball509]

Democrats also got blamed for McCarthy getting removed as if McCarthy didn’t talk shit right before the vote to kick him from Speaker. 

[u/I-Make-Maps91 → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

I'm doing my best to stop. It's impossible to tell rage bait from real opinions and them you have to guess if they're a content mill farming engagement or a real person. Reddit is great for small subs about specific topics, it's much less good for politics and news.

[u/HavingNuclear → u/ApexSimon]

I had someone tell me on here during the election that they'd rather have mean tweets than wars. I told them they're going to get both. And... huh... well look at that.

[u/DrySecurity4 → u/HavingNuclear]

Wow. You're telling me Trump isn't going to usher in an era of global world peace and end all wars once and for all? Truly enlightening

[u/adreamofhodor → u/ApexSimon]

Yes, I’ve got no doubt a lot of people believed it.

[u/ZHISHER → u/IHerebyDemandtoPost]

I sure am glad I just aged out of the draft

[u/darito0123]

im no iran theocracy lover BUT

how can we expect any nation to not pursue nuclear weapons after the worlds reaction to ukraine?

[u/dontKair]

“Under Trump there were no wars”

[u/gorillatick → u/dontKair]

Like Putin in Russia, they will simply redefine the concept. By providing Ukraine with arms, Biden is bringing the USA to war with Russia ... however, airstrikes in Iran will not bring the USA to war with Iran. It's a special operation with airstrikes, not war. It's really very simple.

[u/[deleted] → u/gorillatick]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/ModPolBot → u/[deleted]]

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:

Law 1. Civil Discourse

~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.

Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.

[u/NINTENDONEOGEO → u/dontKair]

No new wars. 

[u/autosear → u/NINTENDONEOGEO]

Russia-Ukraine isn't a new war. It was going for all four years of Trump's last presidency, with Russian soldiers occupying Ukraine and soldiers on both sides killing each other.

[u/NINTENDONEOGEO → u/autosear]

If you want to count it all as one war, then it still began during Obama and wasn't a "new war" under Trump.

[u/autosear → u/NINTENDONEOGEO]

Right, I'm just saying it wasn't a new war started under Biden. I don't think Trump really had a chance at ending it.

[u/BigfootTundra → u/NINTENDONEOGEO]

We’re not currently at war with Iran so this would be a new war. Surprised taking out their general (which I wasn’t opposed to) didn’t spark a bigger conflict in 2020

[u/I-Make-Maps91 → u/BigfootTundra]

It would have, but then Iran knocked out a passenger airliner and there were rumors of this new virus spreading in Asia and then Europe which dominated news and government priorities for a couple years.

[u/BigfootTundra → u/I-Make-Maps91]

Ah true, I forgot all of that happened (well not the pandemic, but the passenger airliner)

[u/I-Make-Maps91 → u/BigfootTundra]

Kinda wild that incompetence spared us from a war instead of leading to one for a change, huh?

[u/NINTENDONEOGEO → u/BigfootTundra]

Israel, with our significant assistance, has been at war with Iran for over a year.

[u/BigfootTundra → u/NINTENDONEOGEO]

“Over a year” is a little lazy. Israel and Iran have been at conflict for decades, and yes, that includes during Trump’s term.

Bombing Iran brings us directly into that conflict and the “no new wars” and the anti-neocon crowd will need to eat their words.

[u/NINTENDONEOGEO → u/BigfootTundra]

There were no new wars under Trump. 

When running for his next term, he said he would speed up the end of the existing wars. If bombing Iran helps do that, good for him. 

Calling it a "new war" is silly when it's been going on since last year. 

[u/BigfootTundra → u/NINTENDONEOGEO]

The US has not been in and is not in direct conflict with Iran. You can jump through whatever mental hoops you need to in order to justify what Trump is saying and what he might do, but you’re only fooling yourself.

[u/WulfTheSaxon → u/BigfootTundra]

The US has been shooting down Iranian ballistic missiles…

[u/BigfootTundra → u/WulfTheSaxon]

Many countries have been.

[u/NINTENDONEOGEO → u/BigfootTundra]

Who said they were in direct conflict?

Straw man argument. 

[u/BigfootTundra → u/NINTENDONEOGEO]

If we’re not in direct conflict with Iran, and then we engage in a direct conflict with Iran, that would be a new war.

[u/NINTENDONEOGEO → u/BigfootTundra]

Trump ran on bringing up that new wars didn't start under him last time and that the existing wars right now (Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Iran), electing him would end them faster.

So if he decides to get directly involved, and that involvement leads to the war ending faster, then he'd be doing what he promised to do.

He never promised to not get involved. He promised to end them quickly.

[u/cathbadh]

Not going to lie, the fact that Trump would do this after insulting the mustache man for years now would make me chuckle a little. Poor John Bolton has wanted war with Iran for more than two decades now, and couldn't get it when he had actual influence over Trump foreign policy.

[u/Sabertooth767]

Why not? Israel proved you can strike Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran can't do shit about it.

I've grown weary over the fearmongering by the Democrats. The nuclear deal is moronic and has only enabled Tehran. They are completely and utterly incapable of waging a war against the United States. They can't even touch Israel!

I'm not saying that we necessarily should use military force against Iran, let alone invade, but to take it off the table is foolish.

[u/Remarkable-Medium275 → u/Sabertooth767]

I have absolutely no complaints about being hawkish on Iran. My complaints is the isolationist rhetoric about Ukraine, only for him to be a standard hawk on everyone else.

[u/andthedevilissix → u/Remarkable-Medium275]

I'm in favor of giving Ukraine weapons forever because that's great way to fuck with Russia.

I think at some point the Ukrainians are going to have to give up some territory and make peace though, perpetual war with Russia is great for the US but not so great for Ukraine.

[u/Astrocoder → u/Sabertooth767]

Israel doesnt possess weapons that could damage Irans underground nuclear sites. Only the US does.

[u/Command0Dude → u/Sabertooth767]

Why not? Israel proved you can strike Iranian nuclear facilities and Iran can't do shit about it.

Iran choosing not to do shit about it.

What happens when they decide to declare a blockade on the straight of Hormuz, and throw the world oil economy into crisis?

They can absolutely cause another 70s energy crisis whenever they want. It's their version of the nuclear option.

The nuclear deal is moronic and has only enabled Tehran.

That was literally the only thing we had that could've convinced Iran to give up their nuclear program. Eventually they're going to be able to develop one in secret no matter how much we bomb them. Iran is a pretty big country and eventually we'll miss something and they'll have it.

[u/Sabertooth767 → u/Command0Dude]

>What happens when they decide to declare a blockade on the straight of Hormuz, and throw the world oil economy into crisis? They can absolutely cause another 70s energy crisis whenever they want. It's their version of the nuclear option.

It wouldn't be the first time we sank the Iranian navy for fucking around in the Persian Gulf.

Also, the vast majority of oil that goes through that area is bound for Asia.

>That was literally the only thing we had that could've convinced Iran to give up their nuclear program. Eventually they're going to be able to develop one in secret no matter how much we bomb them. Iran is a pretty big country and eventually we'll miss something and they'll have it.

If they can hide a nuclear site from our bombs, they certainly can from IAEA.

[u/Command0Dude → u/Sabertooth767]

It wouldn't be the first time we sank the Iranian navy for fucking around in the Persian Gulf.

My dude, the Houthis have significantly less capability than the Iranians, and the Red Sea straight is still mostly blockaded.

Also, the vast majority of oil that goes through that area is bound for Asia.

Doesn't matter, oil is a global market. Gas will get more expensive here because an oil shortage for Asia means they will pay more for oil, and producers will ship that oil to Asia from somewhere else. As oil prices rise, oil companies will be able to sell for higher profits, raising the prices in America.

Or, did you not notice how in 2022 gas prices surged because of a war in Ukraine, even though we got no oil from Russia?

2022 will look like a molehill by comparison.

If they can hide a nuclear site from our bombs, they certainly can from IAEA.

It's a matter of difference in degree.

Under the Iran deal the we would only have to find a single site out of compliance to impose sanctions again, which would just mean going back to square 1. Without the Iran deal, we need to find every single site.

Is finding 1 site easier or harder than finding every single site without exception?

Iran was on course to be ruled by moderates who might have normalized relations with us. After Trump nuked the Iran deal, the moderates were pushed out of power and hardliners took over, leading to a more militant Iran. How did that help us?

[u/Tw1tcHy → u/Command0Dude]

What? Iran just elected a reformist President this year, who openly wants to engage with the West in hopes of improving the economy. The people in Iran absolutely despise the regime. Sounds like it worked pretty well!

[u/Neglectful_Stranger → u/Command0Dude]

My dude, the Houthis have significantly less capability than the Iranians, and the Red Sea straight is still mostly blockaded.

Because Biden has been handling them with kid gloves.

[u/AngledLuffa]

Trump supporters, 2024: Kamala is a warmonger and will cause millions of deaths!

Trump, 2025: So anyway, I started blasting

[u/N0r3m0rse]

Oh great. Can't wait for Joe Rogan to talk about how safe trump makes him feel after this.

[u/BadgerCabin → u/N0r3m0rse]

Well the opposite would be feeling safe with Iran having nukes. Is that what you are claiming?

[u/gorillatick → u/BadgerCabin]

Missing the point. Trump claimed to be anti-war and isolationist, and these airstrikes are neither. Pointing that fact out is not the same thing as wanting Iran to have nukes.

Kinda like pointing out that we knew all along that grocery prices would be hard to control before the election, and Trump claimed he can bring down grocery prices. He backtracked after being elected. Pointing out that he was full of it before, and that somehow people believed him, is not the same thing as wanting high grocery prices.

[u/N0r3m0rse → u/BadgerCabin]

Well you know, if trump hadn't blown up Obama's Iran deal we wouldn't really be worrying about that right now.

But sure, let's start a war that could've been easily avoided.

[u/Tw1tcHy → u/N0r3m0rse]

Actually the deal would be expiring shortly and Iran would have a much stronger economic position to continue funding terror proxies and resuming their own nuclear development.

[u/Neglectful_Stranger → u/N0r3m0rse]

The nuclear deal was straight garbage.

[u/st0nedeye → u/Neglectful_Stranger]

Ahh, and dumping it for a nuclear capable Iran was sooooOoooOooOoo much better?

I'm so sick of people bemoaning that deal while not acknowledging that getting rid of it led directly to Iran being in the position they are today.

Or even being able to face the reality that at this point Iran can produce a deployable nuke in a matter of weeks, if not days.

[u/Neglectful_Stranger → u/st0nedeye]

Iran was going to become nuclear capable either way unless the US directly attacks, all the deal did was give them money to fund terrorism.

[u/st0nedeye → u/Neglectful_Stranger]

"I'm so sick of people bemoaning that deal while not acknowledging that getting rid of it led directly to Iran being in the position they are today."

Your response is exactly what I'm talking about.

Maybe the deal would have worked, and I can even acknowledge it might not have as well. But it's utterly certain that pulling out in the way we did led to the worst possible outcome and because of that, the argument that it wasn't a good deal is completely asinine.

---

It's analogous to a person sitting in the passenger seat complaining that the driver was going too fast so they we're forced to grab the wheel and crash the car into a brick wall.

Dude.

Arguing that the car was being driving carelessly is completely pointless when that wasn't the reason the car crashed.

The reason the car crashed and the reason we're in this position vis-a-vis Iranian nukes is because someone else grabbed the wheel and stupidly drove us straight into a wall.

---

And to bring this full circle back to the current issue at hand.

It's really, really hard to trust the judgement of the guy who recklessly drove us straight into brick wall to make any sort of reasonable judgement about where we should go from here. But that's where we are.

It very well may be that these public musings about bombing Iran will lead them from being a nuclear capable country to a nuclear armed one by the time trump takes office.

You can be damn well sure that Iran is reconsidering their decision to take a knee on the goal line.

God save us from this stupidity.

[u/permajetlag → u/[deleted]]

Sure, but that doesn't mean starting a war to end Iran's military capabilities would make the world safer.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/BigfootTundra]

Where’s the “no new wars” crowd?

[u/Polandgod75 → u/BigfootTundra]

Don't worried it a "speical military operation"

[u/CCWaterBug → u/BigfootTundra]

I'm no Trump fan boy, but where are the new wars again?  I haven't seen anything except an article.

[u/thingsmybosscantsee → u/CCWaterBug]

Respectfully, considering that Trump isn't president yet, this is a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

[u/CCWaterBug → u/thingsmybosscantsee]

That's what I said, no need to be repetitive 

[u/BigfootTundra → u/CCWaterBug]

I’m not saying he started a new war, but his team is weighing an option that would likely bring us into direct conflict with Iran. Not trying to put the cart in front of the horse, but the number of times I heard “no new wars” during his campaign only to see his team talk about bombing Iran, it’s just not off to a good start

[u/Mysterious-Coconut24]

Jesus, just let the Israelis do it and take the heat don't get us involved FFS.

[u/leftofmarx]

Ah yes, the anti-war right.

[u/History_Is_Bunkier]

Or, you know, they could have left the Iran nuclear deal alone and the Iran program could have been monitored.

[u/mikey-likes_it]

So much for being anti war heh

[u/Stormclamp]

I thought no new wars.

[u/theolcollegetry]

Should see if they can draft up some sort of a treaty.

[u/200-inch-cock]

Starter comment

Summary

The incoming Trump administration is considering multiple options to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state, up to and including direct military action (airstrikes).

The administration is also formulating “maximum pressure 2.0” involving the reinstatement of sanctions.

Meanwhile, Israel is reportedly planning an attack on Iranian nuclear development infrastructure. Trump and Netanyahu have already discussed taking action against Iran during the next 4 years, but Trump wants to avoid a war between Iran and the US involving US troops.

One option the Trump team is examining is further enhancing Israeli capabilities to strike against Iranian nuclear sites. If that doesn’t work, then the US airstrikes are on the table.

In other words, the new Trump administration will prefer to destroy any Iranian nuclear capabilities through Israel as a proxy, while applying sanctions against Iran. Only if that fails will US airstrikes be considered.

Discussion question

Do you think that the incoming Trump administration will successfully prevent (or help to prevent) Iran from acquiring nuclear weaponry?

[u/Ind132]

Iran just took a huge loss in Syria. Iranian soldiers died trying to keep Assad in power, their families are wondering why. That's on top of the loss with Hezbollah and Hamas. The government probably has less popular support today than any time in the last __ decades.

A direct attack by the US would be a wonderful "rally round the flag" moment for the current government.

[u/BetaPlain]

Man there is a lot of talk about attacking Iran and hoping nothing happens.

Where are the people talking about why we shouldn't have gotten out of the nuclear deal?

[u/helic_vet → u/BetaPlain]

That's in the past. I don't think there is any going back to that.

[u/DubiousNamed]

This isn’t as crazy as it seems. I think a lot of people have forgotten about Operation Praying Mantis during the Reagan Administration. Iranian mines damaged a US warship so Reagan said fuck it and blew up about half of the Iranian navy. Nothing happened afterwards. As much as Iran likes to kick the US while it’s down and use terror proxies to harm US soldiers and our allies, they simply do not have the capability to respond to a US in-kind attack.

[u/Hefty_Musician2402]

Military industrial complex is hungry again

[u/helic_vet → u/Hefty_Musician2402]

I say let it eat!!!

[u/Kaye-77]

I talked a senior military intelligence officer just by sure randomness at my bartending job recently, he made 2 points very clear. One is the majority of Irans population hates the government. Second in a serious conflict with Iran if that was to happen, taking out their oil facilities through out thier country would be not hard to accomplish. Based of how weak Irans Air Force and Air defense is. Therefor cutting off a large portion of the government’s revenue 

[u/marchjl]

It was stopped before trump allowed it to start up again by backing out of the nuclear deal. If he hadn’t created the problem, it wouldn’t now need solving

[u/[deleted]]

[removed] — view removed comment

[u/ModPolBot → u/[deleted]]

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:

Law 1. Civil Discourse

~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.

Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 60 day ban.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.

[u/frust_grad]

Trump had imposed severe sanctions on Iran to cripple their nuclear program. The Biden administration undid those sanctions based on an unacknowledged 'pinky promise' from Iran that they won't enrich Uranium. But Iran had their cake and ate it too; as soon as they got billions of $$$ from Biden, they started enriching Uranium, and also attacked American assets/soldiers.

U.S. Grants Iran Sanctions Waiver Worth $10 Billion

Since the administration last extended the waiver in November, an Iran-backed Iraqi militia carried out a drone attack in Jordan that killed three U.S. soldiers. In addition, the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen have used anti-ship ballistic missiles and suicide drones to continuously attack U.S. Navy ships and American-owned commercial vessels.

The waiver extension appears to be linked to an unacknowledged nuclear deal in which Iran has agreed to enrich uranium below the 90 percent weapons-grade threshold. But the International Atomic Energy Agency’s latest report showed that Iran’s high-enriched uranium stockpile has expanded over the last three months.

[u/GeorgeWashingfun]

Whatever it takes to prevent them from obtaining and maintaining nukes.

[u/Opening-Citron2733]

Quasi related but I'm so over the speculation about 47s term. So many fakes, leaks and whatever's its just oversaturated and he's not even POTUS for a month 

Will Trump stop Iran's nuclear program? Idk but we'll all find out eventually 

[u/CCWaterBug → u/Opening-Citron2733]

I'm with you, we have people being all smug with their comments like it's 2027 and all these things speculated on have already happened.  

It's going to be a long 4 years and I can see myself checking out on the need again, this chicken little stuff gets tiresome