Trump says he bombed Iran

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-says-...d-uranium/

 President Trump said in a phone interview that Iran has "agreed to everything," and will work with the U.S. to remove its enriched uranium...

..."No. No troops," he said. "We'll go down and get it with them, and then we'll take it. We'll be getting it together because by that time, we'll have an agreement and there's no need for fighting when there's an agreement. Nice right? That's better. We would have done it the other way if we had to."

The president said the material would then be brought to the U.S.

"Our people, together with the Iranians, are going to work together to go get it. And then we'll take it to the United States," he said.

The president also said Iran has agreed to stop backing proxy terrorist groups, like Hezbollah and Hamas. 

is it real and for true this time? 

Let's assume it is and play forward the tangent universe. 

So much for them being as stubborn as Muslim Branch Dividians... which is good. 

And give the calculated lunatic credit. He proved you can use airstrikes, blockades, and Armageddon posturing to adlib a path through war and still minimize casualties when you change what you say every hour. 

So that's everything then.

No nukes.
No Jihad.
Open Straits.
Reformed Iran.

Are firms in the USA and Gulf alike lined up and waiting to transform Tehren in the next cyber punk led covered city of tomorrow!? 

Go capitalism yet!? 

But if its true, Trump will likely rub it in at length for doubting him..

"For 47 years Iran terrorized the world and instilled hatred aimed at the US and Israel. They caused and funded militant wars and oppressed a once free nation. And the world let it happen.  ALL MY PREDECESSORS didnt have the guts to do what i did. And I did it in 7 weeks with the exact same number of troops lost as Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan!" 

Probably something like that...

While I dislike the cult of personality for a number of reasons, his "selectively unhinged insanity" always finds a way to magically work out somehow. 

Plan? What if "no plan" is the plan? 

Should be use to him never failing when it counts by now...

Although there's always the chance everything i said is void in 24 hours too....

[Oldcarpy2]

 Dozens of Democrats call for Trump's removal after his Iran threats
Dozens of Democrats call for Trump's removal after his Iran threats

Good.  Because he's clearly off his head.  Senile, dementia ridden, ranting incoherently, just like Biden, only worse.

"Gulf of Iran?

Time to go into a Home.

[cherokeetroy]

These word salad announcements + premature victory laps is obvious market manipulation 

Nothing has changed 

https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/2045...33535?s=20
https://x.com/tradfi/status/2045184326774767954?s=20

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

Lol. That lasted long. And that's why I used the qualifier "lets assume it is". 

That was playing that tangent universe forward a little. 

But in comes the immediate contradiction as always.

I have a hope this ends very soon. He can win this one, i dont care. I want everyone sent for doomsday posturing brought home.

The USA isn't going to lose, not with all the deals going around, so the sooner Iran caves and they wrap this up, the better....

I really want this to magically work out without any further casualty. 

I will tell myself because its the foreign ministry's comments there's a chance they are doing the two-faced thing, or just expected to repeat the same thing as always. 

Maybe it isnt so sacred anymore? 

You can be a Trump critic, and want Trump and The USA to win this, and he can even get his eventual moment to build himself a golden statue again.

If its over its over.

[DBCowboy]

 
You can be a Trump critic, and want Trump and The USA to win this, and he can even get his eventual moment to build himself a golden statue again.

If its over its over.

There's a difference between being a critic and wanting Iran to win so you can dump on Trump.

[govshill2]

Pretty hilarious in a grotesque sort of way, isn't it?

Under the JCPOA Obama only had to pay $1.7 Billion in 2016 to remove Iran's enriched uranium plus shutting down most of their enrichment centrifuges, plus modifying their reactor so it couldn't produce plutonium, plus allowing 24/7 monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency.  And the MAGA crowd screamed bloody murder that Obama was a traitor, etc., etc.  

So in 2018, after twice certifying that Iran was living up to its side of the agreement, Trump unilaterally and impulsively terminated the JCPOA, which, of course, put Iran back in the uranium enrichment business.

Fast forward to 2026 and Trump spends maybe $150 Billion to bomb somewhere in excess of 10,000 Iranian targets and STILL wants to spend another $20 Billion to get back to where we were under Obama 10 years ago.  

And of course, in a weird kind of way Trump predicted this all 10 years ago when he said, "We’re going to win so much, you’re going to be so sick and tired of winning, you’re going to come to me and go ‘Please, please, we can’t win anymore.’ .... You’ll say ‘Please, Mr. President, we beg you sir, we don’t want to win anymore. It’s too much."

I'm definitely at the point where I don't want any more of his winning.

Would'a been OK if any of that actually happened with the Obama Gareement. Did any of that actually happen with total verified proof?  Did Iran actually "get rid" of all that enriched Uranium?  

[Oldcarpy2]

There's a difference between being a critic and wanting Iran to win so you can dump on Trump.

Jeez.  No one one on here wants Iran to win, no matter how many times you say so.

[DBCowboy]

Jeez.  No one one on here wants Iran to win, no matter how many times you say so.

I would politely beg to differ.

[cherokeetroy]

If we're measuring the success of this war by prior conflict metrics (i.e. US GOOD vs. OPPOSITION BAD) then knowing who the good guys are would be simple 

But there's an added layer to this war where the contrast between good vs evil gets muddied in a grey area because the parties involved are making deals and creating pacts that will most likely enrich them at the expense of everyone else

If people feel like that's something to root for, I guess that's their prerogative

[DBCowboy]

If we're measuring the success of this war by prior conflict metrics (i.e. US GOOD vs. OPPOSITION BAD) then knowing who the good guys are would be simple 

But there's an added layer to this war where the contrast between good vs evil gets muddied in a grey area because the parties involved are making deals and creating pacts that will most likely enrich them at the expense of everyone else

If people feel like that's something to root for, I guess that's their prerogative

Why would you consider the Iranian regime the "good guys"?