Trump says he bombed Iran

[putnam6]

I don’t think anyone is suggesting the bill is the reason, merely that’s it’s being parlayed now. That’s not just speculation either, he had a truth social talking about how the strike helped unify the party, and they should focus on the bill.

We don’t know what intel made him strike Iran, we don’t know where it came from, or much else other than the Admin said Iran was weeks away. We don’t know if the intel was US, or Israeli. We can only read in between the lines, and Trump said our intel community’s assessment three months ago was, in his words, wrong.

As JD pointed out, things can change in three months. But we don’t know if that was internal or not that picked up on any changing environment.

If people are supportive of all of this, it’s my opinion they’re operating on trust. To some extent I suppose that’s always the case with the government, but for some of us who are more skeptical and critical, we have a right to be so. Every admin in my lifetime has lied at some point. Some of them did so for war. So it’s not much to ask to say make a case to the American people more than “trust me”. Because frankly, I don’t. And even if I did, I don’t want that to be a standard going forward. Maybe you trust Trump, but there will be someone down the road that you don’t. That’s why power isn’t supposed to be consolidated to one person, without hurdles to go through when making such massive decisions. We’ve talked about this isn’t the first time, but using former admins who many agree were wrong doesn’t justify current actions, IMO.

As always, I dig your posts, they are well thought out and reasoned... 

Just because I can rationalize the decision, it doesn't mean I agree.

I would have waited, but

In a world where Iran has nuclear weapons, Im not worried about the future, I'd be worried about the present.

Ive been influenced deeply by the death and destruction since 10/7, all sides. Im sick of it...

Absent knowing how close they were, I choose not to believe Trump's words, but I believe my rationale, that he wouldn't have done something so domestically and internationally polarizing if he wasn't convinced the risk was there. 

Sure, he could be lied to by the intelligence and his cabinet, and I do not trust Israel, but if the military and various intelligence members concurred with Israel? 

I can easily rationalize that the decision was made with proper and considerable consternation and concern.

Where Im I calling for censorship and eliminating free thought here? 

I happen to disagree with some of the particular free thoughts presented here, in a particularly demonstrative way.