|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On May 13 2026 02:15 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2026 23:08 Jankisa wrote:We can just all remind ourselves of what the newly minted member of resistance and previous Trump campaign surrogate, as well as our very own oBlade's favorite interviewer had to say about Trump during the 2024 campaign: Tom Snyder wasn't alive in 2024.
Are you seriously going to pretend like you aren't a huge Tucker Carlson fan now? And your dodge is going to be to pretend like your favorite interviewer is someone who receded their last interview in 1999? The comment where you professed your admiration for Tucker also has no references to Tom Snyder. In fact, when you search your profile for Tucker there's like 10 posts, not a beep about Tom here, curious.
Also, I wasn't familiar with that moron at the time, but this is what you had to say about Nick "Ukrainians are using our money on cars" Shirley:
Another is Nick Shirley, he's rising. Leans right but doesn't preach. Kind of gonzo? He's young, not as experienced so a bit choppy at times, very respectful and personable and somehow gets people to be honest and open and candid.
That whole comment is gold, haven't seen it since then and it's nice to have a reminder how utterly broken your brain is and what your media, or rather, propaganda diet is.
|
|
|
On May 12 2026 08:50 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2026 05:50 Vivax wrote:On May 12 2026 04:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 12 2026 02:53 Falling wrote:There is no meaningful difference in the uniparty + Show Spoiler +: Genocide Joe and Bomber Harris would have also given a free pass to Netanyahu in Gaza and were gearing for war in Iran, the second stage of Obama's war directives.
It is said the uniparty made much spectacle over expanding healthcare coverage. But they were all of them deceived, for behind the public stunts, the uniparty agreed healthcare coverage should not expand and did not pass it in the 70 days one 'side' of the uniparty had a 'supermajority'. And ever since then the uniparty has been looking to remove the expanded healthcare coverage they did not pass.
Democrats may not be terribly left wing relative to some European democracies, but they do represent the left in American politics. And if, according to you, America cannot even muster a single left wing party but has instead spawned two right wing parties... that does not speak very well of an expanding social consciousness to overthrow the bourgeois and establish a socialist paradise. + Show Spoiler +But do continue to mock and gawk the unwashed and unenlightened proles in this thread. Maybe we split the difference and call them the "left-wing of the uniparty"? Maybe not? Anyway, 90%+ of people including voters from both parties overwhelmingly want pretty radical wealth redistribution.The core problem basically being stuck on the Hamster Wheel. The 90%+ that wants that radical wealth redistribution (or similar majorities with other things) can't muster a party that represents their interest in part because US democracy is (and has been since inception) designed to prevent it. Part of the ratchet effect is convincing people like yourself that we can't have something 90%+ of us support because we want something unreasonable instead of the ~10% having more power/leverage to get/keep it the way they prefer. Redistribution was like stage 1 prevention, we're at stage 2, 3 or even 4, where it's about stopping money from buying any kind of power these guys want. And that's not about superyachts, it's about not allowing a bunch of super rich to play god in societies because they bought out a bunch of dudes in the government. Happens even here. Goes well for a while, not forever. No need to buy the government when you can buy Twitter. Or TikTok. Or already own whatsfacegram.
"Why not both?" Buying the politicians/judges/etc is basically a rounding error. For better or worse, Trump is demanding a much more handsome ransom than most.
|
On May 13 2026 05:03 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2026 02:15 oBlade wrote:On May 12 2026 23:08 Jankisa wrote:We can just all remind ourselves of what the newly minted member of resistance and previous Trump campaign surrogate, as well as our very own oBlade's favorite interviewer had to say about Trump during the 2024 campaign: Tom Snyder wasn't alive in 2024. Are you seriously going to pretend like you aren't a huge Tucker Carlson fan now? And your dodge is going to be to pretend like your favorite interviewer is someone who receded their last interview in 1999? The comment where you professed your admiration for Tucker also has no references to Tom Snyder. In fact, when you search your profile for Tucker there's like 10 posts, not a beep about Tom here, curious. Also, I wasn't familiar with that moron at the time, but this is what you had to say about Nick "Ukrainians are using our money on cars" Shirley: Show nested quote +Another is Nick Shirley, he's rising. Leans right but doesn't preach. Kind of gonzo? He's young, not as experienced so a bit choppy at times, very respectful and personable and somehow gets people to be honest and open and candid. That whole comment is gold, haven't seen it since then and it's nice to have a reminder how utterly broken your brain is and what your media, or rather, propaganda diet is.
Of the 6 posts containing the word Tucker, 2 are me responding to you going "Durr oBlade loves Tucker Carlson bootlicking fascist" and 1 of them is me using his name as a placeholder for a rich guy hypothetical.
If you want to have your finger on the pulse of the conservative Zeitgeist, Tucker Carlson's interviews at the time I wrote that were key both in terms of the breadth and caliber of guests, and the candidness and detail of information he's able to exchange with his guests. Which is what the post was about. That was the point of that post. I would not mention Tom Snyder there because it wasn't what the post was about.
Shirley was also a great call by me who noticed his promise before you knew him - which you do now.
You have politics brain so you don't understand that interviewers are just interviewers and there is a world outside of politics. The forensic post analysis is a waste of time. If I search your profile for Trump there will be a billion posts about Trump, it doesn't mean he's your favorite person in the world. Does it? Now any other stuff you want to dig up from a year ago and continue to misunderstand as part of your "please notice me oBlade senpai" scheme?
|
|
|
On May 12 2026 20:39 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2026 14:45 Sermokala wrote:On May 12 2026 03:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 12 2026 02:33 Sermokala wrote:On May 12 2026 02:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 12 2026 01:27 Sermokala wrote:On May 11 2026 04:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 11 2026 04:28 Sermokala wrote:On May 11 2026 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 11 2026 03:01 LightSpectra wrote:
[quote]
So Democrats are "a group of leftists" but simultaneously "objectively are right-wing"? Well, "a group of leftists" is something Democrats are called sometimes (frequently in a pejorative manner). Additionally, the Democrat party is objectively right-wing. It's unfortunate those observations confused you. That's the ratchet effect working in real time. They can't be both right wing and left wing, and that has nothing to do with the ratchet effect. + Show Spoiler +Snipping out eight words for incomprehensible misunderstanding of someone elses post is pretty on brand though. You're correct that the Democrat party isn't left-wing. People disagreeing with that observation are real time examples of the ratchet effect. + Show Spoiler +Thats not what I'm saying and thats again not what the ratchet effect is. Simply saying words with complex meanings behind them isn't a strong argument for anything. There are two relevent parties, they cannot both be right wing, + Show Spoiler + thats not how any of this works. They can be right wing of you, but thats just your perspective.
If you claim to be left wing but all you ever do is advocate for and push for the right to win what does that make you? They obviously can be. If Democrats imploded and Republicans split into MAGA and super-MAGA that wouldn't make MAGA a left-wing party in any meaningful way. Sorta like how the bipartisan Hamster Wheel preventing any actual left-wing party from gaining power doesn't make a right-wing party left-wing. You're also welcome to disagree with Squirrel since they also recognize the Democrat party is a right-wing party, since you likely don't have any particular personal animosity towards them, you may be more likely to have a fruitful discussion about it. + Show Spoiler +Have you ever seen a bird with two right wings GH? If republicans spit into MAGA and super MAGA then the MAGA party would be more left wing than the super MAGA party.
You're the one thats trying to hide your bias behind concepts that are so tired and overused by you that you've compeltly lost the plot on what a bird is. I'm not replying to squirll because hes bringing actual value and his perspective to the thread + Show Spoiler +, you're just spouting off inside baseball to avoid having to put thoughts into words. Well... On May 12 2026 02:33 Sermokala wrote:On May 12 2026 01:49 LightSpectra wrote:
Do you ever get bored of interrupting conversations to copy/paste the "mock and gawk" slop or is this actually your only hobby? Its projection, He doesn't want other people to have actual conversations + Show Spoiler + he just wants to mock and gawk at left people in the thread. He can't take other peoples issues with what he says as being legitmate so he has to assert that they must be personal attacks.
Notice how he always claims that we mock and gawk right wingers when we mock and gawk at him just as much. I think you've confused yourself. + Show Spoiler +No I didn't. You sniping peoples posts removes context and you moving posts out of order is there for you to attempt to confuse other people. + Show Spoiler +Removing Squirl's post to him just thinking the democratic party is right-wing removes the conversation that he was adding to the thread. That was the smallest part of this post and it was responded to. What are you talking about "moving posts out of order"? I think you confused yourself again.
I think you've manged to confuse yourself just fine.
|
On May 14 2026 01:36 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2026 20:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 12 2026 14:45 Sermokala wrote:On May 12 2026 03:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 12 2026 02:33 Sermokala wrote:On May 12 2026 02:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 12 2026 01:27 Sermokala wrote:On May 11 2026 04:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 11 2026 04:28 Sermokala wrote:On May 11 2026 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Well, "a group of leftists" is something Democrats are called sometimes (frequently in a pejorative manner). Additionally, the Democrat party is objectively right-wing.
It's unfortunate those observations confused you. That's the ratchet effect working in real time. They can't be both right wing and left wing, and that has nothing to do with the ratchet effect. + Show Spoiler +Snipping out eight words for incomprehensible misunderstanding of someone elses post is pretty on brand though. You're correct that the Democrat party isn't left-wing. People disagreeing with that observation are real time examples of the ratchet effect. + Show Spoiler +Thats not what I'm saying and thats again not what the ratchet effect is. Simply saying words with complex meanings behind them isn't a strong argument for anything. There are two relevent parties, they cannot both be right wing, + Show Spoiler + thats not how any of this works. They can be right wing of you, but thats just your perspective.
If you claim to be left wing but all you ever do is advocate for and push for the right to win what does that make you? They obviously can be. If Democrats imploded and Republicans split into MAGA and super-MAGA that wouldn't make MAGA a left-wing party in any meaningful way. Sorta like how the bipartisan Hamster Wheel preventing any actual left-wing party from gaining power doesn't make a right-wing party left-wing. You're also welcome to disagree with Squirrel since they also recognize the Democrat party is a right-wing party, since you likely don't have any particular personal animosity towards them, you may be more likely to have a fruitful discussion about it. + Show Spoiler +Have you ever seen a bird with two right wings GH? If republicans spit into MAGA and super MAGA then the MAGA party would be more left wing than the super MAGA party.
You're the one thats trying to hide your bias behind concepts that are so tired and overused by you that you've compeltly lost the plot on what a bird is. I'm not replying to squirll because hes bringing actual value and his perspective to the thread + Show Spoiler +, you're just spouting off inside baseball to avoid having to put thoughts into words. Well... On May 12 2026 02:33 Sermokala wrote:On May 12 2026 01:49 LightSpectra wrote:
Do you ever get bored of interrupting conversations to copy/paste the "mock and gawk" slop or is this actually your only hobby? Its projection, He doesn't want other people to have actual conversations + Show Spoiler + he just wants to mock and gawk at left people in the thread. He can't take other peoples issues with what he says as being legitmate so he has to assert that they must be personal attacks.
Notice how he always claims that we mock and gawk right wingers when we mock and gawk at him just as much. I think you've confused yourself. + Show Spoiler +No I didn't. You sniping peoples posts removes context and you moving posts out of order is there for you to attempt to confuse other people. + Show Spoiler +Removing Squirl's post to him just thinking the democratic party is right-wing removes the conversation that he was adding to the thread. That was the smallest part of this post and it was responded to. What are you talking about "moving posts out of order"? I think you confused yourself again. I think you've manged to confuse yourself just fine.
I gather you realized I presented your posts in the order they appeared and rather than just accept that minor embarrassment you've done this instead.
Instead of doing that, what are the "actual conversations" you want to be having (with whoever)/reading here?
|
There's an update on just how much of the U.S. military arsenal is being wasted on Iran + how well Iran is holding together + Trump asking for more money to keep funding his war.
Reported nearly a month ago, on the U.S. side:
The U.S. military has used up nearly half of its stockpile of Patriot air defense interceptor missiles and heavily expended six other key missile stockpiles during its seven-week strike campaign against Iran, according to a new analysis from the Washington-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
The U.S. fired almost 50 percent of its Patriot missile stockpile; more than half of Terminal High Altitude Area Defenses (THAADs), which are used to protect against short, medium and intermediate-range missiles; and over 45 percent of its Precision Strike Missiles (PrSMs) stockpiles during the air and missile campaign in Iran, CSIS said in its Tuesday report. ... The U.S. military has also used up more than 20 percent of JASSMs, over 30 percent of SM-3s and at least 10 percent of SM-6 missiles during Operation Epic Fury, according to CSIS. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5842118-patriot-thaad-prsm-expenditure-iran/
Reported today, on Iran's side + on Trump's request for more military funds:
Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ...
The White House also is planning to ask Congress for a $80 billion to $100 billion supplemental for the war in Iran — with a significant chunk meant to backfill costly and sophisticated weapons expended in the now eleven-week conflict, which since early April has settled into a tense ceasefire.
The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5877148-us-iran-war-munitions-stockpiles/
|
Northern Ireland27269 Posts
Personally I’d prefer to invite the thread to join me in my new drinking game. Take a shot or a good gulp of your favoured tipple if you encounter the phrases ‘mock(ing) and gawk(ing)’, ‘hamster wheel’ and ‘aiding and abetting genocide’
I’d add more but I’m not sure your collective livers could handle it
|
Northern Ireland27269 Posts
On May 14 2026 08:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:There's an update on just how much of the U.S. military arsenal is being wasted on Iran + how well Iran is holding together + Trump asking for more money to keep funding his war. Reported nearly a month ago, on the U.S. side: Show nested quote +The U.S. military has used up nearly half of its stockpile of Patriot air defense interceptor missiles and heavily expended six other key missile stockpiles during its seven-week strike campaign against Iran, according to a new analysis from the Washington-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
The U.S. fired almost 50 percent of its Patriot missile stockpile; more than half of Terminal High Altitude Area Defenses (THAADs), which are used to protect against short, medium and intermediate-range missiles; and over 45 percent of its Precision Strike Missiles (PrSMs) stockpiles during the air and missile campaign in Iran, CSIS said in its Tuesday report. ... The U.S. military has also used up more than 20 percent of JASSMs, over 30 percent of SM-3s and at least 10 percent of SM-6 missiles during Operation Epic Fury, according to CSIS. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5842118-patriot-thaad-prsm-expenditure-iran/ Reported today, on Iran's side + on Trump's request for more military funds: Show nested quote +Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ...
The White House also is planning to ask Congress for a $80 billion to $100 billion supplemental for the war in Iran — with a significant chunk meant to backfill costly and sophisticated weapons expended in the now eleven-week conflict, which since early April has settled into a tense ceasefire.
The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5877148-us-iran-war-munitions-stockpiles/
They are clowns of the highest order, it’s really quite something to behold.
Say what you want about Iraq, the neutralising the Hussein regime was done in a couple of weeks. It was the incredibly unrealistic nation-building aspect that they tripped up on. A fool’s errand to attempt, but at least you can say it’s a tricky endeavour.
What’s worse you’re going to have a stable 40-50% of folks saying ‘this is fine’ when it’s a complete fucking shitshow that’s obviously a shitshow
|
On May 14 2026 08:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:There's an update on just how much of the U.S. military arsenal is being wasted on Iran + how well Iran is holding together + Trump asking for more money to keep funding his war. Reported nearly a month ago, on the U.S. side: Show nested quote +The U.S. military has used up nearly half of its stockpile of Patriot air defense interceptor missiles and heavily expended six other key missile stockpiles during its seven-week strike campaign against Iran, according to a new analysis from the Washington-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
The U.S. fired almost 50 percent of its Patriot missile stockpile; more than half of Terminal High Altitude Area Defenses (THAADs), which are used to protect against short, medium and intermediate-range missiles; and over 45 percent of its Precision Strike Missiles (PrSMs) stockpiles during the air and missile campaign in Iran, CSIS said in its Tuesday report. ... The U.S. military has also used up more than 20 percent of JASSMs, over 30 percent of SM-3s and at least 10 percent of SM-6 missiles during Operation Epic Fury, according to CSIS. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5842118-patriot-thaad-prsm-expenditure-iran/ Reported today, on Iran's side + on Trump's request for more military funds: Show nested quote +Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ...
The White House also is planning to ask Congress for a $80 billion to $100 billion supplemental for the war in Iran — with a significant chunk meant to backfill costly and sophisticated weapons expended in the now eleven-week conflict, which since early April has settled into a tense ceasefire.
The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5877148-us-iran-war-munitions-stockpiles/ I don't know how controversial of sn opinion it is but the reason Trump announced and extended a one sided cease fire that somehow holds to this day is because the US has run out of long range ordnance.
Trump might want this war to.continue but the army physically can't, hence also the blockade. It lets them atleast pretend to be doing something.
It really is the most humiliating defeat in America's history.
|
The Secret Service are not ones to wait until someone else gets shot and then either blame the person for bringing it upon themselves and deserving it if they're Republican, or prop up the person as a martyr if they aren't. They just want everyone protected. They want to have funding which doesn't get interrupted for over 2 months by Democrat shutdowns so the agents who protect the most important figures in our government are paid.
The price breakdown for each target area of the project area is:
$220 million for White House hardening
$180 million for White House visitor security screening facility
$175 million for Secret Service training
$175 million for enhancements for Secret Service protectees
$150 million for evolving threats and technology
$100 million for events of national significance
The $1 billion request is in addition to the annual USSS budget, $3.2 billion in FY 2025.
https://abcnews.com/Politics/breakdown-1-billion-request-trumps-white-house-ballroom/story?id=132927177
|
did you guys actually read the 2 thehill articles (#1 #2)?
I just did. Also followed up on some of the mentioned articles in those. Just made me wonder why you would quote this + Show Spoiler +"Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ... " "Asked about the report that Iran has about 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-conflict missile stockpile, Cancian, of CSIS, said those figures are “very difficult to know” and the U.S. “famously got this wrong during” the Gulf War.
“It’s fair to say that Iran may have substantial missile capabilities remaining and U.S. actions have to accommodate that possibility,” he said.
Joel Rayburn, a Middle East expert with the Hudson Institute, was dubious of the figure of 70 percent, telling The Hill that “if anything, Iranian military capabilities overstated systematically for years.”
“When I read that assessment, I thought to myself, 70 percent looks to me like something an intel team would describe as ‘as much as.’”
“I think 70 percent would be an upper limit. What is the lower? ‘We think they could have as little as 40 percent but they might have as much as 70 percent.’ I’m willing to bet that that’s what that assessment said.” Rayburn said.
He also said the Iranians are doing an information operation “to try to convince people that they have hidden strength, that they’ve been holding back. And I just don’t believe that.”
“They don’t have some super secret, hidden weapons that they’re holding back in there. They’re going to unleash those when provoked,” he added. “They will latch on to Times reporting to try to restore a deterrent because their deterrent is gone.”
Also this + Show Spoiler +"The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles." "As The New York Times previously reported, the United States expended roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the war — close to the total supply that remains in the American stockpile."
don't get me wrong. I'm all for trump bashing. but if we do it why don't we do it properly. These articles are just a lot of guess work and quoting without real substance; and - at least it seems this way - bad journalism.
|
On May 14 2026 16:47 jodljodl wrote:did you guys actually read the 2 thehill articles ( #1 #2)? I just did. Also followed up on some of the mentioned articles in those. Just made me wonder why you would quote this + Show Spoiler +"Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ... " without mentioning this + Show Spoiler +"Asked about the report that Iran has about 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-conflict missile stockpile, Cancian, of CSIS, said those figures are “very difficult to know” and the U.S. “famously got this wrong during” the Gulf War.
“It’s fair to say that Iran may have substantial missile capabilities remaining and U.S. actions have to accommodate that possibility,” he said.
Joel Rayburn, a Middle East expert with the Hudson Institute, was dubious of the figure of 70 percent, telling The Hill that “if anything, Iranian military capabilities overstated systematically for years.”
“When I read that assessment, I thought to myself, 70 percent looks to me like something an intel team would describe as ‘as much as.’”
“I think 70 percent would be an upper limit. What is the lower? ‘We think they could have as little as 40 percent but they might have as much as 70 percent.’ I’m willing to bet that that’s what that assessment said.” Rayburn said.
He also said the Iranians are doing an information operation “to try to convince people that they have hidden strength, that they’ve been holding back. And I just don’t believe that.”
“They don’t have some super secret, hidden weapons that they’re holding back in there. They’re going to unleash those when provoked,” he added. “They will latch on to Times reporting to try to restore a deterrent because their deterrent is gone.” from the same article. Also this + Show Spoiler +"The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles." when the original NYTimes article i'm guessing they are referring to says this + Show Spoiler +"As The New York Times previously reported, the United States expended roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the war — close to the total supply that remains in the American stockpile." don't get me wrong. I'm all for trump bashing. but if we do it why don't we do it properly. These articles are just a lot of guess work and quoting without real substance; and - at least it seems this way - bad journalism.
To answer your question: I chose the quotes that I did because those figures came from the intelligence community (your first part) and because I think including the percentages of weapons used/depleted is helpful for context (your second part).
I purposely didn't include the reactions of individual Democrats agreeing with the intelligence report and saying this is a problem, nor individual Republicans dismissing the report and saying that this isn't that big of a problem. For example, the Hudson Institute is a right-wing think tank, which is why I didn't include your suggested Rayburn opinions. I don't consider them to be as reliable as the intelligence community's reports. There are several other partisan thoughts also mentioned in the articles, some from other individual Republicans and some from individual Democrats, and you're more than welcome to consider all of them. As always, I've linked the full articles so that you can read them in their entirety.
|
On May 14 2026 18:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2026 16:47 jodljodl wrote:did you guys actually read the 2 thehill articles ( #1 #2)? I just did. Also followed up on some of the mentioned articles in those. Just made me wonder why you would quote this + Show Spoiler +"Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ... " without mentioning this + Show Spoiler +"Asked about the report that Iran has about 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-conflict missile stockpile, Cancian, of CSIS, said those figures are “very difficult to know” and the U.S. “famously got this wrong during” the Gulf War.
“It’s fair to say that Iran may have substantial missile capabilities remaining and U.S. actions have to accommodate that possibility,” he said.
Joel Rayburn, a Middle East expert with the Hudson Institute, was dubious of the figure of 70 percent, telling The Hill that “if anything, Iranian military capabilities overstated systematically for years.”
“When I read that assessment, I thought to myself, 70 percent looks to me like something an intel team would describe as ‘as much as.’”
“I think 70 percent would be an upper limit. What is the lower? ‘We think they could have as little as 40 percent but they might have as much as 70 percent.’ I’m willing to bet that that’s what that assessment said.” Rayburn said.
He also said the Iranians are doing an information operation “to try to convince people that they have hidden strength, that they’ve been holding back. And I just don’t believe that.”
“They don’t have some super secret, hidden weapons that they’re holding back in there. They’re going to unleash those when provoked,” he added. “They will latch on to Times reporting to try to restore a deterrent because their deterrent is gone.” from the same article. Also this + Show Spoiler +"The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles." when the original NYTimes article i'm guessing they are referring to says this + Show Spoiler +"As The New York Times previously reported, the United States expended roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the war — close to the total supply that remains in the American stockpile." don't get me wrong. I'm all for trump bashing. but if we do it why don't we do it properly. These articles are just a lot of guess work and quoting without real substance; and - at least it seems this way - bad journalism. To answer your question: I chose the quotes that I did because those figures came from the intelligence community + Show Spoiler +(your first part) and because I think including the percentages of weapons used/depleted is helpful for context (your second part).
I purposely didn't include the reactions of individual Democrats agreeing with the intelligence report and saying this is a problem, + Show Spoiler +nor individual Republicans dismissing the report and saying that this isn't that big of a problem. For example, the Hudson Institute is a right-wing think tank, which is why I didn't include your suggested Rayburn opinions. I don't consider them to be as reliable as the intelligence community's reports. + Show Spoiler +There are several other partisan thoughts also mentioned in the articles, some from other individual Republicans and some from individual Democrats, and you're more than welcome to consider all of them. As always, I've linked the full articles so that you can read them in their entirety.
You sure about all that?
In reference to the second article, did you see these intelligence reports? Who spoke for "the intelligence community"?
|
On May 14 2026 20:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2026 18:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 14 2026 16:47 jodljodl wrote:did you guys actually read the 2 thehill articles ( #1 #2)? I just did. Also followed up on some of the mentioned articles in those. Just made me wonder why you would quote this + Show Spoiler +"Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ... " without mentioning this + Show Spoiler +"Asked about the report that Iran has about 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-conflict missile stockpile, Cancian, of CSIS, said those figures are “very difficult to know” and the U.S. “famously got this wrong during” the Gulf War.
“It’s fair to say that Iran may have substantial missile capabilities remaining and U.S. actions have to accommodate that possibility,” he said.
Joel Rayburn, a Middle East expert with the Hudson Institute, was dubious of the figure of 70 percent, telling The Hill that “if anything, Iranian military capabilities overstated systematically for years.”
“When I read that assessment, I thought to myself, 70 percent looks to me like something an intel team would describe as ‘as much as.’”
“I think 70 percent would be an upper limit. What is the lower? ‘We think they could have as little as 40 percent but they might have as much as 70 percent.’ I’m willing to bet that that’s what that assessment said.” Rayburn said.
He also said the Iranians are doing an information operation “to try to convince people that they have hidden strength, that they’ve been holding back. And I just don’t believe that.”
“They don’t have some super secret, hidden weapons that they’re holding back in there. They’re going to unleash those when provoked,” he added. “They will latch on to Times reporting to try to restore a deterrent because their deterrent is gone.” from the same article. Also this + Show Spoiler +"The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles." when the original NYTimes article i'm guessing they are referring to says this + Show Spoiler +"As The New York Times previously reported, the United States expended roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the war — close to the total supply that remains in the American stockpile." don't get me wrong. I'm all for trump bashing. but if we do it why don't we do it properly. These articles are just a lot of guess work and quoting without real substance; and - at least it seems this way - bad journalism. To answer your question: I chose the quotes that I did because those figures came from the intelligence community + Show Spoiler +(your first part) and because I think including the percentages of weapons used/depleted is helpful for context (your second part).
I purposely didn't include the reactions of individual Democrats agreeing with the intelligence report and saying this is a problem, + Show Spoiler +nor individual Republicans dismissing the report and saying that this isn't that big of a problem. For example, the Hudson Institute is a right-wing think tank, which is why I didn't include your suggested Rayburn opinions. I don't consider them to be as reliable as the intelligence community's reports. + Show Spoiler +There are several other partisan thoughts also mentioned in the articles, some from other individual Republicans and some from individual Democrats, and you're more than welcome to consider all of them. As always, I've linked the full articles so that you can read them in their entirety. You sure about all that? In reference to the second article, did you see these intelligence reports? Who spoke for "the intelligence community"?
The reports are classified and I imagine that the sources are protected, but here is what I found on the topic:
According to NYT, citing senior US officials' classified assessments on the matter, around 90 per cent of Iran's underground missile facilities are now considered "partially or fully operational". The intelligence assessments suggest that Iran has retained a substantial portion of its missile infrastructure and military capabilities despite months of claims by the Trump administration that Tehran has lost most of its firepower during the joint US-Israel strikes.
The classified assessments, prepared earlier this month and reviewed by US policymakers, indicate that Iran still possesses nearly 70 per cent of its mobile missile launchers and roughly 70 per cent of its pre-war missile stockpile, including ballistic and cruise missiles, The New York Times reported.
The assessments reportedly found that only three of Iran's 33 missile facilities along the Strait of Hormuz remain completely inaccessible, while the remaining sites have regained varying degrees of operational access, allowing Iran to potentially deploy mobile launchers or launch missiles directly from existing infrastructure.
The report also stated that US military intelligence agencies, citing satellite imagery and surveillance data, assessed that Iran has regained access to nearly 90 per cent of its underground missile storage and launch facilities across the country, NYT reported.
These findings appear to contradict repeated public statements made by Trump and US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who had asserted that Iran's military had been "crushed" and rendered ineffective following the joint US-Israel military campaign, Operation Epic Fury, launched on February 28.
Last week, The Washington Post, citing a US official, reported that the Islamic Republic had retained nearly 75 per cent of its pre-war mobile missile launcher inventory and around 70 per cent of its missile stockpile, further noting that Tehran has managed to regain access to almost all of its underground missile storage facilities, repair damaged missiles, and complete the assembly of several missiles that were close to production before the conflict began, as indicated in an intelligence assessment. https://openthemagazine.com/world/us-intel-contradicts-trump-iran-restores-90-missile-site-access
So it appears that these assessments and reports are coming from - and being seen by - senior US officials, US policymakers, US military intelligence agencies, satellite imagery, and surveillance data.
|
On May 14 2026 20:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2026 20:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 14 2026 18:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 14 2026 16:47 jodljodl wrote:did you guys actually read the 2 thehill articles ( #1 #2)? I just did. Also followed up on some of the mentioned articles in those. Just made me wonder why you would quote this + Show Spoiler +"Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ... " without mentioning this + Show Spoiler +"Asked about the report that Iran has about 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-conflict missile stockpile, Cancian, of CSIS, said those figures are “very difficult to know” and the U.S. “famously got this wrong during” the Gulf War.
“It’s fair to say that Iran may have substantial missile capabilities remaining and U.S. actions have to accommodate that possibility,” he said.
Joel Rayburn, a Middle East expert with the Hudson Institute, was dubious of the figure of 70 percent, telling The Hill that “if anything, Iranian military capabilities overstated systematically for years.”
“When I read that assessment, I thought to myself, 70 percent looks to me like something an intel team would describe as ‘as much as.’”
“I think 70 percent would be an upper limit. What is the lower? ‘We think they could have as little as 40 percent but they might have as much as 70 percent.’ I’m willing to bet that that’s what that assessment said.” Rayburn said.
He also said the Iranians are doing an information operation “to try to convince people that they have hidden strength, that they’ve been holding back. And I just don’t believe that.”
“They don’t have some super secret, hidden weapons that they’re holding back in there. They’re going to unleash those when provoked,” he added. “They will latch on to Times reporting to try to restore a deterrent because their deterrent is gone.” from the same article. Also this + Show Spoiler +"The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles." when the original NYTimes article i'm guessing they are referring to says this + Show Spoiler +"As The New York Times previously reported, the United States expended roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the war — close to the total supply that remains in the American stockpile." don't get me wrong. I'm all for trump bashing. but if we do it why don't we do it properly. These articles are just a lot of guess work and quoting without real substance; and - at least it seems this way - bad journalism. To answer your question: I chose the quotes that I did because those figures came from the intelligence community + Show Spoiler +(your first part) and because I think including the percentages of weapons used/depleted is helpful for context (your second part).
I purposely didn't include the reactions of individual Democrats agreeing with the intelligence report and saying this is a problem, + Show Spoiler +nor individual Republicans dismissing the report and saying that this isn't that big of a problem. For example, the Hudson Institute is a right-wing think tank, which is why I didn't include your suggested Rayburn opinions. I don't consider them to be as reliable as the intelligence community's reports. + Show Spoiler +There are several other partisan thoughts also mentioned in the articles, some from other individual Republicans and some from individual Democrats, and you're more than welcome to consider all of them. As always, I've linked the full articles so that you can read them in their entirety. You sure about all that? In reference to the second article, did you see these intelligence reports? Who spoke for "the intelligence community"? The reports are classified and I imagine that the sources are protected, but here is what I found on the topic: + Show Spoiler +According to NYT, citing senior US officials' classified assessments on the matter, around 90 per cent of Iran's underground missile facilities are now considered "partially or fully operational". The intelligence assessments suggest that Iran has retained a substantial portion of its missile infrastructure and military capabilities despite months of claims by the Trump administration that Tehran has lost most of its firepower during the joint US-Israel strikes.
The classified assessments, prepared earlier this month and reviewed by US policymakers, indicate that Iran still possesses nearly 70 per cent of its mobile missile launchers and roughly 70 per cent of its pre-war missile stockpile, including ballistic and cruise missiles, The New York Times reported.
The assessments reportedly found that only three of Iran's 33 missile facilities along the Strait of Hormuz remain completely inaccessible, while the remaining sites have regained varying degrees of operational access, allowing Iran to potentially deploy mobile launchers or launch missiles directly from existing infrastructure.
The report also stated that US military intelligence agencies, citing satellite imagery and surveillance data, assessed that Iran has regained access to nearly 90 per cent of its underground missile storage and launch facilities across the country, NYT reported.
These findings appear to contradict repeated public statements made by Trump and US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who had asserted that Iran's military had been "crushed" and rendered ineffective following the joint US-Israel military campaign, Operation Epic Fury, launched on February 28.
Last week, The Washington Post, citing a US official, reported that the Islamic Republic had retained nearly 75 per cent of its pre-war mobile missile launcher inventory and around 70 per cent of its missile stockpile, further noting that Tehran has managed to regain access to almost all of its underground missile storage facilities, repair damaged missiles, and complete the assembly of several missiles that were close to production before the conflict began, as indicated in an intelligence assessment. https://openthemagazine.com/world/us-intel-contradicts-trump-iran-restores-90-missile-site-access So it appears that these assessments and reports are coming from - and being seen by - senior US officials, US policymakers, US military intelligence agencies, satellite imagery, and surveillance data.
So no.
The descriptions/dissemination of the (classified) assessments could be coming from Democrats. Good on them if this "treason" is true.
|
On May 14 2026 16:42 oBlade wrote:The Secret Service are not ones to wait until someone else gets shot and then either blame the person for bringing it upon themselves and deserving it if they're Republican, or prop up the person as a martyr if they aren't. They just want everyone protected. They want to have funding which doesn't get interrupted for over 2 months by Democrat shutdowns so the agents who protect the most important figures in our government are paid. Show nested quote +The price breakdown for each target area of the project area is:
$220 million for White House hardening
$180 million for White House visitor security screening facility
$175 million for Secret Service training
$175 million for enhancements for Secret Service protectees
$150 million for evolving threats and technology
$100 million for events of national significance Show nested quote +The $1 billion request is in addition to the annual USSS budget, $3.2 billion in FY 2025. https://abcnews.com/Politics/breakdown-1-billion-request-trumps-white-house-ballroom/story?id=132927177
You're preaching to the wrong crowd here oBlade, you need to convince the Senate to cut more children's cancer research funding to pay for Nero's Palace. Since you said there were world leaders in tents on the White House lawn getting shot to death it should be an easy case to make.
|
On May 14 2026 21:20 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2026 20:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 14 2026 20:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 14 2026 18:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 14 2026 16:47 jodljodl wrote:did you guys actually read the 2 thehill articles ( #1 #2)? I just did. Also followed up on some of the mentioned articles in those. Just made me wonder why you would quote this + Show Spoiler +"Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ... " without mentioning this + Show Spoiler +"Asked about the report that Iran has about 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-conflict missile stockpile, Cancian, of CSIS, said those figures are “very difficult to know” and the U.S. “famously got this wrong during” the Gulf War.
“It’s fair to say that Iran may have substantial missile capabilities remaining and U.S. actions have to accommodate that possibility,” he said.
Joel Rayburn, a Middle East expert with the Hudson Institute, was dubious of the figure of 70 percent, telling The Hill that “if anything, Iranian military capabilities overstated systematically for years.”
“When I read that assessment, I thought to myself, 70 percent looks to me like something an intel team would describe as ‘as much as.’”
“I think 70 percent would be an upper limit. What is the lower? ‘We think they could have as little as 40 percent but they might have as much as 70 percent.’ I’m willing to bet that that’s what that assessment said.” Rayburn said.
He also said the Iranians are doing an information operation “to try to convince people that they have hidden strength, that they’ve been holding back. And I just don’t believe that.”
“They don’t have some super secret, hidden weapons that they’re holding back in there. They’re going to unleash those when provoked,” he added. “They will latch on to Times reporting to try to restore a deterrent because their deterrent is gone.” from the same article. Also this + Show Spoiler +"The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles." when the original NYTimes article i'm guessing they are referring to says this + Show Spoiler +"As The New York Times previously reported, the United States expended roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the war — close to the total supply that remains in the American stockpile." don't get me wrong. I'm all for trump bashing. but if we do it why don't we do it properly. These articles are just a lot of guess work and quoting without real substance; and - at least it seems this way - bad journalism. To answer your question: I chose the quotes that I did because those figures came from the intelligence community + Show Spoiler +(your first part) and because I think including the percentages of weapons used/depleted is helpful for context (your second part).
I purposely didn't include the reactions of individual Democrats agreeing with the intelligence report and saying this is a problem, + Show Spoiler +nor individual Republicans dismissing the report and saying that this isn't that big of a problem. For example, the Hudson Institute is a right-wing think tank, which is why I didn't include your suggested Rayburn opinions. I don't consider them to be as reliable as the intelligence community's reports. + Show Spoiler +There are several other partisan thoughts also mentioned in the articles, some from other individual Republicans and some from individual Democrats, and you're more than welcome to consider all of them. As always, I've linked the full articles so that you can read them in their entirety. You sure about all that? In reference to the second article, did you see these intelligence reports? Who spoke for "the intelligence community"? The reports are classified and I imagine that the sources are protected, but here is what I found on the topic: + Show Spoiler +According to NYT, citing senior US officials' classified assessments on the matter, around 90 per cent of Iran's underground missile facilities are now considered "partially or fully operational". The intelligence assessments suggest that Iran has retained a substantial portion of its missile infrastructure and military capabilities despite months of claims by the Trump administration that Tehran has lost most of its firepower during the joint US-Israel strikes.
The classified assessments, prepared earlier this month and reviewed by US policymakers, indicate that Iran still possesses nearly 70 per cent of its mobile missile launchers and roughly 70 per cent of its pre-war missile stockpile, including ballistic and cruise missiles, The New York Times reported.
The assessments reportedly found that only three of Iran's 33 missile facilities along the Strait of Hormuz remain completely inaccessible, while the remaining sites have regained varying degrees of operational access, allowing Iran to potentially deploy mobile launchers or launch missiles directly from existing infrastructure.
The report also stated that US military intelligence agencies, citing satellite imagery and surveillance data, assessed that Iran has regained access to nearly 90 per cent of its underground missile storage and launch facilities across the country, NYT reported.
These findings appear to contradict repeated public statements made by Trump and US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who had asserted that Iran's military had been "crushed" and rendered ineffective following the joint US-Israel military campaign, Operation Epic Fury, launched on February 28.
Last week, The Washington Post, citing a US official, reported that the Islamic Republic had retained nearly 75 per cent of its pre-war mobile missile launcher inventory and around 70 per cent of its missile stockpile, further noting that Tehran has managed to regain access to almost all of its underground missile storage facilities, repair damaged missiles, and complete the assembly of several missiles that were close to production before the conflict began, as indicated in an intelligence assessment. https://openthemagazine.com/world/us-intel-contradicts-trump-iran-restores-90-missile-site-access So it appears that these assessments and reports are coming from - and being seen by - senior US officials, US policymakers, US military intelligence agencies, satellite imagery, and surveillance data. So no. The descriptions/dissemination of the (classified) assessments could be coming from Democrats. Good on them if this " treason" is true.
So because I haven't personally seen the classified documents, I ought to ignore the military intelligence and corroborated reports observed by senior US officials, US policymakers, and US military intelligence agencies, which were based on actual satellite imagery and surveillance data?
We'll have to make sure to hold you to the same standard in the future, where every claim you make or article you post should be dismissed unless you've personally read a classified report supporting it.
|
On May 14 2026 21:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2026 21:20 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 14 2026 20:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 14 2026 20:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 14 2026 18:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 14 2026 16:47 jodljodl wrote:did you guys actually read the 2 thehill articles ( #1 #2)? I just did. Also followed up on some of the mentioned articles in those. Just made me wonder why you would quote this + Show Spoiler +"Trump administration’s public insistence that Iran’s missile capability is all but obliterated was thrown into doubt following assessments from the intelligence community that Iran still has roughly 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile ... " without mentioning this + Show Spoiler +"Asked about the report that Iran has about 70 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-conflict missile stockpile, Cancian, of CSIS, said those figures are “very difficult to know” and the U.S. “famously got this wrong during” the Gulf War.
“It’s fair to say that Iran may have substantial missile capabilities remaining and U.S. actions have to accommodate that possibility,” he said.
Joel Rayburn, a Middle East expert with the Hudson Institute, was dubious of the figure of 70 percent, telling The Hill that “if anything, Iranian military capabilities overstated systematically for years.”
“When I read that assessment, I thought to myself, 70 percent looks to me like something an intel team would describe as ‘as much as.’”
“I think 70 percent would be an upper limit. What is the lower? ‘We think they could have as little as 40 percent but they might have as much as 70 percent.’ I’m willing to bet that that’s what that assessment said.” Rayburn said.
He also said the Iranians are doing an information operation “to try to convince people that they have hidden strength, that they’ve been holding back. And I just don’t believe that.”
“They don’t have some super secret, hidden weapons that they’re holding back in there. They’re going to unleash those when provoked,” he added. “They will latch on to Times reporting to try to restore a deterrent because their deterrent is gone.” from the same article. Also this + Show Spoiler +"The United States has reportedly burned through thousands of missiles since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, using nearly all of the long-range stealth cruise missiles left in Washington’s stockpile and depleting its stores of Tomahawks, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike and ATACMS ground-based missiles." when the original NYTimes article i'm guessing they are referring to says this + Show Spoiler +"As The New York Times previously reported, the United States expended roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the war — close to the total supply that remains in the American stockpile." don't get me wrong. I'm all for trump bashing. but if we do it why don't we do it properly. These articles are just a lot of guess work and quoting without real substance; and - at least it seems this way - bad journalism. To answer your question: I chose the quotes that I did because those figures came from the intelligence community + Show Spoiler +(your first part) and because I think including the percentages of weapons used/depleted is helpful for context (your second part).
I purposely didn't include the reactions of individual Democrats agreeing with the intelligence report and saying this is a problem, + Show Spoiler +nor individual Republicans dismissing the report and saying that this isn't that big of a problem. For example, the Hudson Institute is a right-wing think tank, which is why I didn't include your suggested Rayburn opinions. I don't consider them to be as reliable as the intelligence community's reports. + Show Spoiler +There are several other partisan thoughts also mentioned in the articles, some from other individual Republicans and some from individual Democrats, and you're more than welcome to consider all of them. As always, I've linked the full articles so that you can read them in their entirety. You sure about all that? In reference to the second article, did you see these intelligence reports? Who spoke for "the intelligence community"? The reports are classified and I imagine that the sources are protected, but here is what I found on the topic: + Show Spoiler +According to NYT, citing senior US officials' classified assessments on the matter, around 90 per cent of Iran's underground missile facilities are now considered "partially or fully operational". The intelligence assessments suggest that Iran has retained a substantial portion of its missile infrastructure and military capabilities despite months of claims by the Trump administration that Tehran has lost most of its firepower during the joint US-Israel strikes.
The classified assessments, prepared earlier this month and reviewed by US policymakers, indicate that Iran still possesses nearly 70 per cent of its mobile missile launchers and roughly 70 per cent of its pre-war missile stockpile, including ballistic and cruise missiles, The New York Times reported.
The assessments reportedly found that only three of Iran's 33 missile facilities along the Strait of Hormuz remain completely inaccessible, while the remaining sites have regained varying degrees of operational access, allowing Iran to potentially deploy mobile launchers or launch missiles directly from existing infrastructure.
The report also stated that US military intelligence agencies, citing satellite imagery and surveillance data, assessed that Iran has regained access to nearly 90 per cent of its underground missile storage and launch facilities across the country, NYT reported.
These findings appear to contradict repeated public statements made by Trump and US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who had asserted that Iran's military had been "crushed" and rendered ineffective following the joint US-Israel military campaign, Operation Epic Fury, launched on February 28.
Last week, The Washington Post, citing a US official, reported that the Islamic Republic had retained nearly 75 per cent of its pre-war mobile missile launcher inventory and around 70 per cent of its missile stockpile, further noting that Tehran has managed to regain access to almost all of its underground missile storage facilities, repair damaged missiles, and complete the assembly of several missiles that were close to production before the conflict began, as indicated in an intelligence assessment. https://openthemagazine.com/world/us-intel-contradicts-trump-iran-restores-90-missile-site-access So it appears that these assessments and reports are coming from - and being seen by - senior US officials, US policymakers, US military intelligence agencies, satellite imagery, and surveillance data. So no. The descriptions/dissemination of the (classified) assessments could be coming from Democrats. Good on them if this " treason" is true. So because I haven't personally seen the classified documents, I ought to ignore the military intelligence and corroborated reports observed by senior US officials, US policymakers, and US military intelligence agencies, which were based on actual satellite imagery and surveillance data? We'll have to make sure to hold you to the same standard in the future, where every claim you make or article you post should be dismissed unless you've personally read a classified report supporting it.
I didn't tell you to ignore anything. I was prodding at the framing.
I default to presuming Trump and his administration are lying and braggadocious regarding just about anything, so I don't object to the notion that those braggadocious liars exaggerated their successes in Iran.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
