Magnificent bigly awesome total destruction of Iran's nuclear program!!!! Oh, wait...

And the pilot lost his targeting capabilities and closed his eyes and relied on "the force."  

This just in......a picture of the bomber.  

Oh, of course. That's where stupid Tom got his fantasy.

What we know today:  Iran's nuclear capacity has been damaged.  To what degree, officially undetermined.

The Frodo plant, one of the three known enrichment sites, or plants targeted, became operational in 2009.  At that time the US didn't have a bomb that could destroy nuclear fuel enrichment sites.   The US went to work to make such capable bombs.  Now we have them.

Here I summarize what I read (as in, I didn't make this up) about Iran's nuclear enrichment sites, the bombs, called the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetratetor, aka bunker busting bombs, how they were dropped and what the pilots saw:

The Iranian nuclear enrichment plants, in this case at locations in Frodo and in Natanz, had entry points, or or tunnels, ventilation routes, into the underground complexes where the machinery was.  

Those 30,000-pound deep penetrating bunker busting bombs the US dropped were designed specifically for those sites.   They are made with a fuse, programmed to detonate at a specific time.  The longer the fuse, the deeper the weapon will penetrate before exploding.  They have been tested and retested hundreds of times on mock facilities, fine tuned to delay detonation until reaching a position to send a pressure blast through open tunnels of the enrichment plants to destroy equipment underground.  Seven B-2 stealth bombers carried two of the "massive" bombs each.  In days before the strike Iran had placed large concrete slabs on top of the ventilation shafts.  The first bomb would eliminate the concrete slab, the next bombs would be dropped into the complex at speed of over 1000 feet per second before exploding.  Bomber crews were able to confirm detonation as they saw the bombs drop from the aircraft in front of them.  Pilots reported "the brightest explosion they had ever seen, that it looked like daylight."

Trump deserves credit for acting with resolve in ordering the strikes.  JMHO.  

As for the concern Congress wasn't asked for approval in advance, as expressed by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky, that "our Founding Fathers did not want presidents to unilaterally go to war", the founding fathers didn't have the degree of espionage, social media, loose lips sinking ships, that now would likely preempt any critical element of secrecy.  Imagine the public protests and outcries, not unlike some of those posted here in Kitchen Sink.  Again, JMHO.

Candy

The issue isn't was it the right or wrong thing. The issue is Trump intentionally lied when he stated more than once that their nuclear program was total obliterated.  The only intelligence he had when he made those statements was that it was at best set back three months. All the drama is on the Trump side with him having being outed as a liar for the whole world

to see.

Trump's domestic policies have been an absolute failure and as I said in another thread he needed not just a win but a really big win like totally obliterating Iran's nuclear program rather than setting it back a few months which isn't a big win. 

While reading the news look at the concessions Iran has already gotten from Trump.  They get to sell their oil to China without fear of sanction. How is this a win if we are the ones granting concessions without asking for anything in return? 

What makes you think you know he 'intentionally lied," and how do you know that's "The only intelligence he had"?  And do you still put your faith in a partially leaked confidential report, which is now disputed by the DNI, CIA, Israeli Intelligence, the FM of Iran,   the Secretary of Defense, the IAEA, and many other scientific organizations who are all stating the Iran program is likely set back by years.  This report was leaked by and to Trump Haters who had absolutely no concern about the real truth. 

How do I know this?  It has been revealed that:

1  The leaked report was marked "Low Confidence". In that intelligence community parlance, that actually means that the analyst's confidence in the report's accuracy was less than 50%.  Less than a coin flip.  Don't you think that might have been an important point to include in the reporting?  Do you think that was not included by the original leaker or by CNN?

Classified Report That Suggested Iranian Nuclear Program Still Intact Likely Relied on Faulty Info From Iranian Sources, Former Intel Officers Say

"A current U.S. official familiar with the ongoing damage assessment process said that the DIA’s findings—as well as "the partisan hit job published by CNN"—have been "completely debunked" over the past 24 hours, including by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)."

"It has now been established by the IAEA that Iran’s nuclear program suffered ‘enormous damage’ and the ‘centrifuges ... are completely destroyed,’" the official told the Free Beacon. "The military operation carried out by the United States was a huge success and we are grateful to our troops who valiantly carried out the president’s mission."

Israeli officials see "significant" damage to Iran's nuclear facilities

US strikes did 'serious' damage: Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi | NewsNation

IAEA: US strikes in Iran left heavy damage on nuclear sites but more evaluation needed

2.  The leaked report also stated that the damage could have been limited or severe.  Don't you think that also might have been an important point to include in the reporting?  Do you think that was not included by the original leaker or by CNN?

CIA says it has evidence Iran’s nuclear program was ‘severely damaged’ as assessments of US strikes’ impact continue | CNN Politics

3  The leaked report also noted that it was preliminary and had no corroboration from any other US intelligence agency.  It has been stated by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs that initial low-confidence assessments are rarely correct..  Why did they not put this in context?

______________________________________________________________________

You and the democrats have once again been duped by Trump haters whose only purpose is to smear Trump for political gain.  Much like you do here.  I wonder if you still believe all the Trump Colluded with Russia propaganda you used to spew when it's pretty well proven that was all a Clinton Campaign dirty trick.  You ever get to watch those Trump Pee Tapes?  Or what about the Hunter Biden Laptop is a Russian disinformation campaign?  You believed that one too?  One connection between those two politically motivated false reports in the press is that both were pimped by Natasha Bertrand, the author of the current smear.  All we're missing is Boris.

Trump's domestic policies have not been a failure.  Just look at what your man Joe Biden gave us.  Worst inflation in 40 years.  Declining real wages.  Open borders with millions of unvetted cutting in line and taking advantage.  The botched withdrawal.  

MEMO: First 100 Days Economy – The White House

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? 

I have often said Trump is a loose cannon, a super bloviator, e.g. 'totally obliterated' without confirmed info, OR without info he can share this day with us. 

The strike was a success in certain ways, this is acknowledged.  Who else has done this?  

Like PJ, I don't like everything about him, despise some things.  But I can credit him for what seems to have been accomplished, something that has not previously been accomplished. 

All the "liar liar" pants on fire stuff is kindergarten childishness.  Were you on the post-strike investigation team up in the mountainsides of Iran?  Have you personally witnessed the results?

Our pilots returned with reports, Iran has all but said uncle other than a weak attack on a US base.  The US demonstrated our position regarding development of nuclear weapons by nations who are not our friends. 

If it is found that Iran has nuclear weapon and military superiority over the US I will certainly acknowledge those facts.

A) Think about the description you read of how the bombs supposedly worked. The ventilation shafts were covered by thick concrete, which the first of two bombs supposedly destroyed. Did that concrete VAPORIZE? No, it would have been turned to rubble...still blocking the entrance to the ventilation shaft. So the narrative you were fed sounds much more like military big boys bragging about their new toys than any objective reality 

And ..you do realize, don't you, that any report that the attack was anything less than a complete bigly success would have been, um, looked on unfavorably?

B) The President does not have the authority to wage war. Even if the enemy is a bunch of crazy meanies.

Period.

Mullah Kevin had no problem with Obama dropping 26,000 bombs without authorization

So with Kevin it comes down to who is dropping the bombs. 

Congress has the power to declare war.  There is a difference.

Presidents negotiate with enemy countries to stop certain practices.  Military actions are taken all the time without a declaration of war. 

But I can see how, depending on how one interprets 'waging war', if bombs are involved it could seem like 'waging war.'  

Suddenly Kevin decides Muslims might lie.