Early assessments, Nuclear program not destroyed.

You lie like a trump.

Nobody said they didn't have a nuclear program.

It was said they weren't producing nuclear weapons.

But I guess it's too much to expect ignorant trumpers to understand the difference.
If they weren’t producing them OR preparing to why did they have 60% enriched uranium like the UN said they did? Are you calling the UN liars?

Do you think they enriched uranium to 60% for peaceful purposes? HINT: you only need to enrich it to 5% for energy generating nuclear power.

Don’t be embarrassed none of your other board leftists can answer this either. Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow haven’t come up with talking points for you yet
 
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN in a statement: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community.

So the assessment is alleged. The alleged assessment is wrong.
The alleged assessment that is wrong is classified.

Why would they classify something that is alleged and is wrong?

Don't hurt SpokesBarbie's carefully-groomed little blonde head. lol
 
The analysis of the damage to the sites and the impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear ambitions is ongoing, and could change as more intelligence becomes available. But the early findings are at odds with President Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the strikes “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also said on Sunday that Iran’s nuclear ambitions “have been obliterated.”


TACO not only always Chickens out, he also always lies.


"TAL"
What do you want to bet Hegseth emailed his family and friends before the strikes to let them know how cool he is, playing with B2s and giant bombs? :laugh:
 
If they weren’t producing them OR preparing to why did they have 60% enriched uranium like the UN said they did? Are you calling the UN liars?

Do you think they enriched uranium to 60% for peaceful purposes? HINT: you only need to enrich it to 5% for energy generating nuclear power.

Don’t be embarrassed none of your other board leftists can answer this either. Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow haven’t come up with talking points for you yet
You still do not get it? Iran is supposed to have reached 60 percent years ago. The claim is that going to nuke level is a small step from there. Why did they not do it? Iran said they were doing 60 because it is the level needed for medical imaging. It is also for sub fuel. The fact that they have not gone past 60 should have told you something. Their claim that they are not after a nuke makes sense. Your right-wing belief has no backing,
 
If they weren’t producing them OR preparing to why did they have 60% enriched uranium like the UN said they did? Are you calling the UN liars?

Do you think they enriched uranium to 60% for peaceful purposes? HINT: you only need to enrich it to 5% for energy generating nuclear power.

Don’t be embarrassed none of your other board leftists can answer this either. Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow haven’t come up with talking points for you yet
As I suggested earlier, they might have been looking to stockpile in the event that someday the world geopolitical situation changed in such a way as they determined they needed nukes for their own security.

The point remains that at 60% enrichment, they have no nuclear weapons and were likely not as close as is being suggested, making the orange idiot's grandstanding play unnecessary.

Had he not shredded the treaty they had signed, we'd have inspectors in their facilities watching and monitoring them.
 
After the bombings it's a cinch nobody can reach their little caves underground at this point, so babbling about it all still being intact is just stupidity and idiocy running amuck among the deviants and terrorist fans. It might as well not exist.
 
Back
Top