The Pentagon says that a total of 14 “bunker-buster” bombs were dropped on the deep underground nuclear facility of Fordo. And according to reporting today, the facility was damaged but not completely destroyed. We have no idea if Iran’s nuclear program was set back all that much. There has been no rise in detectable radiation levels at any of the bombed sites, which strikes me as a tad odd, but I’m no expert in these matters. While Trump was quick to claim supreme success, it may be a few days before we know if the bombings had any significant effect on Iran’s nuclear programs, whatever they were.
And, of course, there was no intel whatsoever calling Iran an imminent nuclear threat to anybody. I’m assuming Trump just chose to believe what Bibi told him. Rolling Stone:
… according to two administration officials with knowledge of internal deliberations in recent weeks, the president’s decision to strike was not driven by any new U.S. intelligence on Iran.
“There is no intel,” says one of the officials, who were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. “Nothing new, that I’m aware of… The president is protecting the United States and our interests, [but] the intelligence assessments have not really changed from what they were before.”
“What they were before” was that Iran didn’t have nuclear weapons and wasn’t actively working on building nuclear weapons.
Another issue is whether Trump properly notified Congress before engaging in an act of war against another nation. “The top two Republicans in Congress, House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, were both notified of the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities ahead of time, according to multiple GOP sources,” says CNN. But no Democrats knew about it until they saw it on the news. The bombings seem to fall into a hole not clearly covered by the War Powers Act or anything else. If the bombings turn out to be a one and done thing, probably nobody is going to call Trump out for it. But if troops are put in danger, or are drawn into any armed conflicts as a result of the bombings, Trump is supposed to get congressional approval to proceed. And he’s allergic to having to ask permission to do anything.
Note also that before the bombings a lot of people were yelling at Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries to get off their butts and insist on congressional authorization for any military action Trump took toward Iran. They did nothing. Peter Beinart wrote in the New York Times a couple of days ago,
From the moment Israel struck Iran, it was obvious the United States might be sucked in. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had made it clear he wanted Washington to join Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. And on the day of the first attack, when Tehran retaliated by launching missiles at the Jewish state, the United States helped shoot them down.
Despite this, the initial statements by the Democrats’ leader in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, and their House leader, Hakeem Jeffries, said nothing about the need for Congress to authorize war. As the days passed and news reports suggested that Mr. Trump was edging toward entering the fray, Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, invoked the War Powers Act to require the president to gain congressional permission. Thomas Massie, a Republican, and Ro Khanna, a Democrat, proposed something similar in the House.
Neither Mr. Schumer nor Mr. Jeffries has signed on. Nor has Mr. Schumer agreed to co-sponsor another bill that Senator Bernie Sanders introduced, prohibiting funding for military force against Iran absent congressional approval (despite backing the same legislation in 2020).
I mean, did they have better things to do? Schumer has frustrated me for years. But I’m starting to think Jeffries isn’t an improvement. Of course they couldn’t have gotten anything passed, but sometimes just getting on the record that you tried is a good thing.
The best thing I’ve read so far about the bombings is by Marcy Wheeler, When Hegemons Backslide. Just read the whole thing. Very briefly, she’s saying that Trump’s foreign policy has been to destroy U.S. global hegemony — “soft power,” if you will — in favor of U.S. military dominance. And this is because Trump is a stupid man with little understanding of history or how the international order was working before he started to smash it. He only understands dominance. In his world, you’re either dominating others or they’re dominating you.
Related to that is my long contention that Trump doesn’t know how to function in a large, complex organization like a government. He’s never had a job. He has no personal experience of being part of a big multi-level corporation with lots of divisions and many layers of management. He’s used to running a family business. His company may be “large,” in that it has holdings in a lot of places, but it’s just him and the boys running it, for good or ill. He’s never had to work “with” anybody, Clearly, he doesn’t know how. He knows one way to function, which is him making all the decisions and giving all the orders. He can’t cope with having to negotiate with or get consent from other branches of government to do what he wants to do. In his first term he had people telling him what he could and couldn’t do, but not now. And the Republicans in Congress are letting him get away with it.
Back to the bombing. Josh Marshall:
We should remember that you can’t destroy the quest to create a nuclear weapons (or more specifically the quest to have all the parts and knowledge to do so on short notice) with bombing alone. If you take the logic of this action on its own terms it has to set the stage for negotiations or effective deterrent. In other words, one option is you hopefully destroy a lot of what Iran has spent years building. With that done, you hope they are more open to an agreement that gets them to verifiably agree not to work on the building blocks for nuclear warheads because you’ve demonstrated that the costs are too great. Or perhaps with this demonstration you make clear that any rebuilding effort will be met by another similar or more devastating attack. So they give up on the effort because they decide it’s not worth it or simply hopeless. You’ll always destroy the work before it gets to completion.
Absent one version of those scenarios being the case they just restart their efforts and get there again in say two or three years. And presumably that’s an Iran far more focused on actually building a deliverable nuclear weapon to be sure it never finds itself in this position again.
So, in the long run Trump may have just made matters worse.
Update: The New York Times is reporting that Trump officials have conceded they don’t know exactly where Iran was keeping its near-weapons-grade uranium stockpile or if any of their bombs destroyed it. If the stockpile is undamaged, that might explain why no one has detected any uranium leaks at the bombing sites. And Iran is saying no more negotiations with the U.S., and I can’t say I blame them. So it may be that Trump just plain screwed up with the bombing.
Technically, since Iran was not a threat to us, it was not lawful for Trump to order aggressive action against them, absent a declaration of war from Congress. Pragmatically, it doesn't matter if Trump broke a dozen laws, unless the House would impeach, and the Senate would convict.
Also, the SCOTUS made good and sure that no President would ever have to fear criminal charges for violating any number of laws, with respect to use of the military, which would always be an official action, for which he'd have immunity.
We don't live in a healthy country (or world, for that matter).
It's good to see you posting more often – I wish it was due to joy over President Harris's accomplishments, and not marking one stupid, incompetent, harmful decision after another by the perpetual turd in the punchbowl.
In the wake of the attack, I struggled to find people who could explain what was going on. I found a video of Adam Kinzinger who actually supported the attack, and who explained the differences between Iran and the 2003 invasion of Iraq – they're very different. I wasn't sure if he was crazy or what, but he at least seemed informed. For all the good Adam did during the Jan 6 investigation, he sounds like a war hawk, probably his true colors.
Iran's leaders have a very tenuous hold on the country, and are ripe for "regime change" – but it will come from within, instead of being imposed by an invasion force.
My own psychological state regarding the attack on Iran versus the 2003 Iraq invasion could not be more different. I was sad and angry when we invaded Iraq – after all, we were given months of warning – but now I feel almost neutral – though I shouldn't be – over this latest abuse.
It's not that 47 is a stupid, self-centered bully and only understands dominance, AND: he doesn't know or care how much damage he causes downstream, believing that whatever happens, it will only benefit him.
It's that our Constitution is borderline useless, as if we needed another example. Even if feckless Schumer or Jeffries had succeeded in mounting a war powers argument, what going to hold 47 back or make him accountable? And how treacherous that he excluded Democrats from informing Congress of his actions. They'll be jailed if they don't learn to fight back.
The only upside, is that we're one step closer to getting 47's supporters to open their eyes and vote his enablers out in 2026. As 47 continues to destroy this country, more and more of his followers are going to feel the effects. I say bring on the harsh medicine, quickly. End this nightmare.
In positive news, I've been reading about how the LAPD blocked ICE from raiding the attendees at Dodger Stadium. ICE denies it, but there are photographs of them and the LAPD at the stadium's gates. A lot of Dodger fans are Latino, and it's bad business to scare them away from the ballpark. Take that, Stephen Miller.
In both Iraq and Afghanistan, the bulk of US fatalities happened after we "won" the war.
My guess is that Iran is concealing the materials to conduct guerrilla warfare. IED's, drones, etc. If they "surrender," it will be an invitation to send IDF forces to enforce the peace. Israel will ask the US to perform that menial task so the IDF can tend to protecting the Palestinians in Gaza. [snark]
The Nagasaki bomb contained 6 Kg of plutonium, 15 pounds. I'm not sure if anyone has intell on how much weapons-grade uranium has been refined in the four years since Trump blew up the agreement we (globally) had to monitor Iran to ensure their adherence to not produce a bomb. I suspect they produced MUCH more than 15 pounds and a modern bomb can be built with far less uranium. Since their production facilities were known in Iran, it seems reasonable that the stuff is stored at a secret location that does not have a bulls-eye on the roof.
Ukraine has rewritten the book on asymmetrical warfare with drones smuggled into the target country. In theory, the top of a trailer could BE constructed to be a nuclear bomb and be detonated remotely from anywhere. I'm not saying this will happen but I don't see Iran rolling over to be occupied by Israel or the US. Without an occupying force, I don't see how hostilities will end. They always do, eventually. Israel has stirred up an ant hill of 81 million fire ants.
After Vietnam, a phrase surfaced which continues to plague military disasters – "exit strategy." Before you commit to combat operations, define what has to happen before you can withdraw. Ignoring this axiom cost the US dearly in Afghanistan and Iraq. Surprisingly, Trump occasionally emits statements that suggest he gets it. The test will be the invitation to commit troops in Iraq. I'm not betting either way.
There is going to be a but, but first, I am quite impressed with your major points. Russia tried to take Ukraine with old textbook military war tactics and still is doing the same by in large. Even resorting to war crime after war crime it is far from winning or having an exit plan. Meanwhile, they are maiming a generation of their citizens just like we did to my generation in Viet Nam. I consider our current messed up politics a direct result of that generation coming of age. I recall when we thought we could bomb our way to victory in Viet Nam. How silly in hindsight was that?
Also silly were our adults (fresh from the great depression WWII and Korea) who kind of knew they were up against a different kind of warfare but failed to understand so many things. They totally tried to cram square pegs into round holes so to speak. They called what they were up against guerilla warfare probably because they were way too lazy to really analyze what prompted the fighting. Never, as I recall, did the American powers of either party admit that division of Viet Nam after WWII could have been a blunder. Was that an omen of what we have in D.C. today? Nothing but "never make a blunder" blunderers. We continue to struggle from our horrid exit strategy from WWII while all republicans can do is quibble about some minor flaws and miscalculation in our exit from the never-ending war in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, not learning from major past errors and blunders is replaced with revisionist history in spades. If the current bombing fit turns out a blunder, this whole thing just turns into another history revision we get to do. Oh, do we love doing that. We have a new generation of young republicans ready and waiting to do that. What we need are legions of Democrats who rub their noses in it every time they try until they get civilized.
So too we need Democrats to respect Ukraine's approach to drone warfare and especially low-cost drone warfare. It is the new warfare revolution Israel, and the United States, and Russia needs to fear. That the Ukrainians are quickly able to part source, design, assemble, and produce these small inexpensive drones by the millions shows quite the cutting edge of warfare. If innovative, intelligent, low-cost, and grass roots warfare is what you mean by asymmetrical so be it. The term reeks of military-speak almost as bad as the miscommunication giants, collateral damage and friendly fire. Those are military grade language blunders at their best. That how the Ukrainians fighting does not look like the Russians fighting is to the credit of Ukraine by in large. It is a modern-day David vs. Goliath story in my book. A story with a moral. Morals are too now a job for the Democrats, as the republicans have gone feral there too.
Well one thing is for sure Stump is getting very positive coverage from our Israel centered corporate media, they love them a war against them mooslims. So since Trump is getting such flattering coverage I expect the bombings will continue at Bibi's direction of course. What stops North Korea from saying: hey Iran you want a nuke, well here you go?
Because we might say, "Hey, South Korea, YOU want some nukes?"
(And Japan, and Taiwan, and Finland, and Poland, and the Baltic States, and maybe even Ukraine?–so Putin and Xi might jerk Kim's leash on that.)
Fourteen (14) was our entire stock of bunker busters, that (for Zen sake) may or may not have destroyed the uranium that may or may not no longer have been there
I don't know who but exhausting out stock is a victory for someone …
Thank you, Maha, for this: "Related to that is my long contention that Trump doesn’t know how to function in a large, complex organization like a government. He’s never had a job. He has no personal experience of being part of a big multi-level corporation with lots of divisions and many layers of management. He’s used to running a family business. His company may be “large,” in that it has holdings in a lot of places, but it’s just him and the boys running it, for good or ill. He’s never had to work “with” anybody, Clearly, he doesn’t know how. He knows one way to function, which is him making all the decisions and giving all the orders. He can’t cope with having to negotiate with or get consent from other branches of government to do what he wants to do. In his first term he had people telling him what he could and couldn’t do, but not now. And the Republicans in Congress are letting him get away with it."
This nails, and in support of your observation I have had this perspective on TFG for quite a few years, having worked in several different sized organizations both for profit and non-profit.
What the above paragraph nicely articulates is the foundational reason why this man is completely unqualified for the governmental position he holds.
More to the point of today's situation: As he doesn't have any ability to work cooperatively, he only understands mano-a-mano conflict. And I had a disturbing thought today. [For context: Iran has been a serious and non-trivial problem in the Middle East and for the broader world since at least the 1970's. And Iran has not been some pip-squeak little annoyance at that.] What we have is a confrontation between the current POTUS and the so-called "Supreme Leader" of Iran. (POTUS must be extremely jealous of that moniker…) Iran is a theocratic dictatorship. And the theocracy is Mooslim. Now, consider the fact that in the US, POTUS has thrown in with the radical KKKristian Nationalists. So are we looking at the seeds of the mother of all religious wars, potentially? I'm not talking about US vs Iran as nation states. That would be easy, because Bibi has already hugely weakened Iran's non-conventional military capability. I'm talking about world-wide Islamic vs world-wide hard right KKKristian conventional & assymentric holy war. Maybe not all of Islam at first…mostly Shia. Shia are the fundamentalist religious nationalists akin to the wackjob KKKristians in the US.
I'm not saying we're there right now. But who can predict? I was a young adult when the Iran Hostage Crisis occurred. There's some deep history there. Currently, POTUS' political support is from a coalition in which a significant percentage are from the hard right Kristian Nationalist movement. POTUS cannot cross them or he gets removed from office. In Iran, I believe a significant source of political power comes from extremist Shia/military groups. Iran is not a democracy, and minority hard power groups are determining, I think. So neither POTUS nor the Supreme Leader can afford to even 'appear' to capitulate to the other lest he lose power in his homeland.
I hope that just over-worrying by me. Maybe our best hope is for internally-driven resistance and regime change in both countries.