[Unconvinced]

Zachary Klement said:

---

Help me understand.

The White House said we obliterated their nuclear facilities last summer, but now we are concerned with them having nukes that can hit the United States?

---

After the June 2025 Israeli strikes the IAEA confirmed Iran's enrichment program was significantly set back. That's obliterated in the sense that it was severely degraded not erased from existence permanently.

Iran then spent eight months rebuilding. This is documented. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said in December 2025 that Iran appeared to be attempting to rebuild Fordow and said it suggested they "didn't get the full message" from the June strikes.

Iran moved approximately 408 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium to secret locations in deeply buried facilities at Isfahan before the February 2026 strikes.

Iran announced it would build new advanced centrifuges after the IAEA censure. Iran reduced IAEA cooperation to hide its rebuilding progress.

So the actual sequence is:

June 2025 program obliterated by Israeli strikes.

June 2025 through February 2026 Iran rebuilds in hardened underground facilities specifically designed to survive future strikes.

February 2026 program approaching immune status in those hardened facilities, requiring American B-2 bombers with bunker-buster MOPs that only the United States possesses to reach.

Hope that clears things up.

Matt Walsh is doing what he does best constructing a clever-sounding logical argument on a foundation he didn’t bother to research.

Here’s why it falls apart completely:

The argument he’s making:

If the program was obliterated in summer 2025, it cannot also be close to immune… https://t.co/wuf4ipUYei

— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) March 3, 2026

Theres an entire thread over there dedicated to the why this was necessary.

So far as the op goes, he has a disconnect between why actions like this indeed mafa.

HarryJ33tamu said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

Help me understand.

The White House said we obliterated their nuclear facilities last summer, but now we are concerned with them having nukes that can hit the United States?

I'm also curious, if they're close to having weapons that can strike the U.S. from Iran, do we not have weapons that can strike Iran from the U.S.? Why did we need to move so much of our resources to the Middle East? Why can't we remotely strike them like they're supposedly going to be able to do to us? Are they on the verge of having more advanced tech than we have? Or what's the deal there?

---

We could nuke them from the U.S. if we wanted to. That's not our goal at all, though. Targeted precision strikes to minimize civilian casualties.

Iran would nuke the U.S. in a heartbeat if they had the ability to.

That's the difference between us and them.

---

I doubt it, but we won't have to worry about any of that either way.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

Help me understand.

The White House said we obliterated their nuclear facilities last summer, but now we are concerned with them having nukes that can hit the United States?

---

After the June 2025 Israeli strikes the IAEA confirmed Iran's enrichment program was significantly set back. That's obliterated in the sense that it was severely degraded not erased from existence permanently.

Iran then spent eight months rebuilding. This is documented. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said in December 2025 that Iran appeared to be attempting to rebuild Fordow and said it suggested they "didn't get the full message" from the June strikes.

Iran moved approximately 408 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium to secret locations in deeply buried facilities at Isfahan before the February 2026 strikes.

Iran announced it would build new advanced centrifuges after the IAEA censure. Iran reduced IAEA cooperation to hide its rebuilding progress.

So the actual sequence is:

June 2025 program obliterated by Israeli strikes.

June 2025 through February 2026 Iran rebuilds in hardened underground facilities specifically designed to survive future strikes.

February 2026 program approaching immune status in those hardened facilities, requiring American B-2 bombers with bunker-buster MOPs that only the United States possesses to reach.

Hope that clears things up.

Matt Walsh is doing what he does best constructing a clever-sounding logical argument on a foundation he didn’t bother to research.

Here’s why it falls apart completely:

The argument he’s making:

If the program was obliterated in summer 2025, it cannot also be close to immune… https://t.co/wuf4ipUYei

— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) March 3, 2026

---

I notice ants in my yard; I "obliterate" ants. Somehow, they start rebuilding. But they are still ants….

HTH

the 2nd and third order effects are just as important as the immediate effects in Iran.

Good summary. And TBH, I think it does a good job of explaining Trump's mindset with this present action.

We all know Trump likes to have the final word. He has a big stick, and isn't afraid to swing it. After the first action in Summer of '25 the Iranians not only didn't get the message, they effectively gave a big middle finger to Trump and immediately began rebuilding their enrichment capabilities.

So in my mind, this was less about what the Iranians could do TODAY, and more about what they would be able to accomplish in the relatively near future - especially if another milquetoast administration were to follow. So Trump is taking the fight to them, and completely destroying Iran's capability to wage war.

Not really surprising if you understrand Trump's frame of mind and how he negotiates.

They had and have the ability for dirty bombs. Possibly already used.

The capabilities and stockpiles of missiles and drones were growing quickly. Next step would be ballistic missiles that could reach us.

It sucks to have to act but we finally did. Now with the Kurds assistance, let's hope the Iranians can handle the IRGC

NPC*

Fixed your name for you.

Did you even listen to Trump's speech about this?

Some of yall are clueless lol

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Have fun over there with tucker and fuentes

---

I don't know about Fuentes, but Tucker is about the only sane voice in media. Sorry it causes so much butt hurt here.

Lol I thought this was about to be Make America Fat Again.

Zachary Klement said:

---

Help me understand.

---

War is big business.

"In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity"
Sun-Tzu from The Art of War

I would add that a listen to Marco Rubio's comments today in the Capital add color to this. He indicated that Iran's ballistic missile production had ramped up and they were approaching a point where they (Iran) would have enough that they would be unassailable. The current action in Iran is much more about that than their nuclear program, although I also read that in negotiations with Iran, they stated that their goal was 11 nukes. So, the primary mission is to reduce/eliminate their ballistic missiles and capacity to manufacture them then degrade or finally completely eliminate Iran's ability to manufacture a nuke.

Don't think you're gonna like the outcome if the U.S. just lays down and allows Iran, China and Russia to dictate the world energy market by being ****heads whenever they want something.

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Explains much

---

And your response speaks volumes. We got ourselves a few little Lindsay Grahams here.

MelvinUdall said:

---

NPR*

Fixed your name for you.

---

FIFY

Zachary Klement said:

---

HarryJ33tamu said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

Help me understand.

The White House said we obliterated their nuclear facilities last summer, but now we are concerned with them having nukes that can hit the United States?

I'm also curious, if they're close to having weapons that can strike the U.S. from Iran, do we not have weapons that can strike Iran from the U.S.? Why did we need to move so much of our resources to the Middle East? Why can't we remotely strike them like they're supposedly going to be able to do to us? Are they on the verge of having more advanced tech than we have? Or what's the deal there?

---

We could nuke them from the U.S. if we wanted to. That's not our goal at all, though. Targeted precision strikes to minimize civilian casualties.

Iran would nuke the U.S. in a heartbeat if they had the ability to.

That's the difference between us and them.

---

I doubt it, but we won't have to worry about any of that either way.

---

What do you doubt? That Iran would if they could?

Madagascar said:

---

Lol I thought this was about to be Make America Fat Again.

---

I actually thought it was going to be Make America Farm Again, which would be great.

Paniacs are nearly as bad as libs

NPH- said:

---

America is great again; we are out of the confines of the demmy's ungodly movement.

But now Im team MAFA; Make America First Again. Why is this a bad thing? Since when do we put American citizen's freedoms, safety and tax dollars at risk because of someone else's agenda?

I was clearly born in the wrong generation. If we have excess and can help other people in a godly way, sure, let's help them. But we've clearly got things here on the home front that need correcting, and people here on our shores that can use our benefits. Why are we fighting the world's wars?

---

It is in the best interests of the United States to end the Iranian government.

We tried negotiating. It did not work.

We tried releasing money to them. That only gave them the opportunity to undermine their neighbors in building their proxy thug networks throughout the Middle East.

We tried allowing them nuclear capacity. They had no intention of using it for anything but bringing about the 12th Caliphate.

We have tried diplomacy. We've tried bribery. We've tried total appeasement.

The one thing we didn't try? Kicking their ass Jacksonian style.

We should have done it in 1979. We should have done it in OIF when the Quds forces were caught red-handed assisting the insurgents in the placement of plasma IEDs in the way of our forces.

Thank God we have a POTUS who understands that killing your enemy is a perfectly legitimate option when all other methods have proven ineffective.

Didn't you hear? The voice of sanity Tucker Carlson says Jews are in qatar up to no good!


Turns out, it was Iranians. Even his daddy Qatar thinks Carlson is a doofus.

carl spacklers hat said:

---

I would add that a listen to Marco Rubio's comments today in the Capital add color to this. He indicated that Iran's ballistic missile production had ramped up and they were approaching a point where they (Iran) would have enough that they would be unassailable. The current action in Iran is much more about that than their nuclear program, although I also read that in negotiations with Iran, they stated that their goal was 11 nukes. So, the primary mission is to reduce/eliminate their ballistic missiles and capacity to manufacture them then degrade or finally completely eliminate Iran's ability to manufacture a nuke.

---

What Iran said was that they had enough highly enriched fissile material to create 11 nukes.

It's not that difficult apparently to go from their 60% enrichment to 90% (or whatever is needed for a nuke)...it's like in the weeks to achieve it.

NPH- said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Zachary Klement said:

---

Help me understand.

The White House said we obliterated their nuclear facilities last summer, but now we are concerned with them having nukes that can hit the United States?

---

After the June 2025 Israeli strikes the IAEA confirmed Iran's enrichment program was significantly set back. That's obliterated in the sense that it was severely degraded not erased from existence permanently.

Iran then spent eight months rebuilding. This is documented. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said in December 2025 that Iran appeared to be attempting to rebuild Fordow and said it suggested they "didn't get the full message" from the June strikes.

Iran moved approximately 408 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium to secret locations in deeply buried facilities at Isfahan before the February 2026 strikes.

Iran announced it would build new advanced centrifuges after the IAEA censure. Iran reduced IAEA cooperation to hide its rebuilding progress.

So the actual sequence is:

June 2025 program obliterated by Israeli strikes.

June 2025 through February 2026 Iran rebuilds in hardened underground facilities specifically designed to survive future strikes.

February 2026 program approaching immune status in those hardened facilities, requiring American B-2 bombers with bunker-buster MOPs that only the United States possesses to reach.

Hope that clears things up.

Matt Walsh is doing what he does best constructing a clever-sounding logical argument on a foundation he didn’t bother to research.

Here’s why it falls apart completely:

The argument he’s making:

If the program was obliterated in summer 2025, it cannot also be close to immune… https://t.co/wuf4ipUYei

— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) March 3, 2026

---

I notice ants in my yard; I "obliterate" ants. Somehow, they start rebuilding. But they are still ants….

HTH

---

LOL. Ants are a nuisance. Radical Muslims with nukes are a tad more than a nuisance.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Didn't you hear? The voice of sanity Tucker Carlson says Jews are in qatar up to no good!


Turns out, it was Iranians. Even his daddy Qatar thinks Carlson is a doofus.

---

Sometimes you just have to let a Ho be a Ho.

Meanwhile Trump will be giving The Future Ayotollahs of Iran a taste of Greatest Generation-level FAFO.

I missed out on the days when even our liberals were capable of going all out on anyone who dared screw with the USA.

Now we have the Tim Kaine types, writing opinions in the Wall Street Journal depicting the Iranian government as victims. Pathetic.