Originally Posted by
Turbosina
So let's see, in June 2025, the individual occupying the Oval Office stated that "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." That is a direct quote.
The individual calling himself the "Secretary of War" stated, and I quote, "Our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons. Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran; so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the President and the successful mission.”
The White House's own page, as you all can see for yourself, stated "Iran's Nuclear Faclities Have Been Obliterated -- And Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News."
Yet the primary justification given for this current "Excursion" is that Iran was moments away from attacking us and Israel with nuclear weapons. To quote the same individual occupying the White House: "
So, MAGA fans. One of these sets of statements is a baldfaced lie. Both statements cannot be true at the same time. Which one do you believe?
I can’t believe I’m weighing in here, but is it not
possible that the best assessment/belief at the time was that the Fordow facilities were destroyed/obliterated, and that sometime later - after Iran doubled or tripled their efforts and went all in - got to a point where intel proved that earlier assessment obsolete, or even wrong in hindsight? It doesn’t make one or the other a lie, necessarily. Hyperbole is this president’s love language, btw. Just answering the question in good faith that you actually are seeking a plausible answer.