So only ‘thirdly obliterated’ ? Another revelation is that US Central Command (CENTCOM) "had developed a much more comprehensive plan to strike Iran that would have involved hitting three additional sites in an operation that would have stretched for several weeks instead of a single night, according to a current US official and two former US officials." US Strikes Destroyed Only One Of Three Iranian Nuclear Sites: Intel Assessment | ZeroHedge
A COCOM will always come up with alternative COA's based on the guidance they get from the CG, SecDef, or POTUS. This is not unusual.
If that’s the case, I’d be interested to know whether that may have been effectively our goal (to send the message that we can take out anything we want whenever we want). We successfully destroyed Iran’s most fortified and supposedly impenetrable nuclear site - the one that had people seriously asking in the days before our strike whether it was actually possible to do significant damage to it with anything short of a tactical nuclear weapon. And there was some contemporaneous reporting that our original intent had been to strike only Fordow, and that we added the other two as additional targets at Israel’s request. Given that, it seems unlikely that we’re capable of completely destroying Iran’s most difficult to damage target, but simultaneously tried and failed on the far less-fortified ones - which suggests to me that our primary goal may have been to take out the one that no one else can and send the message that we have the ability to destroy anything they build, but did not want to go all in on destroying everything we could.
well they used different methods to hit the different sites. Seems like they perhaps weren't aware of the Isfahan site be buried so deep. Perhaps a bunker buster could have been used there as well.
More Iran news: Northern Iran is facing such a severe water shortage (from drought, global warming, etc.) that they may have to move the entire population of Tehran (15 million) somewhere else. One of their largest reservoirs is expected to run dry within a month. MSN
On to rapacious states that actually possess nukes, when are we going to bomb Israel’s sites ? I don’t understand the holdup.
12% of Gaza is stage 5 famine. There comes a point… where you’ve made your point. Hamas needs to go, but the death of child to hunger and starvation breeds a hate that is beyond Hamas’ wildest fantasy. “JERUSALEM — Israel has begun to airdrop food into Gaza, Israel said on Saturday, as deaths from starvation in the besieged enclave spread this week and international criticism of Israel’s restrictions on aid reached a crescendo.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/07/26/gaza-airdrops-resume-starvation-israel/
Tell me who won again ? US used about 25% of its THAAD missile interceptors during Israel-Iran war | CNN
So Hamas has transitioned their military strategy from letting their civilians die as a result of being human shields for Hamas’ weapons and fighters to allowing their civilians die by not allowing them to eat. All for the sole purpose of hoping the civilized world blames Israel because they know they cannot defeat the IDF and it’s their only path to anything they consider victory. Sadly, there are people out there that still buy into this propaganda.
We've got the UK threatening to recognize Palestine if Israel doesnt stop and Israeli human rights groups using "genocide", and you are still going with this line?
Israel was banking on a quick knockout blow but was squealing for US involvement on Day Three. As mentioned, US depletion of top of the line missile defense systems and no hard evidence that Iran’s nuclear industry has been severely disrupted, much less ‘obliterated.’
The only part you are missing is the UN is actively supporting Hamas plans by refusing to deliver food/aid through because it is being controlled at distribution points by the IDF. This prevents Hamas from being able to control the food supply and through UNRWA, which has become an arm of Hamas.
