This lie I can live with...

[FormerOstrich]

Normally I am all-in in calling out the lies...but I make an exception this time.

If Iranian nuclear capacity is "obliterated" there would be no justifiable reason to perform more and/or severe strikes.

If the lie stands It would force diplomacy over military might lest there would have to be an admission the capacity was not obliterated.

I have said since his first term. He does something atrocious but by the time the dust settles he has done something so much more atrocious the first event pales in comparison and fades away. Ultimately, given time, nukes will be in the escalation mix.

I have no problem acknowledging he is correct...the sites are obliterated.

[rampartd]

1. obliteration as a gateway drug......

i am reluctant to take even such a baby step into his alternate reality.

[Ohioboy]

2. Yep, no need for regime change

Bibi and Trump will have to be satisfied that the whole thing is over as far as further attacks are concerned.

[EndlessWire]

3. Won't he be surprised

but of course, he'll probably die before that happens.

Did they get the ICBM and drone factories? Just saying. Should have done that first.

[usonian]

4. Regime change needed. X4

[snot]

5. I've had similar thoughts.

Trump is no negotiator; his only tactics are showmanship, lies, and bullying. Those have worked pretty well for him in his business and domestic political careers; and now he's trying to use lies and showmanship to de-escalate the conflict with Iran, because he already threw out the best deal anyone could gotten (the one Obama negotiated), he has no prayer of replacing it with any actual treaty that's as good, and he's too egotistical to settle for anything that's not seen as better.

So he's conducting a pretend and extend operation in the hope that nothing terrible will result before he's out of office.

Since Iran's given every indication that they really don't want an all-out war with the US, and if Trump has secretly informed Israel that he really will constrict the flow of US funds and weapons to them if they don't go along, it just might work.

Part of the problem, though, is that each government is issuing contradictory messages for external vs. internal consumption: each must somehow reassure the other countries that they've had enough and don't want further warfare, while reassuring their citizens that they've suffered no serious damage but have inflicted grievous harm on the other country and are eager to inflict more at the drop of a hat.