Page 2 | Trumps senior counter terrorism officer resigns due to the war with Iran and has said they only went to war because of Israeli pressure, not because of any imminent threat from Iran.

BerthaPotts · 2026-03-17T15:49:32+00:00

If that is really the case will this not be very damning for Trump? How will he respond to this?

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 16:10

So it is about regime change? Because if you leave the regime in place its going to circle back to nuclear pretty damn fast.

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 16:06

Because people don’t care about 8 to ten years away even if it could be life ending for nearly all in a wide vicinity. Even on here people say so what about Iran having nuclear as it’s not immediate.

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 16:04

So why even pretend there was an imminent threat? Why not just acknowledge its been done because they could.

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 16:02

dairydebris · 19/03/2026 16:01

Powerful countries led by Strongmen have always gone ahead as if International Law doesn't apply to them.

Show quote history

International law protects states not people anyway. In this case it’s protecting the IRGC.

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 16:01

Well Putin will certainly be very happy with how things have played out thus far. Win win for him.

dairydebris · 19/03/2026 16:01

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 15:43

Russia will be very happy with your redrafting of international law.

Powerful countries led by Strongmen have always gone ahead as if International Law doesn't apply to them.

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 15:57

We've been told they are about to have nuclear capability for decades. The treaty Trump tore up appeared to function.
Certainly now I can't imagine why the regime wouldn't make it a priority. I imagine a lot of countries now feel that they must have nuclear capability. Presumably there will need to be repeat bombings ad infinitum.

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 15:47

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 15:43

Russia will be very happy with your redrafting of international law.

How do you feel about Iran having nuclear capability in ten years as suggested below?

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 15:43

Russia will be very happy with your redrafting of international law.

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 15:40

Twiglets1 · 19/03/2026 15:27

Well I do see 10 year as fairly imminent, or even 20 years.

In my lifetime ... it's a threat I would prefer to be reduced, and I don't even live close to Iran.

Extinguished if possible.

Show quote history

Same.

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 15:40

There is a definition of 'imminent threat' - a necessity of self-defence, instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.

Twiglets1 · 19/03/2026 15:27

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 14:43

So it's nothing to do with an imminent threat. It's just as and when.

Well I do see 10 year as fairly imminent, or even 20 years.

In my lifetime ... it's a threat I would prefer to be reduced, and I don't even live close to Iran.

Extinguished if possible.

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 14:52

I recall hearing Ursula von der Leyen making the statement that Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Seems sensible from her, other leaders likely agreed.

No one suggested what should be done to ensure that. Presumably politicians prefer to kick it in to the long grass as it will impact their popularity and their power is more important.

How Iran is dealt with in say 8 years when even stronger, be great to hear how from anyone really.

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 14:43

So it's nothing to do with an imminent threat. It's just as and when.

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 14:24

Islandsofsand · 19/03/2026 10:32

@Twiglets1
US intelligence agencies have themselves, as I have already linked an article confirming, that the risk was felt to at least 10 years away.

They have also said that there has been no evidence of Iran working towards developing a threat since their nuclear facilities being attacked in 2025.

Personally, I don’t see 10 years as being imminent.

Show quote history

If people are saying ten years then I’m not sure how it gets easier to deal with as it gets closer to having the weapons.

Islandsofsand · 19/03/2026 10:32

Twiglets1 · 19/03/2026 08:16

To me it depends what is meant by "imminent threat".

Threat in the next few months or even years ... maybe not.

But Iran were fiercely defending their right to develop nuclear weapons and moving towards having the capability. In their own words (June 25):

the President of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran has issued necessary directives for launching a new enrichment facility in a secure location, and replacing first-generation centrifuges at the Martyr Ali Mohammadi (Fordo) enrichment center with advanced sixth-generation machines.

Additional measures are also being planned and will be announced in due course.

Show quote history

@Twiglets1
US intelligence agencies have themselves, as I have already linked an article confirming, that the risk was felt to at least 10 years away.

They have also said that there has been no evidence of Iran working towards developing a threat since their nuclear facilities being attacked in 2025.

Personally, I don’t see 10 years as being imminent.

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 09:12

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 09:11

I've got no interest in convincing people of anything tbh. People can educate themselves and make up their own minds. From your post it seems like you believe(for now) that angrily lashing out and blowing up gas fields was a positive and is a legitimate way to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons. That's all I was asking 🙂

Show quote history

Ok fine. Up to you.

I’m yet to see anyone put forward much but if someone will perhaps they’ll get a lot of support for it.

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 09:11

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 09:05

Up to you but surely what you raise is key. What are the options, I can be convinced this current approach isn’t the right way to go if people are ready to lay out alternatives.

I may well agree another approach as outlined would be better.

Show quote history

I've got no interest in convincing people of anything tbh. People can educate themselves and make up their own minds. From your post it seems like you believe(for now) that angrily lashing out and blowing up gas fields was a positive and is a legitimate way to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons. That's all I was asking 🙂

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 09:05

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 08:44

No. I don't answer questions from people who aren't willing to do the same, I don't see how it can be productive

Show quote history

Up to you but surely what you raise is key. What are the options, I can be convinced this current approach isn’t the right way to go if people are ready to lay out alternatives.

I may well agree another approach as outlined would be better.

Twiglets1 · 19/03/2026 08:48

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 08:35

Phew, so glad it isn't relevant to you. That was definitely my concern. It's not like the rest of us in the world have to live alongside Iran

We’re all just posting from our own perspective & that’s mine 🤷🏼‍♀️

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 08:44

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 08:42

I’d love to know the options, can you say, I might agree one would be better.

Show quote history

No. I don't answer questions from people who aren't willing to do the same, I don't see how it can be productive

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 08:42

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 08:40

So do you think that the choices are to angrily and violently lash out and blow up Iranian gas fields or ignore the situation, it seems to me like there are a wealth of options in between the two extremes but you disagree? Do you think that Israel violently lashing out and blowing up gas fields has helped towards stopping the production of nuclear weapons?

Show quote history

I’d love to know the options, can you say, I might agree one would be better.

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 08:40

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 08:37

Ignoring the production of weapons doesn’t make the issue go away though, it makes it more difficult if not impossible to resolve.

Show quote history

So do you think that the choices are to angrily and violently lash out and blow up Iranian gas fields or ignore the situation, it seems to me like there are a wealth of options in between the two extremes but you disagree? Do you think that Israel violently lashing out and blowing up gas fields has helped towards stopping the production of nuclear weapons?

EasternStandard · 19/03/2026 08:39

The problem isn’t going away, it’s just kicked to a harder place.

Notonthestairs · 19/03/2026 08:37

FloralDeerPattern · 19/03/2026 08:35

Phew, so glad it isn't relevant to you. That was definitely my concern. It's not like the rest of us in the world have to live alongside Iran

And Russia.