Let's face it Iran is indiscriminatly hitting Israeli civilians targets including schools using cluster bombs.....

[mids2019]

Iran is firing missiles into heavily populated Israeli towns and have abandoned the pretence of targeting anything military.....this is just pure terrorism and does make you think what would happen if Iran did manage to develop a nuclear weapon.

Just hoping more of the missile launch sites can be taken out and this terrorist regime falls.

The argument was that Trump has dementia and says things in speeches that he doesn't mean.

The White House releases will be proof read before going out.

Come on Twiglets, keep up....

I said this just a few posts ago.....

Now wants to leave NATO, by tomo will forget this and by the time he sees King Charles, the UK will once again be the USA's closest of close allies.....

Thats the trouble with cognitive disfunction, one never really knows whats true, false, will never happen or will happen....

Thats why Trump is so dangerous

I could really use the laughing emoji reaction at that WH post

Do you think the whole White House communications centre also has dementia given what the release they posted on March 1st which confirmed a war goal as being to degrade its proxy terror networks

It’s unlikely an option anymore, no one entered.

Politically it’ll turn sour when people realise £1.5m per passage goes to barbaric IRGC leaders. They’re not who you want profiting from a ransom.

For people who won't accept the President of the US as being a reliable source for what he wanted to achieve in the war (his own words) or the official releases from the White House, it appears that you are living in a strange universe where you think you know US goals better than their President or communications staff at the White House.

Considering we are just random people debating on Mumsnet, it doesn't seem very likely.

Although just saw this so maybe things will change

The United Arab Emirates is preparing to join a US military operation to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Diplomats in Abu Dhabi said they were exploring how Emirati forces could play a role in the campaign to secure the waterway, which normally accounts for around a fifth of the world’s oil trade.

Interesting.

Well whose fault is that? Trump and Netanyahu sowed the seeds, now the rest of the world are going to be reaping the "rewards" for a long time.

So why do people keep harping on about Iran and nuclear weapons then? Irans ability to create nuclear weapons was obliterated in 2025 and suggestions otherwise are fake news. The White House said so. Why do so many of you here think that you know better than the white house? Iran doesn't even have the ability to create nuclear weapons yet you are using it as justification for war?

“Based on everything we have seen — and I’ve seen it all — 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.”

www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2025/06/irans-nuclear-facilities-have-been-obliterated-and-suggestions-otherwise-are-fake-news/

What does "taken them out" look like to you? Strange turn of phrase

I do know and I will be clear; I am not here to defend Iran. I would argue that deaths of Iranian people at the hands of the US and Isreal should not diminished or justified by deaths of Iranian citizens at the hands of Iran.

Thank you for clarifying that you do not agree with nation states having secret nuclear weapons (albeit caveated with an “if”). You may be aware that in 2022 many world leaders (152 to be precise) passed a resolution at the UNGA for Israel to accede to the NPT, to place all of its nuclear facilities under the safeguards of the IAEA and to ultimately to destroy its nuclear arsenal. Israel has declined to do so. Many world leaders do not believe Israel should have nuclear weapons. My personal belief is that no country should have nuclear weapons.

I wish to point out the double standards applied – Iran does not have nuclear weapons yet they are being attacked for posing an “imminent nuclear threat”. Israel does have nuclear weapons that are not subject to any regulations and are an “ally” and brought into the fold. The same double standard exists in the OP to this thread – Iran is accused of using cluster munitions and must be condemned. Yet, in a large part, the reason we even have the Convention on Cluster Munitions 2008 is because of Israel’s extensive use of these types of bombs in Lebanon in 2006. It is estimated that in the last 72 hours of that particular war with Lebanon, Isreal dropped an estimated (by the UN) 4 million bomblets on an area covering 1,400sq km. Some 1 million of which failed to detonate and became, in essence, land mines which continued to kill, maim and injury Lebanese civilians for years after that war finished. No one should be using cluster bombs – they shouldn’t even be made.

I have noticed that you sidestep any criticism of Israel’s actions though and do not acknowledge the immense death tolls caused by Israel’s actions so I do not expect a substantive response to my argument that a double standard is being applied by the West here.

Well, tbh a: you ve moved the goal posts from Trump to the WH and b: yes when i listen to Karoline Leavitt, i do think she is either crazy or has ambitions as a stand up comedian or is planning to win an Oscar.

btw How is the degrading of Iran's proxy networks going? is Hormuz now open or being blocked due to the actions of Iran and its proxies....

Hezbollah is now, as we speak, gaining support from local Lebanese, with the aim of driving back the IDF, so look out for a Taliban style war and 1000s killed.

Even Sky news has said we should take Trumps announcement on NATO with a "pinch of salt" as he'll change his view over night, the US will also lose access to all of its European bases... nose and face spring to mind.

Do you think his latest announcements are rational?

Because with the exception of Trump and Pete Hegseth, the other sources mentioned in that White House release only point to the sites being very significantly damaged (particularly Fordow), rather than Iran losing the ability to develop nuclear weapons in the future. For example:

Israel Atomic Energy Commission: "We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir: “I can say here that the assessment is that we significantly damaged the nuclear program, and I can also say that we set it back by years, I repeat, years.”

Iran Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei: “Our nuclear installations have been badly damaged, that’s for sure.”

Vice President JD Vance: “I can say to the American people with great confidence that they are much further away from a nuclear program today than they were 24 hours ago. That was the objective of the mission, to destroy that Fordow nuclear site, and of course, do some damage to the other sites as well, but we feel very confident that the Fordow nuclear site was substantially set back, and that was our goal.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan “Razin” Caine: “Initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio: “The Iranian program — the nuclear program — today looks nothing like it did just a week ago … That story is a false story and it’s one that really shouldn’t be re-reported because it doesn’t accurately reflect what’s happening.”

Secretary Rubio: “Everything underneath that mountain is in bad shape … There’s no way Iran comes to the table if somehow nothing had happened. This was complete and total obliteration. They are in bad shape. They are way behind today compared to where they were just seven days ago because of what President Trump did.”

Special Envoy Steve Witkoff: “We put 12 bunker buster bombs on Fordow. There’s no doubt that it breached the canopy, there’s no doubt that it was well within reach of the depth that these bunker buster bombs go to, and there’s no doubt that it was obliterated — so the reporting out there that in some way suggests that we did not achieve the objective is just completely preposterous.”

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard: “The operation was a resounding success. Our missiles were delivered precisely and accurately, obliterating key Iranian capabilities needed to quickly assemble a nuclear weapon.”

International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi: “Given the explosive payload utilized, and the extreme vibration-sensitive nature of centrifuges, very significant damage is expected to have occurred.

Institute for Science and International Security President David Albright: “Overall, Israel’s and U.S. attacks have effectively destroyed Iran’s centrifuge enrichment program. It will be a long time before Iran comes anywhere near the capability it had before the attack.”

Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Nonproliferation and Biodefense Program Deputy Director Andrea Stricker: “I think that because of the massive damage and the shock wave that would have been sent by 12 Massive Ordnance Penetrators at the Fordow site, that it likely would render its centrifuges damaged or inoperable.”

American Enterprise Institute Middle East Portfolio Manager Brian Carter: “There is no question that the bombing campaign ‘badly, badly damaged’ the three sites.”

Institute for Science and International Security Senior Research Fellow Spencer Faragasso: “Overall, it may possibly take years for Iran to reconstitute the capabilities it lost at these facilities.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2025/06/irans-nuclear-facilities-have-been-obliterated-and-suggestions-otherwise-are-fake-news/

My point has not changed, it has all along been that the US had goals from the start of the war that it wanted to degrade Iran's proxy networks (made in response to another user denying this point).

You jumped in to make the point that Trump was not a good source for what the US goals were ... now you are also dismissing the WH releases generally and Karoline Leavitt in particular - maybe you think she has dementia too.

At the same time you now seem to accept that one of the US war goals was to degrade Iran's proxy networks because you have asked me how that is going.

I think we're done here.

Of course its a double standard. International politics is full of double standards.

However, apart from little pockets of extremity here and there, and in this filthy little corner of mumsnet, most people accept that Israel isn't a danger to anyone unless that party first attacks them. And contrary to that, most people accept that Iran is indeed a danger internationally, because of the desire to expand it's idealogy into places where it feels it can by violent means, and because of its oft repeated desire to destroy Israel and attack Jewish people and other groups outside it's borders.

I haven't ever even seen a thread on here about concern about Israels nuclear status. People are only saying now it's unfair in relation to 'not allowing' Iran to get one.

I can feel the outrage coming at me for pointing out these obvious to most facts and I won't be coming back to respond. I already know how many of you feel about Israel, and someone reminded me yesterday that they feel Israel is the bigger threat. I already know. I strongly disagree.

Double standards exist for many, many reasons. The world isn't run on morals or fairness and agape, its run on the self interest of nations and powerful individuals.

So the Iranian regime continues. The nuclear threat continues. Terrorism continues. More conflict.

We just have to pay more for everything.

@Kassamungo yes I prefixed my response with an "if" because I don't feel that I know if Israel have nuclear weapons or not. If I had to bet on it, I would guess that they do but because I don't know, I use the word "if".

I can understand why Israel would feel a particular need to have nuclear weapons, but nevertheless, I definitely think that if they do have them they should be transparent about it and their nuclear facilities be inspected as other countries are inspected and they should have to follow the same regulations as other countries with nuclear weapons.

It is not true that I sidestep any criticism of Israel’s actions. I have expressed criticism of the Settlers on multiple occasions and of the extremists in Netanyahu's party. Now I criticise Israel for having secret nuclear weapons if they do (and I have explained the "if" while also explaining that I think they probably do have them).

I agree with you that I would prefer for no country to have nuclear weapons.

I always enjoy your turn of phrase @dairydebris and "this filthy little corner of mumsnet" doesn't disappoint.

Don’t worry leaders are more likely to agree re Iran which is what counts v mn posts.

Who are the 'filthy' posters this turn of phrase refers to?

So unless we agree with US and Israeli policies we are filthy?

UNCLOS is not that simple. Nobody is exempt. It's international law. It's a sort of reciprocal thing. The only way to be punished really is to not be allowed freedom of navigation in other nations waters. That will have limited effect on Iran cos Trump sunk their ships.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/29/world/middleeast/us-precision-strike-missile-iran-lamerd.html

New U.S. Missile Hit Iranian Sports Hall and School, Analysis Shows

The Pentagon used missiles untested in combat in a deadly attack that struck civilian sites near a military compound on Feb. 28, according to visual evidence examined by The Times and weapons experts.

You and I are both in agreement on the need for Europe to increase defence spending and it is a good thing to become less reliant on US military support.

However despite our views I unfortunately have to accept that there simply isn't the will amongst UK voters to spend more on defence especially if it comes at the cost of cutting Government spending on other areas.

And even if that is overcome then other European countries (Spain for example) are even less willing increase defence spending. So all that would happen in a "European defence force" is UK taxpayers spending more on defence in order to give Spanish taxpayers a free ride on our military support.

Lastly there is the question of personnel and very few young people now being willing fight for their country.

Quite simply after 75 years of relative peace in Europe voters have become complacent and see defending their country as a job for someone else.