I have been reading your posts on the current situation. I'm puzzled.
We sort of know that the public, including media pundits, have been (and continue to be)) played. Not everything we hear or see is apparently obviously comprehensible. So my question is how can you be so confident that your take is in the right direction.
I am not quibbling about epistemology. I just wonder if you are taking your opinions/speculations far too seriously. Like so many people, especially pundits, you seem to be letting wishful thinking affect your analysis.
So I humbly suggest that you sprinkle a bunch of IMHOs among your speculations, both for the sake of your readers and as your own reminders.
"Unfortunately, Israel is too dependent on military aid and sales from the U.S. Israel is now at the mercy of Donald Trump and every President who comes after him. Trump has only been in office for 6 months, and every day there is something new. Our future in the Middle East is like a rollercoaster ride. How will we ever feel secure again? Yesterday morning, we were lavishing praise on the US attack, until later that evening, we realised that the Iranian attack on the US base in Qatar was staged to let Iran save face. What a joke!" (Marlene H)
Upon seeing this headline today, “President Trump: 'Israel has guys who go in after the hit, they say it was total obliteration'” I commented to my husband that Trump sounds like a mafia don— and sure enough he referred me to your article. Well done
Thanks for this, Ruth. I saw a reference to it, but this is helpful. It will take time for the competent authorities to come up with a final assessment on how far back the bombing campaign set Iran's nuclear program. Albright is a respected voice, for sure. For now, the dispute is over semantics - how to characterize the bombing. Like I said, time will tell.
One of the report’s more interesting observations for me was an alternate interpretation of the truck sighting at Fordo : that perhaps materials were being transported TO Fordo from elsewhere, if the Iranians were confident Fordo was impenetrable. It’s such an obvious possibility but I have not seen this discussed
This one arrived via email:
I have been reading your posts on the current situation. I'm puzzled.
We sort of know that the public, including media pundits, have been (and continue to be)) played. Not everything we hear or see is apparently obviously comprehensible. So my question is how can you be so confident that your take is in the right direction.
I am not quibbling about epistemology. I just wonder if you are taking your opinions/speculations far too seriously. Like so many people, especially pundits, you seem to be letting wishful thinking affect your analysis.
So I humbly suggest that you sprinkle a bunch of IMHOs among your speculations, both for the sake of your readers and as your own reminders.
Let's hope to hear good news.
Reuben F
Thanks for these messages via WhatsApp
"Great perceptive article , Elliot 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽" (Jeff G)
"Unfortunately, Israel is too dependent on military aid and sales from the U.S. Israel is now at the mercy of Donald Trump and every President who comes after him. Trump has only been in office for 6 months, and every day there is something new. Our future in the Middle East is like a rollercoaster ride. How will we ever feel secure again? Yesterday morning, we were lavishing praise on the US attack, until later that evening, we realised that the Iranian attack on the US base in Qatar was staged to let Iran save face. What a joke!" (Marlene H)
Upon seeing this headline today, “President Trump: 'Israel has guys who go in after the hit, they say it was total obliteration'” I commented to my husband that Trump sounds like a mafia don— and sure enough he referred me to your article. Well done
what about trucks leaving underground nuclear site with possible enriched uranium?!!!!!!*
That's an interesting question. Some details here. But bottom line...time will tell.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2025/06/22/iran-strikes-nuclear-site-damage-visuals/
This report is worth a look - inspires cautious optimism at least for the near term: https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/post-attack-assessment-of-the-first-12-days-of-israeli-strikes-on-iranian-nuclear-facilities?utm_source=Klaviyo&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily-newsletter-paid&utm_content=6-20-25&_kx=0xFelEXY865qKxRdiCq8_ElkEhkXVCAQg--9wEFnm7s.L87CGh
(And no, it’s not that ISIS)
Thanks for this, Ruth. I saw a reference to it, but this is helpful. It will take time for the competent authorities to come up with a final assessment on how far back the bombing campaign set Iran's nuclear program. Albright is a respected voice, for sure. For now, the dispute is over semantics - how to characterize the bombing. Like I said, time will tell.
One of the report’s more interesting observations for me was an alternate interpretation of the truck sighting at Fordo : that perhaps materials were being transported TO Fordo from elsewhere, if the Iranians were confident Fordo was impenetrable. It’s such an obvious possibility but I have not seen this discussed