Brace Yourselves For War Between Iran and Israel

Quoting several Xs from Palestine Today

Washington Post, quoting officials: "The Director of Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense do not play an important role in Trump's circle with regard to discussions about Iran."


"The circle of advisers on Iran includes DeVance, Marco Rubio, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."


Bloomberg, citing informed sources: "Senior US officials are preparing for a possible attack on Iran in the coming days."

Bloomberg, citing informed sources: "There are potential plans to launch an attack on Iran this weekend, and the situation is still evolving and could change."

Screenshot_20250618-201402_X.jpg
 
Whoa! Things are really getting crazy! :shock:
Yeah, the Russians are far more sobre and clearly the adult in the room of global situations.

Just today I caught Putin's statements about the situation in the ME, from the perspective of someone with power and honor, he says that there are ways to guarantee the Iranian nuclear program and the Israeli security concerns. That he has spoken about this with Israel and with Washington, but that is his position publicly, he probably knows that none of what has been used to justify the aggression is in fact a real concern for anyone. Take a listen


While in the US, both the WSJ and Bloomberg are reporting that Trump has already drafted plans for a possible attack on Iran for the next few days, maybe as early as this weekend.
 
Q: (Joe) So the 'surprising solution to the longstanding problem' globally would, without asking what that is, would it be a good idea for us to stock up on diesel and gasoline for the cars for example?

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) Because Middle East obviously... There's nothing else going on right now. So a surprising solution that we're not going to like, it's going to happen in the Middle East. And if it's big enough that always causes chaos in oil markets...

(L) Does this have anything to do with a previous prediction you made that Israel would ultimately be destroyed or bring on its own destruction?

A: Close!


Q: (L) Are other countries going to get involved?

A: Yes

Q: (Andromeda) Will there be a civil war in the US?

A: Not yet.

Q: (Joe) Can't have it all at once, sweetie!

(Andromeda) Well, you know...

(Joe) Can't cram it all into November! [laughter]

(L) That suggests there IS going to be a civil war in the US. Just not yet.

(Chu) Should we seriously consider moving?

A: That opportunity will present itself.

Q: (L) Well. Anything anybody else can think of that we want to know about at this particular point in time? Is Trump going to go to prison?

A: No

Q: (Chu) Why did the Israelis do this inside job now and not before?

A: Time was right for them.

Q: (Chu) They said it had to be apocalyptic for them to do it.

(L) Yeah.

(Joe) Yeah, they created the apocalyptic situation. It's just...

A: The change is coming and 4D masters are getting desperate.


Q: (Joe) At the human level... I mean, is the rationale for at least the US getting involved in what we suspect is some kind of a major conflict in the Middle East to, from their perspective, try to destroy the process of movement towards a multipolar world where they would lose out? Is that their geopolitical thinking behind it?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Also remember that at one point they called the USA a 5D city on a hill.

A: Yes

Q: (L) So there is going to be destruction in the US?

A: Yes

Q: (PoB) This recent inside job with the provoked or arranged attack of Hamas and the war in Gaza: To what extent on the 3D level were Israelis motivated by religion?

A: At the top, very little. It is a convenient ideology for the levels below.

That Session 28 October 2023 is sounding very prescient. A gas crisis leading to economic downturn. A war no one wants leading to the fracture of a country.

Just to recap. The whole point of this attack on Iran is to gain total control of the oil and gas resources in the Middle East and thereby strangle China's (and Russia) plan for a multipolar world, unseating the US as hegemon - and by definition Israel as the ME hegemon.

So it's "existential" for both the US and Israel, and by implication the major European powers.

That's the short version.
 
According to reports from "Palestina Hoy", Iran has resumed bombing Israel. Israeli sources: "At least 25 missiles were launched from Iran toward Israel, making it the most powerful attack in recent days."

An aerial battle ensued during which Israel's air defenses failed to intercept the Iranian missiles, which struck several targets in various locations.

Channel 12 Israel: "Initial reports of direct hits in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area and sounds of massive explosions."

As the weekend approaches and Iran deploys more advanced missiles, it seems that the revelation that they are in possession of nuclear weapons is drawing nearer. In that case, what will Trump's strategy be? Will Tulsi Gabbard resign?
The first moments after the launch of a missile from Iran, minutes ago.​
 
Well, Israel says it follows God's law.

Exodus 21:24-25
24 An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot, 25 a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound, a blow for a blow.


Iranian News Agency: "The target of the missile attack is the Israeli army's command and intelligence headquarters, next to Soroka Hospital. The military infrastructure was hit with precision and Soroka Hospital was damaged by the shock wave."

The Israeli Stock Exchange building was directly hit by an Iranian missile in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area this morning.

It seems as though we are witnessing the final phase of the Hunger Games in action, and the world is Panem.
 
Some people here are not aware of that and neither should the C's transcripts be taken as the gospel. There can be errors in transmission and things like that, so that for example the early sessions were only about 70% accurate (according to the C's). And this is a research forum, where in this case we try to determine how Iran could have gotten nukes and tested them without apparently anyone noticing.
In addition to the aforementioned study, which revealed that nuclear tests could be hidden between earthquakes, I found certain things that could point to how this could be done.
Before continuing, keep in mind that although Israel possibly conducted its first nuclear tests at the same time as the French tests, and an incident in South Africa is suspected, it generally managed to cover up its tests somehow. Technology advances, and innovative new methods are often developed.

There are quite a few similarities between the uranium centrifuges of Israel, Pakistan, and Iran due to their apparent common origin, which is why it was relatively easy for the Israelis to damage the Iranian facilities using the Stuxnet computer worm:
Meanwhile, Israeli agents charged with buying fissile material and state-of-the-art technology found their way into some of the most sensitive industrial establishments in the world. This daring and remarkably successful spy ring, known as Lakam, the Hebrew acronym for the innocuous-sounding Science Liaison Bureau, included such colourful figures as Arnon Milchan, a billionaire Hollywood producer behind such hits as Pretty Woman, LA Confidential and 12 Years a Slave, who finally admitted his role last month.

"Do you know what it's like to be a twentysomething-year-old kid [and] his country lets him be James Bond? Wow! The action! That was exciting," he said in an Israeli documentary.

Milchan's life story is colourful, and unlikely enough to be the subject of one of the blockbusters he bankrolls. In the documentary, Robert de Niro recalls discussing Milchan's role in the illicit purchase of nuclear-warhead triggers. "At some point I was asking something about that, being friends, but not in an accusatory way. I just wanted to know," De Niro says. "And he said: yeah I did that. Israel's my country."

Milchan was not shy about using Hollywood connections to help his shadowy second career. At one point, he admits in the documentary, he used the lure of a visit to actor Richard Dreyfuss's home to get a top US nuclear scientist, Arthur Biehl, to join the board of one of his companies.

According to Milchan's biography, by Israeli journalists Meir Doron and Joseph Gelman, he was recruited in 1965 by Israel's current president, Shimon Peres, who he met in a Tel Aviv nightclub (called Mandy's, named after the hostess and owner's wife Mandy Rice-Davies, freshly notorious for her role in the Profumo sex scandal). Milchan, who then ran the family fertiliser company, never looked back, playing a central role in Israel's clandestine acquisition programme.

He was responsible for securing vital uranium-enrichment technology, photographing centrifuge blueprints that a German executive had been bribed into temporarily "mislaying" in his kitchen. The same blueprints, belonging to the European uranium enrichment consortium, Urenco, were stolen a second time by a Pakistani employee, Abdul Qadeer Khan, who used them to found his country's enrichment programme and to set up a global nuclear smuggling business, selling the design to Libya, North Korea and Iran.

For that reason, Israel's centrifuges are near-identical to Iran's, a convergence that allowed Israeli to try out a computer worm, codenamed Stuxnet, on its own centrifuges before unleashing it on Iran in 2010.

Arguably, Lakam's exploits were even more daring than Khan's. In 1968, it organised the disappearance of an entire freighter full of uranium ore in the middle of the Mediterranean. In what became known as the Plumbat affair, the Israelis used a web of front companies to buy a consignment of uranium oxide, known as yellowcake, in Antwerp. The yellowcake was concealed in drums labelled "plumbat", a lead derivative, and loaded onto a freighter leased by a phony Liberian company. The sale was camouflaged as a transaction between German and Italian companies with help from German officials, reportedly in return for an Israeli offer to help the Germans with centrifuge technology.


When the ship, the Scheersberg A, docked in Rotterdam, the entire crew was dismissed on the pretext that the vessel had been sold and an Israeli crew took their place. The ship sailed into the Mediterranean where, under Israeli naval guard, the cargo was transferred to another vessel.

US and British documents declassified last year also revealed a previously unknown Israeli purchase of about 100 tons of yellowcake from Argentina in 1963 or 1964, without the safeguards typically used in nuclear transactions to prevent the material being used in weapons.

Israel had few qualms about proliferating nuclear weapons knowhow and materials, giving South Africa's apartheid regime help in developing its own bomb in the 1970s in return for 600 tons of yellowcake.

There is also the Midan project, in which Israel accused Iran of advancing a nuclear weapons project that allegedly contemplated the creation of up to five nuclear weapons between 2000 and 2003 and also planned the construction of a nuclear testing site.

In a 2015 report called Final Assessment on Past and Present Outstanding Issues Regarding Iran’s Nuclear Programme, the IAEA assessed that:

"A range of activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device were conducted in Iran prior to the end of 2003 as a coordinated effort, and some activities took place after 2003 [but] these activities did not advance beyond feasibility and scientific studies, and the acquisition of certain relevant technical competences and capabilities. The Agency has no credible indications of activities in Iran relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device after 2009."

Iran, of course, claimed the documentation was false, and that may be partly the case.
But here are the details in case you want to take a look:
Project Midan: Developing and Building an Underground Nuclear Test Site in Iran | Institute for Science and International Security

In the second round of nuclear tests by India carried out two days after the first (May 11 and 13 respectively), there is an anomaly that has not been explained due to the lack of declassified or revealed data, but basically this consists of the fact that the seismographs did not detect it and there was only a general awareness that said tests had been carried out after an abnormally open press conference was held by the Indian government:

Corroboration of a sort for India's explanations for the different tests on 11 May was given immediately after they were fired, and four days before the official AEC/DRDO announcements, by commentary on their military significance offered by P.K. Iyengar, the former chairman of India's AEC. On 12 May he told Reuters in Mumbai (Bombay) that their differing sizes corresponded to three ways in which nuclear bombs might be used.

According to Iyengar, the smallest was the size that might be fired as an artillery shell or dropped from a combat support aircraft. The mid-size blast was from a standard fission device equivalent to about 12 kilotons -- the size that might be dropped from a bomber plane. The largest of the three warheads tests on Monday was not a full hydrogen bomb. Most of its 50 to 100 kiloton explosive force came from the primary, a fission device which serves as a trigger for the H-bomb's big fusion explosion. Iyengar said the device contained only a token amount of the hydrogen variant tritium. It showed that India's thermonuclear technology worked, but did not produce the megaton explosion typical of a full H-bomb.

"We need not go for a megaton explosion while testing an H-bomb," said Iyengar, one of the scientists involved in India's only other nuclear test, in 1974. "Such tests are required only if we are planning for a total destruction of the opposite side. They don't have relevance in our strategy."

One technical issue that affects all three of the low yield tests, with yields of 0.2, 0.3, and 0.5 kilotons, is that the yields of low yield fission tests are very sensitive to physical parameters like the amount of fissile material present, the degree and uniformity of compression, and the nuclear properties of the materials. Even if the Indian designers have achieved very accurate control over the implosion process, without test data in this yield range to calibrate their models they would have difficulty predicting the exact yield of their devices. This of course is one reason for conducting these tests in the first place, but it also means that there is a good chance of overshooting or undershooting the target yields. Thus the intended yields of these devices may be significantly different than the yields produced, on the other hand if the advertised yields are the expected ones, then the actual ones may be significantly different.
The Shakti IV-V tests on 13 May are even more curious. India reported two shots being conducted with yield of 0.5 and 0.3 kt, but no outside seismic station has reported any evidence of tests on this day. The closest CTBT monitoring station was in Nilore, Pakistan 740 km to the north of Pokhran. This station is estimated to have sufficient sensitivity to detect a test at least down to 25 tons in Pokhran, yet no signal was detected. Wallace estimated that with standard seismic coupling, the test would have had to total no more than 10-15 tons to escape all detection. Assuming very poor coupling (and India's description of one test being conducted in a dry sand dune lends some support to this) allows yields up to perhaps 100 tons to escape detection, still far smaller than those claimed. The seismic signals detected for Pokhran-I and Shakti I-III provide a benchmark for evaluating the detectability of small tests. Even if India's claims of 12 kt and 43 kt are accepted for the two tests (thus indicating that seismic signals from this region are weaker than expected), the seismic signal of 800 tons of yield would be easily detectable unless extreme decoupling of both devices is assumed. Given the reported haste in shaft construction, and the unsophisticated shaft construction techniques used by the India Army, the use of deliberate decoupling measures seems ruled out.

Barker states that the yield of the 13 May event "was at least 500 times smaller than that of the 11 May event" and estimates an upper yield bound for these shots at 30 tons [Barker et al 1998; p. 1968]. But a footnote to this paper cites the description of these shots being fired in a sand dune region 10 km from the Shakti I-III site, and suggests that "under such conditions the upper bound of the 13 May test could be as alrge as 300 tons" but provides no explanation of how this new bound is obtained. Walter applies compensation factors developed at NTS for shots fired in poorly coupled media to arrive at a tentative upper bound of 100 tons [Walter et al 1998].

India has released an image of one of these shots showing a surface crater in a sand dune. The dune crater, judging by the sand bags in the image is quite small, perhaps 3.5-4 meters from rim to rim. The yield for producing this feature could be anything from a few hundred kg of explosive yield upwards, depending on the depth of burial and the mechanism by which the surface crater was formed.

In addition to this photographic evidence, BARC has published purported sample radiation measurements from all three sub-kiloton [Attarde et al 1999] test sites . Given the brevity of this article, and the lack of any substantive analysis, the apparent sole reason for this article's publication was to provide proof that they did actually occur. Accepting this evidence as genuine, at this writing no explanation of the anomaly of non-detection is at hand. BARC does not appear to have offered an explanation for this mystery. One possible resolution of this question is to postulate that Shakti IV-V were fired at the same time as the other Shakti shots. This contradicts all reports emanating from India however.

The consensus among outside seismic experts is that the yields of most Indian tests are overstated (particularly Pokhran-I or "Smiling Buddha" and Shakti-I), and that the very existence of Shakti IV-V is in question. Interestingly, the case with the Pakistani tests (conducted in a far different geological environment) is similar - claimed yields do not match the seismic evidence. No well-founded explanation is available for such a consistent pattern of deception by both India and Pakistan .

It begins to play with smaller explosions, which can be more easily concealed by the coupling of certain detonation areas and, of course, these can be confused with conventional explosive explosions since there are no significant differences in the wave generated beyond the size in the case of a larger nuclear detonation.
So here's a good question, keep in mind that it may not be that easy, but it could still be possible. :

Can Nuclear Weapons Be Developed Without Full Testing?
Theodore B. Taylor
Confident development and stockpiling of nuclear weapons mayor may not
require full yield testing, depending on the nature of the weapons, the prior
experience and technical capabilities of the developers, and the degree of
assurance required that the weapons will perform as intended.
9.1 Pure Fission Weapons
Nuclear weapons that derive all their energy from fission can now be developed
with high confidence, without any nuclear tests. The extent to which
the performance of such weapons can be pushed towards basic limits of
yields, weights, and efficiency of use of fissile materials (plutonium or
highly enriched uranium), without nuclear testing, depends on the extent to
which the developers make use of relevant development tools that have
become widely accessible since the early days of this technology. These
include published technical data (such as critical masses, equations of state,
neutron cross sections); accessible procedures and equipment for calculation
of weapon performance; and techniques for laboratory and field testing of
weapon components and assembled weapons in which ordinary uranium has
been used as a substitute for fissile materials.
Confidence in the performance of pure fission weapons can be increased
by "zero yield" testing. This approach involves testing implosion systems
with smaller quantities of fissile core materials than needed for the full
design yield. This can be done by producing a fission yield high enough to
be observable with radiation detectors close to the device, but corresponding
to much less energy than released by the implosion system's chemical
explosive. Such extremely low energy releases require only about 25 generations
of a fission chain reaction, compared with something like 45 generations
to build-up to a yield equivalent to a few tons or more of high
explosive.
Such tests require much sophistication, especially if it is important that
errors in design do not cause the yield to be many orders of magnitude
greater than intended. This risk can be minimized by planning several tests,
starting with one that involves so little fissile material that there is no possibility
of a nuclear' explosion, but there is likely to be observable
multiplication of neutrons emitted by a source within or close to the fissile
materials.
Extremely low yield nuclear tests are typically more stringent tests of the
overall behaviour of a weapon assembly system than a full yield test, since
imperfections in the weapon have more effect on its performance at very low
yield than at high yield. Such tests can therefore be useful to countries with
considerable experience with nuclear weapons and their testing. But they can
also be useful to countries starting nuclear weapon development, if they
want to test without detection.

That's the crux of it. Not very "smart" at all. When I interviewed this person a year ago, I did ask as to why they moved over from Iran and the response was along the lines that people are struggling due to the sanctions, most of them wanting to leave and Iranian leadership not doing much to assure the populace etc. This person's English is still not the best being second language so its difficult for them articulate it in very exact terms. Also, I don't think Iranian populace will be well informed about the goings on in the middle east for the past few years and a subset would already be anti-current regime due to social media programming.
Social discontent, mainly given the country's current difficulties, is something often seen and especially pronounced among younger generations who yearn to savor certain fruits of Western democracy. However, despite the general malaise that may exist, it seems that in Iran's case, ideology wins and the people remain sufficiently united against a common external enemy blamed for all the calamities. This is similar to Venezuela, which also points the finger at the US and, despite the deteriorating current situation, managed to stand firm against the protests and partially encouraged the flight of sectors of the population who did not share the same vision.
Dangerous situations occur when foreign interference is too great and occurs at a delicate moment.

A certain portion of the population doesn't see the game, even though regime change might be desirable—well, to a certain extent, on paper. Many don't learn or pay attention to the times when it ended up destroying the country, as in the case of Libya, where support was also provided to the rebels and later part of NATO intervened.
War, of course, changes things a lot. Just look at Ukraine, where, despite the current popular rejection of the regime, there are also certain feelings of unity against the enemy in other sectors, which was obviously stronger at the beginning. All this mix of positions makes it difficult to form a cohesive group to oppose their leaders, even more so when a greater external existential threat is perceived. It is only when a state is sufficiently defeated and beaten that rebellions against the regime begin... but that is not going to happen in Iran, at least for now. Imagine having as an enemy the country most hated by humanity in general at this moment. Imagine how that feeling must be even greater in Iran since said bloodthirsty country that has made their lives difficult all these years now comes to present itself as the saviors of the Iranian people (only in their twisted minds do psychopaths believe this will work after having woven the longest string of lies in modern history).

What I find amusing about this situation is that they suspect Iran has nukes, but the usual 'immunity' that would provide a nation in such a situation is not afforded because it is not "official", and under cover of this non-official status they are attempting to regime change Iran in order to take control of those nukes. Basically, it was a bad move by Iran to NOT declare to the world that it has nukes.

I wonder, although I know it's not that simple, why, beyond certain elusive videos, they haven't changed that position and devised a plan to reveal their nuclear arsenal? Whether through videos and announcements or in a more subtle way, a nuclear detonation in some appropriate testing ground (if they have one) that would allow the seismographs to be activated and reveal the obvious without the need to make an announcement accompanying such an event... I think they really have confidence in themselves despite the situation for now, huh?
 
Last edited:
I’m inclined to think the latter. Not based on any specific evidence, just a gut feeling. Perhaps also the Iranians are letting the Israelis bleed themselves, while secreting the locations of their launchers, and while underground missile stocks are brought up to the surface.
Another possibility is that the Iranians understood that there is almost a fact that the US will attack them next, therefore they need to save their ammo for the occasion.

As for Trump, I think he likes the protagonic role he is about to play, but dislikes a war - especially one that turns into a 'forever war'. So he may be thinking that perhaps he can get away with bombing a nuclear facility like Fordow and then claim he's done his part, hoping that the Israelis and neocons will be satisfied or that Iran will fold. But naturally, there is a high risk that it will not end there. Iran may respond by bombing some US bases in the area or targeting an aircraft carrier, and then Trump will be pressured into responding again, and so on. Or he will not be allowed to stop because Israel is still at risk and there needs to be regime change, etc. So, if he chooses to bomb, it may turn out to be a big miscalculation on his part. But then again perhaps he will not be allowed any other choice.
 
I see a lot of footage of damage to Tel Aviv from last night. It's looking like a real war zone in places. High quality shots from many angles. Much of this on MSM. Has the strategy shifted from cover-up to broadcast widely? Selling the 'Israel needs help' line. We know that the air defence systems are struggling and the public has been informed that they can't sustain this for much longer. Especially as Iran has avoided the shock and awe style propaganda gift, avoided killing large numbers of civilians, and adopted an attritional strategy Russia style. Measured escalation in response. I can't believe that Israel would be so naive as to being surprised by this. It might have been plan A to goad Iran into killing Israeli citizens in large numbers, now this is plan B. It hits their reputation but serves the larger goal of a wider war.

It's all pointing to US involvement. At the very least it's not going back in the box after this amount of damage.
 
I can't believe that Israel would be so naive as to being surprised by this. It might have been plan A to goad Iran into killing Israeli citizens in large numbers, now this is plan B. It hits their reputation but serves the larger goal of a wider war.
I think like you. Show that Israel is helpless under the devils of Iran. Show that Israel is weak, is under attack, that Israel is the victim. The eternal victim, the Jews. And also show to the public that once again the Jews must flee, as has happened throughout history. Ask the world for help to save them, and once again wage a world war, to save Israel, the "the killer of children" as they are called here these days.
 
At this stage, I think it's inevitable America will get involved. I hope Trump takes the high road but we have to consider very strongly that he won't.

I'd assume that Iran thinks America will get involved. They can't be launching missiles every day towards Israel without thinking that at some point this will trigger America to get involved.

The American strategy of war is well known. They will start by bombings, lots of it. So I don't know how Iran withstand that. Surely the only way is to target US bases, and US navy assets where the bombs and jets will be launched from? 🤷

America will also likely come in with a coalition of the willing. Sadly I expect Keir Starmer to sell out volunteer the British military. 😭

Interestingly, listening to that professor last night, I didn't realise that Iran and Saudi Arabia despise each other... so Saudi may also be in the coalition and send the most troops behind the US.

Just repeating what the professor said. And yes, I know Joe won't like it one bit probably because the assesment has more holes than swiss cheese. 😭
 
The hospitality of the Iranian people is well understood around the world, at least by those in the know and not stuck behind the American frequency fence. Stories like the one in the tweet below are common.

I know it's not purely as simple as this, but I do wonder if the PTB are just trying to annihilate all of the good and decent people in the world. Rich cultures of hospitality and good will just have no place in their desired new reality.



Contrast this with Israeli anti-"freier" culture, where being at all naïve or giving away too much for free is laughable, manners are for the weak, and taking advantage of others can be a virtue.
 
What I wrote yesterday - traitors and corrupt officials are in power in Iran itself:

Russia's proposal to build a modern air defense and missile defense system in Iran, which has no analogues in the Middle East, was torpedoed by the Iranian president and his inner circle.
The IRGC advocated the creation of such an air defense system - (Source: OPUS MAGNUM)

And Putin himself actually confirmed this on 06/18/2025, that is, yesterday evening at the St. Petersburg economic forum.
Vladimir Putin: "You know, we once offered our Iranian friends to work in the field of air defense systems. The partners did not show much interest then, and that's all."

That is, there would not have been hundreds of victims among the civilian population of Iran if Iran had listened to Putin.
 
More cope.

Putin agreed last night.

"We once offered our Iranian friends cooperation in the field of air defense, but at the time, our partners didn't show much interest, and that was it. The strategic partnership we have with Iran doesn't contain any clauses related to the defense sector, and Iran isn't asking for any."

 
Last edited:
Putin agreed that last.

"We once offered our Iranian friends cooperation in the field of air defense, but at the time, our partners didn't show much interest, and that was it. The strategic partnership we have with Iran doesn't contain any clauses related to the defense sector, and Iran isn't asking for any."


The saying 'You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink' comes to mind. Not a very smart thing to do by the Iranian leadership classes.
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom