Rumors of a cease fire as Trump threads the needle.
The latest details from the failed Iranian response: Iran launched missiles against the U.S. Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar on Monday. Reports indicate that Iran fired 19 missiles and 18 were shot down with one causing minor damage. All US bases in the region are fully functioning, just hours ago however the President indicated that there is an agreement between Iran and Israel to a cease fire.
Apparently, the President's work is done. He removed Iran's nuclear threat and showed our enemies that just like in his first term he is very capable of using limited military force to achieve his objectives. No Americans were killed.
The President left a G-7 summit early to take care of this matter and he is now off again to the Hague in the Netherlands for a NATO summit where he will deal with another matter. It seems that Spain doesn't want to meet its 2% responsibility to NATO. They all have a surprise coming. Trump is likely to demand that each member pitches in at the rate of 5%.
Tags
Who is online
90 visitors
Never one to sit still ...
Off to the Netherlands!
Trump supporter crying after trump lost the election?
Do they have golf courses in the Netherlands?
Too busy playing golf to sit still....
Can you let us know what was/is his golf schedule?
Trump Golf Track
Apparently you didn't realize that there is a website dedicated to tracking when he is playing golf.
Correct, I didn't.
What that tells you is I am not TDS afflicted.
Actually the fact that you totally ignore the facts about his golfing show that you do suffer from TDS.
So, now that you see that he has spent about 25% of his time in office playing golf, what do you think about it? Note: this very closely matches the amount of time he spent golfing during his 1st administration.
Um, no. Being infatuated with how much golf one plays, and that person’s name is Trump, shows true TDS affliction. No one with any sense cares.
Kinda like how many on the left said the same when it was revealed that Biden took as many vacation days as rounds of golf Trump played. They said no big deal. It wasn’t because he wasn’t running the country anyway.
So you have no issues with someone who's salary you may be paying, spending a 1/4 of his work time playing golf?
Fact Check Team: Comparing President Biden's vacation time in comparison to predecessors
Biden leaves D.C. as much as Trump did — but there’s a difference
So basically, republicans include ALL days that Biden wasn't in the Whitehouse or travelling as part of the job. Apparently republicans feel that unless he is in the Whittehouse he is on vacation.
Since you failed to answer my question, I'll ask again.
So, now that you see that he has spent about 25% of his time in office playing golf, what do you think about it?
No. Just a s you leftists had no problem with Biden on vacation away from the White House for days on end while someone else ran the country.
According to you leftists, the president is a 24 hour job, so it highly unlikely he spent that much time playing golf.
"o basically, republicans include ALL days that Biden wasn't in the Whitehouse or travelling as part of the job. Apparently republicans feel that unless he is in the White house he is on vacation."
I don't see anyone doing that. Plus, you use the WaPo and a local CBS affiliate to "prove" your point, so not much with credibility.
"So, now that you see that he has spent about 25% of his time in office playing golf, what do you think about it?"
I did. You just don't like the answer and would never accept it anyway. Biases does that.
Wow, I debunked that lie with 2 different links in the comment you're replying to.
So ignore the facts hitting you in the face and just say "NAH he didn't".......
And who do you use to "prove" your claims? TruthSocial...??
Translation: Your answer would qualify as a dictionary definition of " hypocrisy ".
He was on vacation IN the White House. Nobody has a clue who was actually running the country between January 2021 and January 2025.
CBS? Really? The group of bloggers on the hook for editing an interview to make a cackling fool?
Washington Post? They haven't been correct on anything in years. They're about on the same level as Marvel Comics.
‘Wow, I debunked that lie with 2 different links in the comment you're replying to’
with opinion pieces on 2 different left wing sources. Not credible.
‘So ignore the facts hitting you in the face and just say "NAH he didn't"....’
when you hit me with any facts we can talk. You just haven’t done that yet.
‘And who do you use to "prove" your claims? TruthSocial.’
My claim was based on true experience from the past 4 years. You know’sharp as a tack’ and ‘he does circles around the White House staff’
[deleted]
Great! Now all you have to do is document and provide evidence that your 4 years of claimed experience is truthful and relevant. Let me know when you do that.
That's hilarious.
Those of us with our eyes wide open witnessed it for 4 entire years.
Those with their eyes closed shut demand evidence for what is right in front of them;
If only your partisan eyes could be trusted with no corroborating evidence.
Pot meet kettle.
Sadly, in the last hour, 119,427 liberal heads exploded, portending a gloomy outlook for them.
If Trump wins the Nobel Peace Prize it's going to get really messy.
Thats not going to happen. There is as much chance of that as there is of Trump not being ranked the worst president of all time by historians.
Whether it happens or not, there will still be a magazine cover stating it on the wall at Mar-A-Lago.
Israel does appear to be onboard according to independent reporting:
One complication is that the Iranian regime may have been so weakened that it no longer controls its proxies. There may still be isolated terror attacks. Hopefully no one gets itchy fingers.
IMO there is no end to this war unless Hezbollah and the Houthies actually do totally quit attacking Israel and Hamas surrenders, releasing all live and dead hostages. I have no doubt, howeveer, that the West Bank Palestinians will continue their terror attacks.
The fawning over Trump is cultish and sickening, but lets look at a couple things.
With this "cease fire" Trump will claim total personal victory. He both ended Iran's nuclear threat and brought peace between Israel and Iran. But what if Iran's nuclear program is not ended? Most objective analysts say a nuclear weapons program CANNOT be ended by anything other than diplomacy and inspections. But Trump has already declared it ended. By agreeing to this cease fire and "peace" with Israel , Iran has now bought itself time , at the cost of fluffing Trump's diseased ego. How can he impose inspections when he, the cult god, has already declared Iran's nuke program "destroyed" ?
If the peace can be established and holds, the next logical step would be the process of lifting sanctions on Iran. That's where the diplomacy and negotiations over inspections come into play.
Trump still has considerable leverage to coax Iran into agreeing to inspections and verification that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons.
So you disagree then with Trump when he says Iran's nuclear program has been destroyed?
Not a relevant question. Even if Iran's nuclear program has been completely destroyed, Iran can still start over and rebuild the program. There is still a need for inspection and monitoring.
The sanctions imposed on Iran is leverage to obtain an agreement on inspection, monitoring, and verification that would prevent Iran rebuilding its nuclear program.
Except that boring stuff doesnt interest Trump at all.
Didn't seem to be a problem negotiating the Abraham Accords. This isn't the first time Trump has taken steps to increase peace and stability of the Middle East.
There will ALWAYS be a need for Iran to NOT (as they have done) prevent the IAEA from inspecting EVERY nuclear site.
"CNN chief law enforcement analyst John Miller wrote in an op-ed Sunday that President Donald Trump could go down as the "hero" after launching a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.
"[Trump] could come out as the hero—the hitman who delivered the kill shot to the Iran threat—or as a supporting player in the final scenes of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s boldest act," Miller wrote in the Wall Street Journal."
CNN analyst John Miller: Trump could be 'hero' after Iran nuclear strike | Fox News
"Israel Defense Minister Israel Katz said he ordered the military to "respond forcefully" to Iran's violation of the ceasefire agreement with "high-intensity strikes against regime targets in the heart of Tehran."
"In light of Iran’s blatant violation of the ceasefire declared by the President of the United States, and the launching of missiles toward Israel—and in accordance with the Israeli government’s policy to respond forcefully to any violation—I have instructed the IDF, in coordination with the Prime Minister, to continue the intense operations striking regime targets and terror infrastructure in Tehran," Katz said in a statement.
"This comes in continuation of the actions carried out yesterday," he continued.
The Israeli Defense Forces also said it will "strike with force" after it accused Iran of violating a ceasefire agreement to end the conflict.
"In light of the severe violation of the ceasefire carried out by the Iranian regime, we will strike with force," the IDF's Chief of the General Staff Eyal Zamir said in a situational assessment.
Iranian state media reported that Tehran is denying Israel's claims that it violated the ceasefire."
Iran accused of breaking ceasefire hours after Israel said it accepted Trump-brokered proposal | Live Updates from Fox News Digital
There are so many different and conflicting stories from so many differently biased sources at this point I have no idea what's going on.
Evening...mmmhhh..he said, she said...etc etc...
Cease fires, lies, deceit, lob a few missiles, they did it, you did it...etc etc...nothing has changed..let them sort it out ..
At least Pakistan and India seem to have gone quiet after alot of people said that was the start of WW3...
And on that note the only war I am creating is on the cat if it wakes me again at 3 am...
Nite all..
You're right about the India and Pakistan conflict. I had actually totally forgotten about it until I read your comment.
And yet the left does it daily.
Probably because it IS a victory. Of which you acknowledge.
You obviously don't see the obvious way ahead in this. Despite stating it yourself.
'Most objective analysts say a nuclear weapons program CANNOT be ended by anything other than diplomacy and inspections. But Trump has already declared it ended. By agreeing to this cease fire and "peace" with Israel , Iran has now bought itself time , at the cost of fluffing Trump's diseased ego. How can he impose inspections when he, the cult god, has already declared Iran's nuke program "destroyed" ?
The flaw in your thinking is that diplomacy was never going to work with this wicked and evil regime, and they didn't allow complete and thorough inspections. In the meantime, they continued to enrich uranium to weapons grade. Their enrichment process has been destroyed. and they are out of options and time. Time to cast aside the mullahs and institute a moderate government
Iran is either defeated (that means taken over by force) or they are managed by diplomacy.
Are you in favor of the USA using military force to take over Iran?
Are you in favor of the USA using military force to take over Iran?
Of course not. That's up to the Iranian people. When has diplomacy ever worked with them?
Then clearly the USA should be pursuing a path of diplomacy as the best option to keep Iran in check.
Are you saying that the Iranians would behave if we simply left them alone to produce weapons grade enrichment of uranium, which is not required to provide domestic power production. And why would they do all of this deep inside a mountain. Most people are not naive enough to believe the mullahs can be believed and trusted.
How could you possibly think that is what I meant??
Try again.
What do you think diplomacy means? If we were to strike an agreement with Iran regarding the cessation of enrichment, do you think that a system of verification is not part of the diplomatic solution??
It needs to be stronger and with strong remedies if Iran again limits and/or prevents inspections. That's where the Iran nuclear deal failed as Iran prevented inspections and the other parties basically let them get away with it. The threat of sanctions alone are not sufficient based on how we got to this point.
Yes, the agreement needs to be more effective than those of the past.
The point, however, is that such an agreement falls under the category of a diplomatic solution rather than a military solution.
You agree with that, right?"
Can't answer for him but I agree. Now what?
I made a point @5.1.2:
So do you also agree that we should be pursing a diplomatic solution for the Iran nuclear weapons issue?
If you mean at this point in time, yes. Why? Do you think that isn't what's happening?
Look at the context of this thread established @5.:
Again, I can't speak for him. Depending precisely on what he intended, I do agree with what I think he was trying to say. That is, I think that the diplomacy prior to recent events was never going to work because it demonstratably wasn't working; something I believed when Obama unbelievably gave all that money to Iran. Iran kept violating the treaty, not letting inspectors have access and continued enriching to levels that can only be for weapons. And they just keep enriching it more.
Personally, I think Trump's attack on the nuclear sites in Iran were brilliant. The smartest thing he could have done. Iran was not taking his efforts at diplomacy seriously. Trump even gave them a time limit and they still didn't take him seriously. Thanks to Israel's campaign in Iran, they created the perfect opportunity for our strike to have an excellent shot at succeeding. That, combined with the fact that the wind has been knocked out of Iran's proxies, Trump made his move. Whatever the damage done, it has cost Iran dearly in a number of ways, materially, politically, militarily and so on.
Now that Trump has their attention and Iran now knows the meaning of FAFO, I think they'll take Trump seriously now. And Trump has gone straight back to diplomacy mode. Even to the point of expressing his anger at Israel publicly for trying to undermine his efforts. Probably fewer than a dozen (and I'd be surprised if it were that many) countries want Iran to have nukes. Most likely most countries actually approve of what Trump did, no matter what they say publicly.
So, now we see what comes next. Trump is actually trying to get Israel to stop attacking Iran. Iran needs to play ball with that, which I'm sure they're eager to do, at this point. Possibly because they're stupid enough to think it gives them time to pull more of the same crap they've been doing over the last forty years or, if they're smart, wondering if maybe, just maybe, they ought to consider a new national direction other than trying to kill everyone they don't like.
So, yeah, at this point in time, diplomacy needs to be the path we take and Trump seems to be trying hard to make it work, now that he has Iran's attention. Not sure what the problem is, other than that the Dems cannot let him succeed at anything, so they're trying to be as obstructionist as they can as hard as they can. Wonderful.
Not asking you to. I noted the context so that you could better understand my response.
I am not ready to weigh in on the Iran attack. When it happened I noted that this could be one of Trump's good moves or it could be a clusterfuck. Since none of us have the intel to make a reasonable assessment of whether this was necessary right now, I remain open.
For myself, I'm convinced it was necessary, for the afore mentioned reasons. The question I think is most relevant is now that Trump has put himself in a good position, helped by the fact that the cease fire seems to be holding, does he have what it takes, diplomatically, to capitalize on it? Not feeling too confident about that but all that can be done is to wait and see. Personally, I pray he succeeds, as any rational person should, in my opinion. Just wish the Dems didn't hate him so much that they're willing to throw away this opportunity just to spite him.
I wish "Repubs" didnt love him so much they vote for him.
It is actually quite possible to completely oppose Trump in terms of his utter unfitness to hold public office and at the same time hope that this will all lead to the end of the Iranian theocratic regime.
Here you are belittling the idea that anyone can know the final result of the bombing , but your guy Trump has already definitively described it as the END of Iran's nuclear weapons program. Its not a misunderstanding of what he is saying, he has repeated it three or four times in the last couple days.
What happens when a malignant narcissist boxes himself in ?
There are extremely good reasons to be critical of Trump. It is incorrect to assume all criticism of Trump is partisan and that the opposition is merely to spite him.
Same is true for Trump supporters. Do you ever read some of the comments (here, on X, on TS, etc.) that are made? They connote hatred of the Ds (and, really, anyone who opposes Trump). Adam Kinzinger (republican former congressman and opponent of Trump) posted criticism of Trump's attack and the immediate Trump supporter responses were not substantive but rather childish and mean-spirited attacks on his manhood. Calling him a pussy, etc.
To wit, there will of course be those who criticize out of emotion (hatred) but it is easy enough to distinguish those from serious criticism. The former offer no argument (or a stupid one) whereas the latter will offer reasoning.
Final note, there are IMO very few opportunities to give Trump genuine credit. Most of what he does is bad and worthy of criticism. So naturally, even if everyone were objective, the criticism should far outweigh the praise.
The 'Right' can't seem to grasp this.
Yes, I know. I have my own criticisms of Trump. But what we're talking about is the current Iran situation. Democrats and the left leaning media are doing all they can to hamstring Trump's efforts in this matter when they should be uniting behind him. On this issue, at least. Even the Democrats say they don't want a nuclear armed Iran, so what the hell are they doing other than obstructing Trump for being Trump? They are pushing a leak from a supposedly secret, low confidence assessment from an unconfirmable source as if it were gospel when anyone with a brain knows that there's no way we could possibly know the effectiveness of the strike so soon. They are attacking every single thing he's attempting to do in creating negotiations with Iran.
So, why?
While I entirely disapprove of purely partisan political crap, it is what routinely happens.
Within hours of President Donald Trump announcing his decision this weekend to bomb multiple military sites in Iran, public opinion polling showed a plurality of Americans opposing the action.
Trump reportedly chose to launch the attack after hours of watching Fox News’ positive coverage of Israel’s attacks on Iran, prompting Iran to respond on Monday with missile attacks on American bases in Qatar and Iraq.
In a YouGov poll taken on Saturday and Sunday, 46% of respondents said they strongly or somewhat disapproved of the bombing campaign that Trump instigated. The biggest bloc of people opposed were Democrats, with 70% disapproving of the Republican’s actions. Among independents, 51% opposed the bombing and even among Republicans, 13% said they didn’t back Trump.
Most of those who were polled (44%) also said they believed Trump’s attack would make Americans less safe. Only 25% bought into Trump’s argument that the bombings would secure the country, with 20% responding that they were not sure and 11% saying that it would not improve or degrade safety.
The new polling echoed public opinion before the bombing kicked off. In a June 18 Washington Post poll , airstrikes were opposed by 45% of the people answering the poll, with 25% supporting action.
One woman who was polled, a 74-year-old Republican from Washington who voted for Trump, explained to the outlet, “I think Pres. Trump and the U.S. needs to continue negotiations and alternatives before the U.S. bombs Iran and starts a World War III.”
Trump is following the drumbeat being played on Fox News, but even members of his own party are expressing some level of dissent.
On Monday, Trump complained in a Truth Social post that Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky is a “simple minded grandstander” for voicing opposition to the bombing. “MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER, Tom Massie, like the plague!” Trump fumed.
Trump also made it clear in another social media post that he is unprepared for the economic fallout from his bombing run.
“EVERYONE, KEEP OIL PRICES DOWN. I’M WATCHING! YOU’RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO THE HANDS OF THE ENEMY. DON’T DO IT!” he wrote .
Oil supplies could be tightened as world markets and governments assess the fallout from Trump’s escalation and that could lead to higher gas prices. Trump spent much of the last four years complaining about gas prices under former President Joe Biden and claimed he would lower them on his first day in office.
Like his promises of “peace,” that didn’t happen .
Things have not been going exactly as he would like. The polling is against him, his right flank in MAGA is against this, and all the "winning" has already happened.
He was looking for a parachute, so why not just declare peace ?
-
-
Trump Takes Victory Lap in Interview With NBC’s Yamiche Alcindor — Boldly Declares Ceasefire is ‘Going to Go Forever’
Thursday, May 29, 2025
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 77% of Likely U.S. Voters are concerned that Iran may be developing a nuclear weapon, including 44% who are Very Concerned. Only 18% are not concerned. (To see survey question wording, click here .)
57% Favor U.S. Military Action Against Iran’s Nukes - Rasmussen Reports®
"Nearly three-quarters (73%) of registered voters questioned in a new Fox News national survey said they think Iran poses a real security threat to the U.S. That's a 13-point boost since Fox News last asked the question six years ago.
And the poll, conducted June 13-16, indicates wide support across the partisan spectrum. Majorities of Republicans (82%), Democrats (69%) and Independents (62%) agreed that Iran poses a threat.
The survey also showed that 78% of those questioned said they were very or extremely concerned about Iran obtaining a nuclear bomb. And eight in 10 said what happens in the Middle East does matter in the U.S."
Poll: 73% of Americans view Iran as security threat amid nuclear concerns | Fox News
Rasmussen is the most biased poll there is. What else ya got?
Most polls have gaslighted us since Trump came down the escalator. I don't know how many remember but just before election night in the 2024 election, one particular poll had Harris winning.
Internal polling, which is used by campaigns tends to be far more accurate. That is when pollsters are hired to simply tell the truth.
A senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris ' presidential campaign said their own internal polling never showed her leading President-elect Donald Trump , and they were "surprised" when public polls put her ahead.
Kamala Harris advisers: VP was never ahead in internal polling
My point in bringing that up, is that the polling since 2016 has become far less dependable.
Paper work or pictures or there was no ceasefire.
You'd better let Iran and Israel know that...............
"...words are nothing but air. But they are life's breath to hear." Sappho