President Trump is seen showing little expression with his arms crossed in the image

Donald Trump was reportedly mulling an attack on Iran’s “main nuclear site” in “the coming weeks”, asking his advisors whether he had such an option during a meeting at the Oval office on Thursday, The New York Times reported, citing “current and former US officials”.

The advisors, among whom were US Vice President Mike Pence, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting Defence Secretary Christopher Miller and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley, reportedly dissuaded Trump from the attack, voicing concerns that it would escalate “into a broader conflict in the last weeks of Mr. Trump’s presidency”.

After advisors warned Trump on the possible aftermath of a strike, according to reports, they reportedly left the office believing that “a missile attack inside Iran was off the table”.
The report emerged amid allegations that Trump was attempting to “sabotage the Biden administration”, as media in the US have described the Democratic candidate as the winner of the White House race, although official election results remain unannounced. Trump, as the sitting president, refuses to concede, insisting that the election was “rigged”.

According to The NYT, a strike against Iran, if conducted, would “almost certainly” target Natanz – an Iranian nuclear plant generally considered to be a central facility for uranium enrichment.

The reported Oval Office meeting allegedly took place a day after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported a significant increase in the Iranian stockpile of nuclear material – 12 times larger than allowed in the 2015 Iran nuclear accord that Trump unilaterally exited in 2018.

ALSO READ  Iran threatens to respond to Israeli and mercenary presence along its Karabakh border

‘Throwback Thursday’?

In 20 June, 2019, Trump abruptly reversed an airstrike against Iran that was planned as a retaliatory move for shooting down a US surveillance drone. That time, however, the attack was allegedly cancelled just minutes before it was to be conducted.

“We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it,” Trump tweeted at the time.

Protesters gather in Times Square Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020, in New York. The U.S. and Iran stepped back from the brink of possible war Wednesday, as President Donald Trump indicated he would not respond militarily after no one was harmed in Iran’s missile strike on two Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops.

US-Iran Tensions

Harsh economic sanctions against Iran immediately followed the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as, without evidence, Trump claimed that Iran had violated the deal. Tehran repeatedly pointed out that, per the terms of the treaty, its nuclear program was exclusively peaceful.

One year after Trump’s 8 May, 2018, pullout from the agreement, Tehran began to step away from its commitments under the nuclear deal.

Tensions between the countries spiraled after the US president ordered the assassination of top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in January.

In retaliation, Iran carried out airstrikes against two American military bases in Iraq, which did not claim any lives, but were reported by the Pentagon to have allegedly left over 100 US servicemen diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries.

ALSO READ  Iran launches massive oceangoing warship with cutting-edge missiles: photos


Source: Sputnik

Share this article:
  • 3

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

This is a Civilized Place for Public Discussion

Please treat this discussion with the same respect you would a public park. We, too, are a shared community resource — a place to share skills, knowledge and interests through ongoing conversation.

These are not hard and fast rules, merely guidelines to aid the human judgment of our community and keep this a clean and well-lighted place for civilized public discourse.

Improve the Discussion

Help us make this a great place for discussion by always working to improve the discussion in some way, however small. If you are not sure your post adds to the conversation, think over what you want to say and try again later.

The topics discussed here matter to us, and we want you to act as if they matter to you, too. Be respectful of the topics and the people discussing them, even if you disagree with some of what is being said.

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

  • Name-calling
  • Ad hominem attacks
  • Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content
  • Knee-jerk contradiction

Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.

Notify of
1 Comment
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Angel Libralesso
Angel Libralesso
2020-11-18 13:08

All in the name of the filthy jews..