On Propaganda and Childish Politics
Team Trump and the DIA assessment of the Iran bombings.
As James Joyner notes, the leaked DIA preliminary assessment suggests that the bombing of three sites in Iran has only set back Iran’s nuclear potential by mere months.
Nonetheless, while the White House Press Secretary seems to confirm that the report exists, even as she calls it “flat-out wrong” and calls the leaker a “loser.”
Now, I am pretty sure that Ms. Leavitt is no defense expert, and so in a contest between her assessment and that of the DIA, I am going to lend more credence to the views of the DIA. Not to mention that pretty much any expert on this subject has warned about this being the likely outcome. Sure, maybe all the experts are wrong, and, yes, physical inspection of the sites is required for a definitive conclusion. I would hasten to add, however, that even significant damage to the sites doesn’t mean that nuclear material and vital equipment weren’t moved.
Of course, we have here the bottom line of how Trump and his team operate: they look at the world like children whose understanding of global politics has been formed, at best, by TV and movies.
You see, she knows the DIA doesn’t know what they are talking about, because if you drop 14 like, really big bombs, on something you get “total obliteration”! Like, duh!
Of course, a major part of the propagandistic tell here is that she is directly echoing Trump’s own simplistic language with the whole “total obliteration” bit (with bonus points for calling the leaker a “loser”).
Meanwhile, the President of the United States is handling the preliminary assessment with maturity and aplomb.
Do note, if you can look past the distracting shouty-caps, that he wants to misdirect the question of mission success with somehow demeaning the military, which is just an attempt to paper over legitimate questions with cheap flag-waving.
Between that post above and my writing at roughly 1:30 pm CDT, I count at least five reference to the program being “obliterated” in posts by Trump on Truth Social.
For example.
So, not only does it appear that Trump does not understand what “total obliteration” means, he seems to not be willing to understand that materials and other capabilities may have been relocated. Indeed, he is insistent that it could not have been moved. Via The Hill: Trump denies Iranians moved nuclear materials before US strikes.
President Trump on Wednesday maintained that nuclear materials were not moved prior to U.S. strikes on Iranian facilities, despite an internal preliminary assessment that indicated otherwise.
“We’re just the opposite. We think we hit them so hard and so fast, they didn’t get to move,” Trump said during a press conference at the NATO summit when asked if U.S. intelligence was able to assess whether materials were relocated from the sites.
However,
Whether Iranians managed to move some nuclear materials ahead of the U.S. strikes appears to be in question.
Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has said the agency does not know the location of 900 pounds of enriched uranium from the sites.
“We do not have information of the whereabouts of this material. So, this is why I’m asking. We are making an assumption, which is not speculative or pure speculation, because Iran officially told me, ‘We are going to be taking protective measures, which may or may not include moving around this material,’” Grossi said on Fox News’s “The Story.”
This report from the BBC has some useful quotes that demonstrate both the childlike approach to international relations by the president and the way in which members of the administration are parsing their words: Trump pushes back after leaked report suggests Iran strikes had limited impact.
First, the president.
On Wednesday, while sitting alongside Nato Chief Mark Rutte, Trump initially acknowledged some uncertainty, saying the intelligence on the attack was “very inconclusive”.
But he then went further in his assessment, saying “it was very severe, it was [an] obliteration”.
When asked if the US would strike again should Iran resume its nuclear activities, Trump said: “Sure, but I’m not going to have to worry about that. It’s gone for years.”
Trump later likened the strikes to America’s atomic bombing of Hiroshima at the end of World War Two.
“I don’t want to use an example of Hiroshima, I don’t want to use an example of Nagasaki, but that was essentially the same thing – that ended a war,” he said.
Because they dropped big bombs in WWII, and we just dropped big bombs on Iran, so, you know, it’s practically the same thing! OBLITERATION = PEACE!
And then there is stuff like this from Hegseth.
Hegseth said the leak was politically motivated and insisted the bombs landed “precisely where they were supposed to”.
I am unaware of anyone of significance (or really, anyone not) who is claiming that the bombs didn’t land where they were supposed to. The question is one of policy efficacy, not the skill of American pilots.
Then there’s Rubio.
Rubio also cast doubt on the leaked report’s credibility, suggesting the contents had been distorted in the media and labelling the leakers as “professional stabbers”.
Is the credibility of the report really the issue? Isn’t the problem that Trump doesn’t like the contents? Maybe he should ask Secretary of State Witkoff what he thinks?
By the way, let’s not forget this.
While I am no fan of Gabbard, what this shows is a man who doesn’t care about intelligence, but prefers to think what he wants to think.
Here’s a useful report on the damage from the BBC: Damaged or destroyed – how much does leaked US report on Iran’s nuclear sites tell us? And, also via the BBC is: Satellite images reveal new signs of damage at Iranian nuclear sites.
While I am no fan of Gabbard, what this shows is a man who doesn’t care about intelligence, but prefers to think what he wants to think.
Some general points:
(1) Trump put together his Advisors and his Cabinet, NOT based on relevant experience or dedication to the objectives of an Agency or Department, RATHER they’re brought on board based on their complete fealty to him.
(2) Trump believes ONLY in himself, in his ability to get what he wants in every situation, as such he does not want independent-type of advice from his people, he wants affirmation.
(3) He MIGHT listen to those he admires and considers equals in position and power – Putin, Netanyahu, Orban Advisors and Cabinet directors, the Vice President? Highly doubtful.
(4) In case anyone forgot … in his first term Trump completely blew off our Intelligence community to the favor of what Putin had to say. So, yes, he does not care about our intelligence community very much, if at all.
It’s fascinating the way Trump and Leavitt are accusing the press of accusing “our Brave Pilots” of screwing up the strike. No one in the media I’m aware of is doing that.
@CSK: They are attempting to shift the narrative *for their supporters.* This has nothing to do with the general public and/or the media. This is the slop one sells when concerned the base will be demoralized by the reporting. It’s a shift of the attack… “wait, you said we weren’t successful? How DARE you criticize the soldiers for not getting it right” is definitely deflection.
Michael Wolff points out frequently that Trump is a man playing president, acting a part. He needs this to be resolved, therefore it is. After all, he’s already rolled credits. He does not care about the truth, it literally doesn’t matter to him. He strutted, he blustered, he bragged, therefore he won and that’s the end of it, now everyone shut up and kiss his ass.
Playing president, not actually doing the job – pretending is so much easier.
So what happens when Israeli intelligence reaches the same conclusion? Can or will Netanyahu get them to lie for Trump? This is serious business for the Israelis and if they conclude the mission was a failure they’re going to want the B2s to come back. Does Bibi call Trump and say, ‘You know all that ‘total obliteration? That didn’t happen, we need more missions. How does Trump admit he was wrong? Has he ever admitted he was wrong? About anything?
I suspect Trump has shot his wad and will not be able to admit he was wrong. If so, then Iran has nothing more to fear from the US. Think about the implications of that.
“Now, I am pretty sure that Ms. Leavitt is no defense expert, and so in a contest between her assessment and that of the DIA, I am going to lend more credence to the views of the DIA.”
Pretty sure this is what the British would call conspicuous understatement.
Given that we also have nuclear weapons that can be used as bunker busters, maybe we should all just pretend to believe Trump, so he doesn’t decide to do a second round with something stronger.
@Michael Reynolds:
Bibi probably knows he’s gotten all he’s going to get, pissing Trump off is unlikely to improve that, and trying to steam roll Trump with the US Christian zionists carries significant risk. Trump’s MAGA coalition is already falling apart over this.
Unlikely Bibi will risk pissing Trump off before Trump is completely lame-ducked, nearly or totally out of office.
Were these bombs marked “Acme?”
Serious question; wouldn’t the radiation levels indicate whether the material was there and had, or had not, been disturbed?
@Daryl:
I had the same thought. How do you blow up highly-enriched uranium without the Geiger counters clicking?
Not to mention satellite imagery can only tell you so much about a strike on an underground facility.
Namely, it’s hard to infer what might have happened to the inside
Then, too, El Taco advertised the strike very publicly and far enough in advance, that the Iranians would have to be trumpian level morons not to have moved equipment and fissile materials.
Of course, for the sequel next week or next month or five minutes from now, El Taco could send a Seal Team to make sure the place is really obliterated. So, after decimating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and defeating all the booby traps that miraculously survived the obliteration, the team will find thousands of corpses frozen in action by the pyroclastic flow produced by the MOPs, and all machinery wrecked.
And what’s that trap door marked “SUPER SECRET FACILITY. DO NOT OPEN!”
1. What Jen said. This is for his supporters.
2. “Fake news!” has been his go-to for a long time now. It has worked for him. He will keep using it until it stops working. I don’t know what will stop it from working. Or if it will stop working.
Which would be more depressing except for the fact that in my community, Pride celebrations abound, and residents of California are experience a wave of solidarity, regardless of national origin. I mean, most Californians like the cosmopolitan nature of California. Which has been a thing since the beginning.
Well, the 5-page report was labeled “low confidence” which is IC speak for “we’re just guessing here” as they don’t have any high confidence source info.
And the leaker is not “loser” yet, they are a criminal. Once the FBI run them to ground, then they will learn what it is like to be a loser as they are prosecuted, or at a minimum have their security clearance burned forever and escorted out of the building.
And if the US IC briefed in March that Iran was not working toward a nuclear weapon, how come they are now saying that the strike only pushed by the Iranian’s on developing a nuclear weapon by a couple weeks?
@Daryl:
You win the internet today.
@Michael Reynolds:
U235 is not highly radioactive. It decays about the same as U238, emitting alpha particles (aka helium nuclei*), but faster. U238 has a half life of several billion years, while U235’s is only about 700 million years.
*That’s why there’s helium deposits on Earth.
@JKB:
Sure. But the issue isn’t the report. It is the response that is the issue.
Trump has asserted utter OBLITERATION and can’t take even a hint of any contradiction.
I know you know this is the problem. You are smart enough to see it.
BTW, as you keep trashing the IC over set of comments, how does Trump know it is OBLITERATED if he can’t rely on intelligence?
Again, you know what is going on here. Why go along with it?
@JKB:
Go read the quote above: “Your intelligence community said they have no evidence that Iran is building a nuclear weapon”
Which is different than having a uranium enrichment program/developing the technology to build a bomb.
I have pieces of wood and tools in my workshop that I plan to use to build some shelves, but I am not currently building any shelves. Even if I go to Home Depot tomorrow and buy new and better tools and more wood and put them in my shop does not mean that bookshelves are being built until I actually start to build them.
But, again, you have to see that Trump is just deciding, on his own, what is true and what isn’t. That’s not how this works. Even if the IC is full of beans, it doesn’t mean that whatever Trump wants to be true is, in fact, true.
Speaking of childish politics, I point you to Trump’s rant about Mandami.
@JKB: How about this: look at those two BBC pieces linked at the bottom of the post and tell me that what you see would comport with the words “total” (absolute/utter/complete) and “obliteration” (to remove from existence/destroy utterly all traces).
And even if you do, can you tell us that the HEU wasn’t moved?
@Daryl: Sigh.
@Daryl: I’m not an expert on the specifics, but I would guess that it would be relatively easy to fake radiation to a level that would fool a satellite.
Also, given that the bombs made tunnels rather than craters, it’s not clear that a lot more radiation would leak after a successful hit.
@Steven L. Taylor:
I don’t think that describes Trump’s pathology to the degree necessary. The tell is that both Leavitt and Trump use the same language to paint any contradiction to want Trump wants to be true as an “attempt to demean” Trump or the military action. If Trump’s truth isn’t everyone’s truth, it is not merely that Trump won’t even consider that he might be wrong. Oh no, it is a show of disrespect to not take Trump’s reality as reality.
It really is a level of narcissism nearly impossible for mere mortals to comprehend. JKB has completely bought into this paradigm, so the starting premise is always “Trump must be right” and then he goes scavenging for threads of information that might be useful to affirm that premise. JKB won’t consider anything contradictory anymore that Trump will. It would be disrespectful to do so.
@JKB:
Because the level of damage is small enough for the facilities to be restored to full operation in a short time? (Just spitballin’ here. I’m not an expert like you.)
@Daryl:
So then MAGA wasn’t truthful when they assured us Obama, Hillary, Biden, and Harris were dirty commies?
@Scott F.:
Narcissistic personality disorder.
@Steven L. Taylor: JKB is smart enough to see a lot of things. The question is whether he’s honest enough to admit any of them.
@Michael Reynolds:
Trump is so often all kayfabe, and approcahing the presidency as it was a series of “The Apprentice: Now the White House.”
It’s quite risible, if only it were not so dangerous.
The main question is not so much the uranium itself as the condition of the separation centrifuges.
Are they destroyed?
Damaged?
If damaged, how seriously?
That’s what we don’t know, and seem unlikely to know without serious damage assesment work.
When you work for a person like Trump, and there alot of Owners like Trump out there in the world, you just need to agree with whatever asinine thought comes out of their mouth. You don’t have to do much else in your job, just do that and you keep your job. That’s all his administration does….they do very little actual work, just carry out orders
“Total obliteration” is just rather silly.
Even if the MOP strikes got full penetration, you cannot “obliterate” uranium outside of a nuclear reaction.
Given its value, you can excavate the ruins, run the debris though chemical refinement and separation, as you might with a uranium ore source, and you have your uranium back, at roughly the same isotopic levels as the collective amount was before.
Which can than be stuck back into isotopic separation, provided you have isotopic separation, which is the crucial issue in all this.
The report is low confidence, but there apparently isn’t any report at all other than Trump’s claims that things were obliterated. It’s too early to tell for the most part.
Any time Trump is involved in anything it’s always the bestest, most hugest, most beautifulist. Of course he claims it was a huge success. Maybe it was but we should wait to see what the real actual assessments say.
Steve
The way the writers at this blog obsess about having evidence for things is tiresome. It’s like the doctrinaire generals who panicked when Luke turned off his targeting computer so he could rely on The Force to destroy the Death Star. President Trump has no need for intelligence data or other evidence, as Marco Rubio, White House co-Press Secretary and personal assistant to Secretary of State Witkoff, explains:
Incredible instincts about the right thing to do, more knowledge about everything than anybody, an uncle who was a professor at MIT – Trump is the most accomplished president ever!