Posted on 06/19/2025 9:58:35 AM PDT by Miami Rebel
Retired U.S. Admiral and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander James Stavridis predicted that President Donald Trump would order a military strike on Iran in the coming days during an appearance on CNN Thursday morning.
After beings asked about the “factors” that might be “going into the president’s thinking” as he mulls his options, Stavridis weighed in.
“I think all presidents begin with pros and cons. The pro is pretty obvious here. U.S. has the ability, using these big, bunker-busting bombs we’re talking about constantly, in all probability to take out definitively the beating heart of the Iranian nuclear program at Fordow. That’s a big pro. The con, the risk is tactical. Could a B-2 bomber get shot down? Could a fighter get taken out while escorting? Could the Iranians lash out at U.S. bases, U.S. partners in the region, go after oil fields? Could they close the Strait of Hormuz? There’s a lot of cons here,” he answered. “I think it’s a close call for the president. At this point, Pamela, I would say there’s a two in three chance he will go ahead and strike. I think there is a one in three chance he’ll give it a bit more time and see how diplomacy plays out. You can make a case on either side of that decision.”
Anchor Pamela Brown followed up by asking him why he believes there’s a a two in three chance Trump “would go for it.”
“One is the way we have aggressively set the table. All the forces are in place and operations like that tend to create a momentum of their own. Secondly, widely reported a lot of advice he’s receiving from people he really trusts in national security like Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Tom Cotton, General Erik Kurilla, I think there’s a growing body of advice to him To conduct the strike,” replied Stavridis. “And third and finally, he looks at it through the prism of domestic politics, here again, pro and con. Many of his supporters are against getting involved in the Middle East, but I think he may make the calculation a quick, certain strike will in fact be well received. It’ll be a sign of strength. So I think those are the three reasons it’s a two in three chance that he decides ultimately to take the shot.”
Well, I’d guess he pulled those “odds” out of his butt.
I’d go with the opinion of a retired U.S. Admiral and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander over a podcaster or anonymous keyboard warrior.
Regardless, when the President of the United States demands unconditional surrender, advises citizens of a 10 million strong capital to evacuate, and says we can kill their head of state but are holding off for now, my gut tells me that at the very least chances are a hair over 50/50 we’re about to wage war.
Trump is waiting and watching. He can strike quickly if intel tells him it’s time to take action.
The US needs to stay out of the conflict.
The Israelis have already done most of the work.
The U-235 for at least one bomb and hundreds of centrifuges for enrichment to bomb grade have probably been hidden in places the US doesn’t know where to hit.
This type of OPSEC speculation puts our troops at risk. These are probably the same weenies that went hysterically ballistic over Hegseth's phone chats.
Trump has drawn a thick red red and is giving Iran a chance to volunteer to give up their enrichment capabilities. Make no mistake: Trump does not bluff... if he says “you’d better do ‘X’ or I will do ‘Y’”, then ‘Y’ will happen if you don’t do ‘X’.
So from the Iranian point of view, (by now) they have to KNOW they will lose their nuke program. Running out the clock is no longer an option (i.e., the clock has expired on negotiations). Their only play, then, is to ‘force’ Trump to go ahead and strike and hope that the world’s condemnation somehow shames Trump and makes for some other consequences.
My belief: Iran didn’t read the room (i.e., Trump’s resolve) well at all. Even most of their Muslim nation neighbors are ignoring them (and probably secretly hoping that Iran is dealt with, once and for all). So: Trump strikes sometime between now and Saturday... and no: this is NOT a Cotton/Graham thing — it’s a limited surgical strike. One and done.
*”thick red line”
“The U-235 for at least one bomb and hundreds of centrifuges for enrichment to bomb grade have probably been hidden in places the US doesn’t know where to hit.”
Which is the obvious quagmire. If you don’t go after it, and destroy it, then it’s likely Iranians are going to use it. I hope your right and the US can ‘stay out of it’. If the Mullahs survive the war they will certainly march on to create nukes. The support of terrorist groups will be traced back again to them, and Iran will be bombed again. They will likely use nukes in retaliation when desperate.
The question then becomes, who here on these boards believes that the Iranians will never use a nuclear warhead? Who on these boards trusts the Iranians that they are not seeking nuclear weapons or would use them? Then the next question is if this ‘development’ will trigger Global Thermal Nuclear war? To me the obvious answers are that they are going to use it, and there is a reasonable chance it will be the biggest ecological catastrophe in human history.
People seem to think this is a simple problem. I see it as probably the most challenging problem for any POTUS or Congress. The decisions here potentially could effect the fate of humanity itself, and most life forms on the planet. This isn’t ‘media hysteria’, in a nuclear exchange there will be no ‘winners’. Leaving the Iranians would likely result in this future.
The ‘easy’ route would be to ‘ignore’ the Iranians again. This has only gotten many killed and far more in the future. Attacking Iran could trigger a regional, if not global conflict. Realistically, I think it’s likely that Iran will not negotiate, after 50 years of trying to build nuclear bombs, getting rid of it’s ‘peaceful’ nuclear program of nearly 80% enrichment (weapons grade, 20% needed only for commercial power reactors).
Not this one. He’s the Grand Admiral of the Beltway Flotilla.
I do not think this is necessary. Israel is taking out the mullahs and the scientists. Machines sit idle until there is person pushing a button. (unless you have the Womper) Just keep killing the people in power the machines can be decommissioned at will when Pahlavi or someone else takes over.
I agree. The immediate priorities should be the theocracy, the IRGC, & the missile launch sites. Fordow can wait until after the fall of the mullahs.
Israel doesn’t need any US involvement other that ammo & possible refueling support.
lots of RETIRED generals and admirals ... lots of predictions ... did i mention RETIRED? ...
... and a reactor that’s making plutonium. Don’t forget that.
There are 12 nuclear sites to take care of. Hope the current govt collapses and people who will deal with Trump to disarm take over soon.
A strike on Iran is the only way to defeat Maga by the deep state. It will derail the Trump agenda, just like Iraq derailed W. Bush’s agenda.
First, we were told that tariffs were necessary for America, but the bitter results at first would be worth it in the end. Same with Iran; pain and deaths at first, but everything will be beautiful in the end. Not buying it. Israel wanted us to eliminate Saddam; now they want us to eliminate the evil mullahs.
And I think that (collapse of the theocratic gov’t) is why Trump is putting some time on the clock. Together, Israel and the US are likely cultivating operatives inside Iran to accomplish just that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.