spoiler
Under pressure from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Trump administration may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran. The target would be Pickax Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuclear enrichment program. No conventional weapon in the American arsenal can penetrate 300 feet of solid granite to destroy the tunnels where enrichment is supposedly taking place. The only military option is a nuclear strike. Netanyahu has been pushing hard for one. “Bibi calls Trump about it every day,” says an informed observer.
Netanyahu is cornered and desperate. After last week’s election results, he can’t form a government unless Trump intervenes directly in Israeli politics and brokers a deal with other parties that gives Netanyahu 61 seats in the Knesset. Otherwise, he is out as prime minister and on his way to ignominy, investigations and possibly jail. Netanyahu must stay close to Trump. He needs this war.
To that end, he’s applied maximum pressure to his closest allies in the administration, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and CENTCOM commander Brad Cooper. Both oppose a negotiated settlement to the war they’ve so grievously mismanaged; both are pushing to restart major combat operations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA director John Ratcliffe are also following Netanyahu’s lead, as are leaders of the Democratic Party. In a recent meeting on the subject, former president Barack Obama said he opposes the current Iran peace deal being drafted in Doha.
The rest of America’s longtime allies in the Middle East are terrified by the prospect of more war. On September 27th, Netanyahu flew secretly to Abu Dhabi to enlist the UAE in his lobbying effort for a final attack on Iran. The Emiratis refused. After eight months of conflict, Gulf economies are teetering. So are global energy and fertilizer markets. They won’t recover soon. Globally, there are a total of about 850 supertankers used to transport oil from producers to the rest of the world. In October alone, 11 of them were badly damaged in Hormuz. At this pace, a global depression is imminent. A nuclear strike would radically accelerate the destruction. Fallout from a ground explosion at Pickax Mountain would contaminate the Persian Gulf, poisoning the water supply for 100 million people.
And those are just some of the immediate consequences for the region. The rest of the world is every bit as exposed. No country other than the United States has ever used a nuclear weapon in war. Some would like to. An American nuclear attack on Iran would set a new precedent. The Russians have already told at least two other governments that an American nuclear strike on Iran would free them to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Pakistan and India would be tempted to do the same against each other, as would North Korea against Seoul. After the first nuclear strike, World War Three is inevitable. That war would be short and final.
We’ve been sleepwalking toward this moment for months. Since February, the administration has quietly rewritten America’s nuclear doctrine to make first use of so-called “battlefield nukes” easier and therefore more likely. No one in Washington in either party seems bothered by this. Now we’re on the brink of it.
Close observers say Trump is likely to decide by next weekend whether or not to use nuclear weapons. That would be November 7, six days from now. To his credit, he’s hesitating. At the moment, Trump is listening to his vice president, JD Vance, and to his envoy and friend Steve Witkoff, both of whom argue a deal with Iran can be made.
They’re right, though it won’t be simple. The Iranians are famously frustrating to negotiate with under any circumstances, and elements of that government have become more radical since Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family were killed in February. After decades of isolation, even relatively moderate Iranian leaders seem confused by how decisions are made in the West. (There is a widespread belief in Tehran, for example, that the United States government controls Israel.) But overall, people who have spoken to decision-makers in Iran say there is consensus there that more war is bad for everyone and a deal is worth making.
One group that hasn’t been consulted so far is the global population — the hundreds of millions of people who will be killed along with their children if Trump is pushed by Netanyahu into launching a nuclear strike next week. Now would be the time for them to speak up.
6:47 PM · Nov 1, 2026 · 43.5M Views
This isn’t to say that Tucker is a reliable narrator. I’m posting it in addition to the statement by democratic senator Chris Murphy a couple days ago where he had reviewed Trump’s plan and said it was “insane” and would “undermine the rule of law”. My takeaway then was that it was going to be a limited land invasion or tactical nuke against some hardened target. Tucker’s post isn’t his usual conspiratorial or antisemitic shit, but the kind of sentiments I’ve heard echoed by more reasonable people like Mohammad Marandi in recent weeks. I think that’s enough to add weight to Murphy’s claim.
I think it’s the more plausible of the two potential escalations. The footage of a big explosion destroying a mountain is going to look cool to Trump and his base of rabid hogs. The footage of Iranian drones raining down on marines doing Paedophile Normandy, that would look really bad to him. Trump will at least be able to spin this into holding the world hostage and asserting presidential control over the military. I don’t think it will work militarily and would almost certainly lead to some kind of regional radiological war against civilian targets within a week, but it’s the only political option that isn’t outright surrender or immediately losing the invasion fleet with the world watching.
edit: Also I have nowhere else to put this but I googled Marandi to make sure I was spelling his name correctly and just learned this from his wikipedia page-
Following the death of U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham in July 2026, Marandi said: “It’s a shame. I wanted him to see oil prices on Monday before he went to hell.”
lol, lmao, heehaw like a donkey
Paedophile Normandy
P-Day
I think it’s the more plausible of the two potential escalations. The footage of a big explosion destroying a mountain is going to look cool to Trump and his base of rabid hogs.
Trump does seem to really love the boom. During Trump 1.0 - the US military dropped a MOAB on Afghanistan. I assumed they did that to jangle keys in front of President Baby Trump because he was considering doing something crazy.
The MOAB use is a big reason why I think he’d do it. Same with things like the piracy and Caribbean sea murders. Trump is stuck in that 2001-2003 Bush mindset where spectacle wins war. It doesn’t matter if it achieves nothing. If it harms the US, 𝒿𝓊𝓈𝓉 𝓁𝒾𝑒 𝒶𝒷𝑜𝓊𝓉 𝒾𝓉. I doubt the military leadership would actually resist and it probably means nothing to any pilot who’d otherwise be bombing a school, so there’s no institutional barrier to it and liberals are too drunk on jingoism to even consider Nuremburg trials against precious baby soldiers in the aftermath.
To him it’s the same kind of calculus as the Hiroshima bombing but on a faulty premise that Iran is materially 1945 Japan. He’s destroyed 90% of their air force and navy every week for the past 9 months. Their economy is completely destroyed and their soldiers are down to rice rations in caves. Tokyo is in ruins along with any other surface evidence of a functioning country. Surely showing them we have two bombs will make them surrender because we might have three.
But realistically Iran is like if 1942 Japan had anime weapons and the entire Pacific Ocean was within range of their small arms. If they duct tape an xray machine to a $20k shahed drone, that’s a radiological weapon that can hit any gulf state after the US spends $10m failing to shoot it down. Shooting it down only irradiates a different gulf state. Their launch systems potentially include every small cargo truck in the region, every patch of sand in a gigantic desert, and every mountain in a country that’s half mountains. Hitting one missile city thinking it will be a bloodless Hiroshima is going to backfire so hard so fast.
Wait, would an x-ray machine on a Shahed actually work?
They’d just need the little container inside with the isotopes. Shaheds already routinely attack targets around the region including military bases. That’s a radiological weapon though, not a nuclear weapon. You’re only irradiating the area with a conventional explosion and not causing a nuclear reaction.
edit: I do however want them to use the full xray machine. That’s going to be a great emoji like
X-ray machines do not use radioactive isotopes to produce x-rays. You can use radioactive isotopes for imaging like in nuclear medicine but that’s not x-rays. X-rays are produced using a high voltage (kilovolts) electron beam, in a vacuum tube, striking a (usually) tungsten anode.
I guess you could maybe attach one to a drone if it could carry enough weight. The mobile x-ray machines I work with are about 300kg but there are smaller hand portable ones. The main issue is that this would be a massive waste of time because the only damage would be a slight increase in the lifetime risk of cancer…unless you used the drone plus 300kg x-ray machine as a kinetic projectile I guess. Source: I am a radiographer.Doing Goiana-by-Shahed would be wildly irresponsible
Tucker’s a CIA asset, he knows he wouldn’t get away with calling a nuclear strike pre-emptively. The only way this is real is if he wants to get heart attack gunned.
Unless this info was given to him by the CIA. It’s pretty clear the intelligence agencies don’t like Trump, and were against the Iran war because they correctly understood we would lose
True, or this could be part of chest puffing and putting up a threat display against Iran.
idk, maybe i just reach for explanantions why Iran is not getting nuked, but i really really really want this to be fake, the entire scenario is so damn bleak.
In a recent meeting on the subject, former president Barack Obama said he opposes the current Iran peace deal being drafted in Doha.
Absolute piece of utter garbage
The Russians have already told at least two other governments that an American nuclear strike on Iran would free them to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
Possible but I’m still doubtful
Pakistan and India would be tempted to do the same against each other
They don’t like each other but I don’t believe they’d actually start open nuclear war against each other
as would North Korea against Seoul
lol, nope
The Iranians are famously frustrating to negotiate with under any circumstances
I’m sorry, the IRANIANS are famously frustrating to negotiate with?! They’ve been entirely reasonable this whole time!
since Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family were killed in February
*murdered
After decades of isolation, even relatively moderate Iranian leaders seem confused by how decisions are made in the West.
Any leader insistent on pushing for peace with America, even at this point, is entirely delusional
Iran is confused about negotiations with America because the negotiations will happen, Iran states their terms, America agrees and then the press hears about the terms, then America will get mad at the press and denies the negotiations ever happened and then pull out of the deals
Anyone would find that confusing
You forgot that us/Israel (attempt to) murder the Iranian negotiators any chance they get because they’re so reasonable.
Pakistan and India would be tempted to do the same against each other
They don’t like each other but I don’t believe they’d actually start open nuclear war against each other
I keep thinking about that brief conflict last year. Two nuclear powers in direct conventional combat is something that I don’t think we’ve seen before. (Thought I’m willing to be corrected if I’m wrong of course.) I’m not sure what’s more worrying, that we may have come close to seeing nuclear war, or that nuclear weapons aren’t the deterrents we’ve always assumed them to be.
I think they can be a slight deterrent but if two or more nuclear powers really come to blows, I don’t think they’re gonna launch. Even if one side faces total capitulation, we’d be looking at a world destroying cataclysm.
nuking somebody on the other side of the planet and nuking your neighbor are petty different.
Even the possibility of it is staggering. Death to the US. They are the liability the whole world can’t afford.
Like most burger brains will be like oh whatever if tactical nukes are used but what they don’t understand or care about if this opens a whole new front to warfare across the globe.
Part of the reason we canned the Davy Crocket tactical nuke was because it was still awful for the environment. If using those becomes accepted, it’d probably accelerate environmental collapse even more than emissions already are. Which is to say burger brains don’t give a shit and will cheer for their use.
Everyone who knew Iran is basically a mountain fortress of a nation could see this coming. They’ve also been sacking higher up generals recently. No one can tell me Trump and Kegseth wouldn’t get off on using nukes.
“hundreds of millions of people who will be killed along with their children” Even now he has to assert that children are property not people.
strange detail that he didn’t mention the real estate and stock portfolios would also be killed.
Weirdly enough I believe Tucker Carlson here, but with this plan now exposed to the whole world, the surprise element is gone and the US will likely decide against nuking Iran.
For now anyway.
could just be that he values the international right wing movement more than the aroma of burning flesh. Establishing by example the political implications that right wing extremism cause nuclear war automatically sheds remaining moderates on a global scale. Doubly so for Europe who will rightfully perceive this as granting Russia license to use various forms of smaller scale tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine (which only matters to Europeans because it’s near them).
Yes, always look on the bright side of nuclear war by the prospect of moderates finally being forced to oppose fascism lol
I think the response from the “rules based international order” will be a collective shrug and a warning for nuclear armed States they don’t like to calm down and don’t do anything rash.
In the US? “I don’t like nukes but Iran was a bad dude full of bad boys… What else could we do?”
the US has already nuked Japan twice and faced no consequences for it
While people might be horrified today, in a handful of decades we’ll hear about how it was ‘morally grey but necessary’; we’ll still hear about it today, but it’ll be a lot more popular with libs in a handful of decades
If history is any guide:
“Actually nuking Iran saved lives because we otherwise we would have HAD TO send hundreds of thousands of ground troops into Iran”
“the Iranian civilians were brainwashed by their theocracy, they all would have laid down their lives for the Ayatollah, they have a warrior culture that emphasizes death over dishonor, they would have kept on fighting even without food”
“We couldn’t just let them nuke Israel!”
I don’t think it would actually force them to oppose shit, actually. Not until the nukes hit them as well. And of course by then it will be too late
Yeah, people, conservatives especially, don’t care about anything until it affects them personally
Always look on the bright side of nuclear war
Always look on the bright side of lifeAnd we will all go together when we go.
What a comforting fact that is to know.
Universal bereavement,
An inspiring achievement,
Yes, we all will go together when we go.
Always look on the bright side of war,
Stare in-to that bright white nuclear core,
Yes, always look on the bright side of nuclear war by the prospect of moderates finally being forced to
oppose fascism lolTempered by what I’ve seen, my first instinct is to disagree with you on this point because a… funnier? possibility exists.
rightfully perceive this as granting Russia license to use various forms of smaller scale tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine
One would think the Europeans would be raising a stink if there was credibility to this rumor but nothing makes sense anymore so…
One would think the Europeans would be raising a stink if there was credibility to this rumor but nothing makes sense anymore so…
Back when Biden was still president, I was telling the lib I know that if any country was likely to use nukes, it would be America and against Iran, and it’s because no one likes Iran; then a while later when Israel was trading missiles with Iran, I remember an Israeli who was crying about Iran striking them and responding to the journalist who asked ‘but didn’t Israel start it?’ with ‘No we didn’t start it, no one likes Iran anyway!’
I still hold that if any country was likely to use nukes, it would be America, and against Iran, because the ‘international community’ will let them with just a perfunctory finger wag and a shaking of the head to denote disapproval
I’m not sure that is enough of a deterrent. They don’t need the secrecy or deception the Enola Gay needed because it probably won’t be shot down. If the plan is a naval invasion they aren’t concerned about OPSEC either, bragging about most of the targets and openly stationing invasion fleets around the region. If the plan is more conventional bombing, the US already knows it doesn’t work and backfires proportionally. Both of the alternatives have overwhelming US casualties within the first hours and I think that’s a bigger deterrent in Trump’s mind.
I personally don’t think Trump gives a shit about American lives, but I guess we’ll see.
He hates da troops openly. It’s just bad optics for him politically. If Paedophile Normandy looks like Paedophile Gallipoli on the television, he looks like a weak failure which I think he pathologically avoids.
You may have a point there.
the b2’s stealth needs scrubbing out
Do you think he has any special knowledge here? Probably just putting the pieces together “cooking”.
Well, I’m pretty sure he has connections with the CIA if he’s not CIA himself.
Not sure whether that makes him more or less trustworthy.
Might be a test balloon. To see how the chuds respond to the idea.
These wouldn’t be large nuclear weapons, just small warheads within a heavy housing that is designed to smash into the ground as deeply as possible before detonating.
You don’t technically have to penetrate the bunker facility to do immense damage to it - if you vibrate a sealed concrete container full of humans, you can turn them into a smooth paste without having to destroy the container, like mixing a can of paint. To prevent this, Iran will have put the fragile enrichment equipment into rooms which are resting on dampening springs, like an earthquake resistant building. I don’t think there’s any one super-bomb the US can use - they’d just have to keep hitting it with small earth-penetrating nukes until the mountain progressively fractured and the facility progressively crumbled.
Assuredly, no matter the result, when the world detects radiation emission, the US will say it’s because they destroyed the target, not because of the bombs. They might even try to say they used a regular bomb and any nuclear emissions are purely from Iranian material.
no matter the result, when the world detects radiation emission, the US will say it’s because they destroyed the target, not because of the bombs. They might even try to say they used a regular bomb and any nuclear emissions are purely from Iranian material.
I think you’re right, but I also think even in that case there’s a real chance Trump just goes off script and says he used nukes on TV
Question, do these low yield EPWs (Earth Penetrating Warheads) even exist? As far as I know there are none in the US arsenal after the W86 got cancelled. The B61-11 EPW is a 400kt weapon. That’s not a low yield EPW… The low yield W76-2 and low yield B61s are not EPWs either, and neither is the W80. Maybe Israel could have secret low yield EPWs. But publicly, the US arsenal doesn’t have them. If they do, it’s some classified programme.
weird political compass but ok
Forgot to put this in the center:
posadists gonna be eating good next year
What if Tucker Carlson is actually planning to nuke Iran himself and this is step one of the frame job?
can’t believe tucker got a nuke before iran
He’s taken over Shadow Moses Island.
Tucker has captured the GP02 Physalis, Metal Gear Rex, and Air Force One with a nuke strapped to the bottom, forming a Nuclear Triad in his efforts to nuke Iran for uh checks notes as retaliation for a podcast making jokes about him being gay.
And you’re the only one who can stop him.
Looking into this.
Right-wing grifter with a 20+ year record of lying as much as he wants to fuck green M&Ms:
even relatively moderate Iranian leaders seem confused by how decisions are made in the West. (There is a widespread belief in Tehran, for example, that the United States government controls Israel.)
This feels like the 6th time we’ve been “days away” from nuking Iran in the past year. Not to say it couldn’t happen but I have my doubts.
It’s also been an escalation trap where he’s learning that nothing else works and he loses if he can’t force a win by the time the new congress starts. I think this coming week is the most dangerous point of uncertainty since the early days of the war.
Tbf I feel like if he was planning to force a victory to get a better result in the next Congress, he’d have done it by now given voting is tomorrow and that’s not counting early voters.
I don’t mean he’s trying to win in Iran to get a better election outcome. I mean that in January when the new house and senate take seat, if it’s a democratic majority he’s going to have a roadblock to fighting or expanding the war. An Israeli attack on Iran after January has less of a chance of American intervention to save them. I think he sees this lame duck period as the only shot he has for it to not be the most embarrassing military defeat in US history.
That’s not to say I have any personal faith in democrats. If anything they’re more bloodthirsty. I just don’t think they want this war this way right now.
it feels like a 15 seconds to minute timing if any.
I think if Trump did use a small nuke it would also open up the possibility of Israel using a larger nuke right after once the seal has been broken, especially if the smaller US nuke didn’t end up meaningfully changing the paradigm. That would also be suicidal but I wouldn’t put it past Netanyahu
Always two there are. No more, no less. A Fat Man and a Little Boy.If a nuke gets used by either party, Iran will make Tel Aviv look like Gaza
It would be funny if Israel laid out it’s “I actually did have nuclear weapons” card for this, and it ended up not working and the facility remained intact anyway. I mean it would be horrific for the surrounding area too but uh, part of it would be funny.
