Now just about everyone is saying that Iran’s nuclear capabilities were dealt a very serious blow

The New Neo Posted on by

Ace has a good roundup of the statements here, plus a cameo by Khamenei doing his best Baghdad Bob imitation, to wit:

“The Islamic Republic was victorious and, in retaliation, delivered a hand slap to America’s face,” Khamenei declared, … “Such an action can be repeated in the future too. Should any aggression occur, the enemy will definitely pay a heavy price.” …

He dismissed America’s involvement as ineffective, saying the United States “achieved no gains from this war.” According to Khamenei, the U.S. only intervened after realizing the “Zionist regime would be utterly destroyed” without assistance.

I wonder whether anyone on earth believes him.

But it’s not just the fact that the attacks by Israel and the US were successful. Just as important, I think, is that the mullahs now know what they may have thought very unlikely, which is that the US is prepared to strike hard if Iran tries to build their nuclear weaponry program up again. So there’s a real deterrent effect. Not only is the Iranian leadership in disarray, with many dead, but perhaps they’re wondering where they would get the money from to regroup and reinvest in enriching uranium.

Of course, that wouldn’t keep them from other approaches such as increased terrorism, but there may be a deterrent effect even for that endeavor. After all, October 7 may have seemed to Iran’s mullahs like a huge success at the time, but look what has happened to Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran as a result.

These things are true for at least as long as Trump, or a MAGA-type successor, is president. The Iranian leadership had better hope that Zohran Mamdani becomes POTUS, because Biden isn’t coming back.

According to US General Dan Caine, the development of the bunker busting strategy was at least 15 years in the making. I have no problem believing that, because I wrote my first post that mentioned bunker busters back in 2004, over twenty years ago. In fact, it was only the third post I’d ever written on this blog. The subject matter was John Kerry’s performance in a presidential debate, and here’s the relevant quote:

But I must say that Kerry said a few things that literally made my jaw drop: his emphasis on “summits” and the UN (I thought I was back in the early 60s); the giving of nuclear fuel to Iran as some sort of test; and the nixing of the bunker busters, one of the few weapons that have the potential to allow us to destroy nuclear weapons and material stored in underground bunkers by the likes of Iran or North Korea.

Plus ça change, as far as the Democrats are concerned. Fortunately, when push came to shove, Democrats were not in charge.

The Democratic primary results: New Yorkers seem to want to slide further down the tubes

The New Neo Posted on by

Yesterday, New York City’s Democrats held their mayoral primary. In New York, the winner of the Democratic primary ordinarily wins the election; the days of Republican mayors in New York seem to be over, as far as I can tell.

And the days of conventional Democrat mayors in New York may be over, as well. Yesterday’s winner was the youthful Muslim socialist Zohran Mamdani, and the loser was Andrew Cuomo:

Mamdani, a 33-year-old self-described Democratic socialist, ran a campaign centered on making New York City more affordable. He proposed offering free universal child care, creating city-run grocery stores, rolling out free bus service and freezing rents on rent-stabilized units.

“As FDR said, democracy has disappeared in several other great nations, not because the people dislike democracy but because they have grown tired of unemployment and insecurity, of seeing their children hungry while they sat helpless in the face of government confusion and weakness,” Mamdani told supporters Tuesday night after his call with Cuomo. “In desperation, they chose to sacrifice liberty in the hope of getting something to eat. New York, if we have made one thing clear over these past months it is that we need not choose between the two.”

Clear as mud – the answer is FREE STUFF! Soak those many billionaires, from each according his means and to each according to his needs. What could possibly go wrong? For starters, those billionaires could decide to leave the Big Apple.

See this:

The most left-leaning candidate in a crowded Democratic field, Mamdani relentlessly campaigned on raising taxes on the city’s billionaires to fund initiatives like free MTA buses.

While his rivals pledged to hire more NYPD police officers, Mamdani said he would instead expand mental health outreach teams to improve the social safety net.

Mamdani was also more critical of Israel than other candidates, prompting some to accuse him of fueling antisemitism, which the candidate denied.

Of course he did.

A little background on Mamdani [emphasis mine]:

Born in Uganda, Mamdani immigrated to the United States as a child and graduated from Bowdoin College in 2014. He worked as a housing advocate and rap music producer in New York City before entering politics. He was first elected to the New York State Assembly in 2020 after defeating a four-term incumbent and has since been re-elected without opposition. …

His campaign platform includes support for free city buses, public child care, city-owned grocery stores, a rent freeze on rent-stabilized units, and building affordable housing units. …

He graduated from the Bank Street School for Children, and then the Bronx High School of Science. Mamdani attended Bowdoin College in Maine, where he co-founded the school’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine. He graduated in 2014 with a bachelor’s degree in Africana studies.

Mamdani seems to be an only child of very successful parents of Indian ethnicity. His father Mahmood Mamdani is a professor at Columbia, of course:

He is the Herbert Lehman Professor of Government and a professor of anthropology, political science and African studies at Columbia University, and also serves as the chancellor of Kampala International University, in Uganda. …

Mamdani specialises in the study of African and international politics, colonialism and post-colonialism, and the politics of knowledge production.

Zohran’s mother is the Indian film director Mira Nair. Born a Hindu, she directed some well-known films (I saw two of them and I enjoyed them, and I’m not that big a filmgoer) such as Mississippi Masala, The Namesake, Monsoon Wedding, and Salaam Bombay!. I especially enjoyed Monsoon Wedding, which had a light touch.

Nair shares her son’s anti-Israel sentiments – or perhaps, in terms of the timelines, he shares hers:

In July 2013, Nair declined an invitation to the Haifa International Film Festival in Haifa, Israel as a “guest of honor” to protest Israel’s policies toward Palestine. Nair posted on Twitter, “I will go to Israel when the walls come down. I will go to Israel when occupation is gone… I will go to Israel when the state does not privilege one religion over another. I will go to Israel when Apartheid is over. I will go to Israel, soon. I stand w/ Palestine for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) & the larger Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) Mov’t.”

We also have this about Zohran Mamdani: he’s a Shiite Twelver.

And more about his stance on Israel:

Following the October 7 Hamas attacks, Mamdani condemned Israel’s military response and joined protests calling for a ceasefire. Rather than condemning the attacks, he criticized those attacked.

Of course he did.

He has also said he would arrest Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he came to New York City, despite there being no arrest warrant for Netanyahu in the US …

Mamdani drew controversy when he defended the use of the phrase “Globalize the intifada” as “a desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights.”

Mamdani isn’t the mayor yet, although at this point he’s the favorite. Adams, the current mayor, is running as an Independent. Cuomo might run, although I doubt it. And there’s even a Republican, Curtis Sliwa of Guardian Angels fame, who probably has no chance.

In this map you can see how every NY neighborhood voted; Mamdani’s strongholds were in Manhattan and in particular the western part of Brooklyn. He had been endorsed by Bernie Sanders, AOC, Letitia James, Jamaal Bowman, Ras Baraka, and Robert Reich. Quite a crew.

Trying to get a rundown of which groups of voters supported Mamdani, I found this poll taken shortly before the primary. It’s quite illuminating:

Voters under 50 break for Mamdani by a 2:1 margin, while Cuomo leads among those aged 50–59 (63% to 37%) and voters over 60 (56% to 44%).
Hispanic voters support Cuomo 60% to 40%, and Black voters favor Cuomo 62% to 38%. Mamdani leads among white voters (61% to 39%) and Asian voters (79% to 21%).
Cuomo leads Mamdani among voters without a four-year college degree, 61% to 39%, while Mamdani leads Cuomo among college-educated voters, 62% to 38%.
Men support Mamdani 56% to 44%, while women lean toward Cuomo 52% to 48%.

So the socialist’s support was very strong among the young – no surprise there. Ignorance of history, including the history of giving away free stuff. His support was also very strong among white voters and in particular Asian voters (do “Asian voters” include middle easterners?), and Cuomo’s was strong among black and Hispanic voters. So the blacks and Hispanics were not fooled by Mambani’s promises, and the white people who supported him may have been virtue-signaling. And of course the college-educated – those indoctrinated in leftism – were more likely to vote for Mambani.

The most surprising statistic to me was that women supported Cuomo more than men did.

Turnout in NYC was a bit under 30% of those eligible – and “those eligible” were registered Democrats only. I guess most Democrats don’t care; they’ll simply vote for the nominee no matter what. Or perhaps many will vote for Adams; I certainly don’t know, but I tend to doubt it. The main choices, Mamdani and Cuomo, were both fairly awful – although Cuomo certainly seems better to me – which is another indication of the terrible state of the Democrat Party. That won’t stop someone like Mambani from doing a ton of damage if elected.

I see many comments around the internet saying, basically, who cares what happens to New York? I do. It’s my hometown. I still have friends and family there. But it also indicates blue city trends, and this represents a terrible one. The left is still very strong in some places, and represents a danger to the entire country.

How many people like this were let in during the Biden years?

The New Neo Posted on by

ICE has been busy lately:

Eleven Iranian nationals have been arrested in the last 48 hours by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents across eight different states and nine cities, according to CBS News. This development comes in the wake of a nationwide security alert issued after the U.S. carried out a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities this past weekend. …

One of the individuals arrested is Mehran Makari Saheli, who is a former member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). ICE arrested Saheli at his home in Minnesota where he “admitted connections to Hezbollah,” an Iranian-funded terrorist organization.

That’s one. You can find more of those arrested, along with their histories, here.

As for the question of how many more with similar life stories might be roaming around the US, we don’t know. ICE and DHS seem to know more than I’d previously thought they did, however.

That said, I have to add that I know a number of Iranian immigrants to this country and they all are very much opposed to the current Iranian regime. In fact, they had to flee the country to avoid imprisonment or worse. They came a few years prior to the Biden administration, however, and I believe the basis was political asylum – which in their cases, was a bona fide claim.

CNN argues that the strikes on Iran’s nuclear program were a nothingburger

The New Neo Posted on by

There’s no reason to believe CNN. But even a stopped clock is correct twice a day.

My position on the subject of the amount of damage sustained by Iran to its nuclear program continues to be: no one knows or sure, but there certainly was plenty of damage. You can find what I believe may be a fairly good article on the matter here. An excerpt:

On June 21, the United States targeted the Isfahan tunnel facility with 30 Tomahawk missiles and hit the Fordow enrichment plant with 12 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs) — bombs designed to reach and destroy deeply buried facilities. While U.S. and Israeli battle damage estimates are ongoing, if HEU survived at either site, it may be entombed and inaccessible for months. Reportedly, Israel struck the Fordow entrances on June 22 to ensure Iran could not engage in any recovery efforts at the site.

Whether Iran moved all or some of its HEU stocks prior to the U.S. strike that targeted the Isfahan tunnels and Fordow is unclear. …

On June 13, Israel eliminated the above-ground Natanz pilot fuel enrichment plant and reportedly damaged the underground main Natanz enrichment plant, which the United States struck with two MOPs on June 21 to ensure its destruction. The Fordow enrichment site is likely too damaged to be operable after successive MOP strikes since centrifuges are delicate machinery and would be significantly damaged from bombing shock waves.

Positively, Iran likely cannot weaponize any HEU and construct nuclear devices any time soon. During its strikes, Israel damaged Tehran’s weaponization capabilities extensively, meaning Iran may not have the ability to construct nuclear devices in the immediate term, even if it sought to. Jerusalem struck numerous weaponization facilities, equipment, atomic weapons components, and documentation and assassinated at least 14 nuclear scientists.

Netanyahu also noted on June 22 that Israel has intelligence on the whereabouts of the missing HEU. Thus, Israel or the United States may conduct further strikes to eliminate the material.

And then there’s CNN:

Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people said the centrifuges are largely “intact.”

Another source said that the intelligence assessed enriched uranium was moved out of the sites prior to the US strikes. So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops,” this person added.

From press secretary Leavitt:

This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community.

CNN conveniently left out that the intelligence report was considered “low confidence.” In addition, the CNN story was written by the first reporter who broke the “Hunter Biden’s laptop is Russian disinformation, says 51 intelligence officials” story.

As for Israel, it’s still evaluating the situation, but the official word from Israel is that the program was set back by years.

What’s more, with these attacks by Israel and the US a line was crossed. Iran’s leaders know that if they reconstitute the program, it will be attacked again by Israel and possibly also by the US (depending on who’s president at the time).

Will the Israel/Iran ceasefire hold? And what will be the result?

The New Neo Posted on by

One of my specialties is asking questions to which I don’t know the answers – such as the above. But I don’t think I’m alone in not being able to predict the future.

Israel is saying it’s achieved all its objectives in Iran and will hold to a ceasefire. I doubt Trump would have announced one if Israel hadn’t substantially done what it aimed to do there, although almost certainly some unfinished business remains that could be activated in the event that the ceasefire doesn’t hold, which is always a consideration.

“Israel has removed from itself a double existential threat,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the Cabinet on Monday night, adding that the IDF had “achieved full air superiority over Tehran, dealt a severe blow to the military leadership, and destroyed dozens of key Iranian government targets.”

The statement stressed that the objectives of the operation, which began on June 13, went “even far beyond” the original goal, calling the achievements “historic” and asserting that they place the Jewish state “alongside the world’s powers.”

It also noted that in the past 24 hours, “the IDF struck hard at government targets in the heart of Tehran, eliminated hundreds of Basij operatives—the regime of terror’s repression mechanism—and eliminated another senior nuclear scientist.” …

“In light of the achievement of the operation’s objectives, and in full coordination with President Trump, Israel has agreed to the President’s proposal for a bilateral ceasefire,” the government said, adding that “Israel will respond forcefully to any violation of the ceasefire.”

Meanwhile, Iran immediately violated the agreement (as I reported last night), with a deadly attack (see this). Was that a salvo from a rogue commander? A sort of “last touch” move? If it’s just the first of many violations, Israel certainly will retaliate.

At the moment, Iran’s position is unclear. But of course Iran is claiming a “great victory.” Does anyone on earth believe that?

Trump admonished both sides, and sounded especially angry at Israel. But I think that’s part of his attempt to seem even-handed and not appear to be joined at the hip to Israel. Meanwhile:

Still, oil prices plunged and stock markets rallied worldwide in a sign of confidence arising from the ceasefire pact, which was taken to mean there would be no threat of disruption to critical oil supplies from the Gulf.

I also think that Trump, Rubio, and the rest of the US team are smart enough to realize that Iran can’t be trusted, and they have developed all sorts of contingency plans. As has Israel, of course.

Interesting times.

Another reason for Trump to get a peace prize – Rwanda and Congo?

The New Neo Posted on by

Not that I think he’ll actually get one – but look at this:

At the invitation of Democratic Republic of Congo President Felix Tshekedi, the Trump administration was brought in to lead negotiations to end the war raging in the east of the country between DRC forces and rebels believed to be backed by Rwanda. A peace deal was initialed Wednesday evening by officials from the neighboring nations, and it’s set to be signed formally late next week in Washington by their leaders, and witnessed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the State Department said.

While many in the region will welcome an end to the long-running and deadly conflict, Daniel Van Dalen, a senior analyst at the Africa-focused intelligence firm Signal Risk, says the way the agreement was hashed out signals a major change in geopolitical efforts to end crises on the continent. The days of diplomatic soft power, he says, are over.

What’s “soft power”? Sounds like an oxymoron. Is it equivalent to Obama’s disastrous “leading from behind”? Whatever it is, it didn’t solve the problems there and instead featured “many previous failed attempts to secure an agreement between the two countries.”

Make of this what you will:

From his first policy speech, President Obama presented contemporary soft power as a vital element of power, referring to the power of attraction rather than influence, as defined by Harvard political scientist Joseph Nye (Nye 2004). To address the prospect of decline in a context of new international relations — to overcome a variety of challenges, including an evolving Jihadist threat, and competition from re-emerging powers like Russia and China—the Obama Administration tried to prioritise nation-branding, selling the American “brand” by developing new attraction strategies.

Blahbidy blah.

The present attempt by Trump in Congo involves the following:

If implemented, the agreement will end the fighting in eastern DRC. It could also bring billions of dollars of American investment into the region, which is rich in the minerals coltan, cobalt, lithium, copper and gold, all of which are critical in the manufacture of electric vehicles, smartphones, computers and a wide range of other high-tech goods, from satellites to military weapons systems.

According to the article, the war there has been going on for three decades – “forever war,” anyone? – and has killed six million people. It’s unclear whether this deal will actually work; the largest Rwanda-backed fighting group isn’t privy to it, for example. Once again, time will tell.

Ceasefire in Iran?

The New Neo Posted on by

Trump announces ceasefire:

CONGRATULATIONS TO EVERYONE! It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a Complete and Total CEASEFIRE (in approximately 6 hours from now, when Israel and Iran have wound down and completed their in progress, final missions!), for 12 hours, at which point the War will be considered, ENDED! Officially, Iran will start the CEASEFIRE and, upon the 12th Hour, Israel will start the CEASEFIRE and, upon the 24th Hour, an Official END to THE 12 DAY WAR will be saluted by the World. During each CEASEFIRE, the other side will remain PEACEFUL and RESPECTFUL. On the assumption that everything works as it should, which it will, I would like to congratulate both Countries, Israel and Iran, on having the Stamina, Courage, and Intelligence to end, what should be called, “THE 12 DAY WAR.” This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn’t, and never will! God bless Israel, God bless Iran, God bless the Middle East, God bless the United States of America, and GOD BLESS THE WORLD!

DONALD J. TRUMP,
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Iran seems to agree.

Iran violates ceasefire by firing missiles at Israel.

What next?

So, how successful were the American strikes on Iran?

The New Neo Posted on by

The goal was to degrade and if possible eliminate Iran’s program to develop nuclear weapons. First up is to determine how much damage was done by the bombs, and second would be whether some of the uranium was moved prior to the strikes. Furthermore, could the regime, or a successor regime, reconstitute the program, and if so how quickly?

And no, I don’t have the answers. But here’s some relevant information.

Iran says the US attack was a were flesh wound, but Israel and the US give preliminary results that are more catastrophic although clearly it’s early and more checking needs to be done.

Commenter “physicsguy” writes:

So I’ve now seen claims by the left that the Iranians moved everything out of Fordow 3 days before, and followed up with a supposed satellite pic of about a hundred trucks lined up there. Anyone else seen that? I assume AI generated to support their argument that Trump was duped, or that he knew and went ahead for political gain.

I can’t believe that the US and Israel didn’t have eyes on the location 24/7.

I’ve seen tons on that from the trolls at Insty and elsewhere. It seems to be based on this sort of thing:

A total of 16 cargo trucks were spotted on the access road leading up to the Fordow tunnel entrance on Thursday, but most had moved to a spot 1 kilometer (0.6 miles) northwest of the access road by the following day, Maxar said.

New trucks and multiple bulldozers had appeared close to the main entrance by Friday, with one truck very close to the main tunnel entrance, the satellite imagery provider said.

The significance of the activity is not yet clear, but Iranian state media reported key nuclear sites had been evacuated ahead of U.S. attacks, with enriched uranium moved “to a safe location.”

There’s no reason to trust a thing Iranian media says. So let’s see what Israel and the US say:

However, top US general Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, gave a more muted assessment of the strikes, saying that the full understanding of their effectiveness will “take some time.”

“Initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction.” …

Despite wide speculation that the nuclear material had been moved from the sites ahead of the strikes, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US believes that a significant amount of Iran’s stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium was located in the Isfahan facility when it was struck.

In an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Rubio says that, while “no one will know for sure for days,” he doubts that Iran’s uranium stockpile was relocated before the operation.

“I doubt they moved it,” he told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “They can’t move anything right now inside of Iran. I mean, the minute a truck starts driving somewhere, the Israelis have seen it, and they’ve targeted it and taken it out. So our assessment is, we have to assume that that’s a lot of 60% enriched uranium buried deep under the ground there in Isfahan.” …

He allowed that it would take days to know for sure whether the nuclear material was there.

Then there’s this at battleswarm blog:

Before the strike, video shows Iranian trucks lined up at the complex entrance. But the trucks look like open-roofed earth moving vehicles, not equipment transport vehicles. These were apparently used to cover the entrances with dirt.

However, there were a couple more specialized vehicles that may have been used to remove enriched uranium from the site.
“I can’t see everything important being evacuated in a couple of days. There’s bound to have been some equipment, some important equipment, left in here. The centrifuges, for example, can feasibly be dismantled and removed by truck, but is tricky to do, because of a base’s depth and will take time. And I think it’s unlikely Iran would have had enough time to do so. But Reuters does say that the enriched uranium had already been removed.”

More here:

1. Both Fordow and Natanz are under partial surveillance by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). … In several cases, the IAEA retained knowledge of infrastructure layouts and could remotely detect large-scale activity, especially if dismantling or evacuation were attempted.

2. This isn’t a warehouse full of sacks of potatoes. We’re talking about highly specialized, sensitive equipment, thousands of IR-1 and advanced IR-2m and IR-6 centrifuges. For context:
•Natanz had an estimated 15,000–20,000 centrifuges at peak capacity. Even after the JCPOA, thousands remained in use or storage.
•Fordow, while smaller, housed over 1,000 advanced centrifuges, some enriching uranium up to 60% purity in recent years.

These are not items that can be boxed up and trucked out overnight. Dismantling a single cascade (a chain of 164 centrifuges) safely requires days of work, if not longer. Multiply that by hundreds of cascades, and you quickly realize this isn’t a quick getaway.

Additionally, centrifuges are connected to high-pressure uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) lines. Improper disassembly can lead to contamination, equipment damage, or worse, leaks of radioactive gas. Such evacuations would require weeks of preparation under controlled conditions.

3. Let’s not forget that the U.S. and Israel have had persistent, layered surveillance over these sites for years, satellites, high-altitude drones, SIGINT, HUMINT. Every inch of ground around Fordow and Natanz has been watched for telltale signs of activity. The idea that Iran stealthily evacuated multiple facilities without being detected is simply ludicrous.

Doesn’t sound all that likely to me.

NOTE: Please see also this article as well as this one.