Thread by @mattczeller

In light of the recent @nytimes story outlining Trump’s desire to attack Iran, I think the firing of the head of the National Nuclear Security Administration is all due to the alleged planned attack on Iran. (A thread).

stripes.com/news/us/us-nuc…

https://twitter.com/attackerman/status/1328491181366534146

Trump and his ilk hated the Obama era 6-party accords. They withdrew the US from them upon taking power and have never let up from the claim that the accords did nothing but delay an inevitable Iranian nuclear weapon - which they calculate as an unacceptable threat.

If one was going to take out the Iranian nuclear program, one would have to use either the GBU-43/B MOAB or nuclear weapons. The MOAB doesn’t guarantee total destruction & it would be very difficult to accurately gage the caused by the MOAB en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_…

Whereas, if one were to use nuclear weapons, one would guarantee the destruction of the deeply buried Iranian nuclear facilities.

We have three means of deploying a nuke - Minutemen ICBMs from silos in the US, Trident missiles from US Navy subs, and the B-61 nuclear bomb carried by Air Force bombers.

The first two are off the table due to the fact that if we don’t let peer level adversaries like Russia or China know the launches aren’t against them, they may interpret our firing as an attack on them, thus starting the end of the world via nuclear Holocaust.

Whenever we test the minutemen or trident missiles we let everyone with the ability to track such and retaliate in kind know our firings are only a test - again, so they don’t think we’re launching a preemptive first strike.

The problem is, for an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities to succeed, we cannot tip off these countries in advance for fear they may warn the Iranians.

(please note I abhor all war and don’t advocate for an attack - I’m simply analyzing the situation as I see it)

So if the minutemen and trident missiles are off the table, that leaves the US with one option - nuclear bombs delivered via US Air Force bombers (likely the B-2 or B-1 or maybe even the rumored B-21 in its first official use).

The US has two stockpiles of B-61 nuclear bombs - those forward deployed in allied nations abroad (like the 50 stored at the joint Turkish-US Airbase at Incirlik Turkey) and those stored domestically.

The ones abroad would require the agreement of the host nation to use them. As those nations are not likely to agree to their use against Iran in a pre-emotive attack, that leaves only our domestic stockpile.

Thus, if Trump were to want to use nuclear weapons to ensure the destruction of Iran’s nuclear program, the only arsenal available is the US domestic stockpile - which he would want under the control of an absolute loyalist, thus explaining the firing Mrs. Gordon-Hagerty.

All the Trumpists who got installed in DOD leadership are very anti-Iranian. Newly installed Undersecretary of Defense Tata has on numerous occasions called for strikes of all types against Iran - niacouncil.org/news/tata-defe…

Should Trump attack Iran, it would also be Biden’s problem from day one and likely come to define a great deal of the Biden Presidency.

A pre-emptive strike also explains much of Elliot Abrams & Sec. Pompeo’s recent & forthcoming travel: Turkey, Georgia, Jordan, the UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, & Israel. If one was about to stroke Iran, I couldn’t think of a list of countries with whom better than that to coordinate

https://twitter.com/yaakovkatz/status/1327166375572480000

A pre-emptive attack on Iran is also likely attractive for Trump as it would fulfill a campaign promise to his base - end the Iranian nuclear threat - thus shoring up support for a potential 2024 run.

The scary thing is, Trump & his ilk don’t seem to care about the ramifications of their actions. They believe Iran poses a grave & present danger & that only they are capable of doing what is necessary to stop it. They also fear they (as of this tweet) have only 63 days to do so.

Imagine what a decisive attack on Iran that utilized the first use of nukes since WWII would do to his support among his base. They adore strength. What’s stronger than using nukes?

By their calculation that they will get all the benefit (achievement of strategic foreign policy goal - defanging of Iran / domestic policy goal - shoring up and expanding of base for 2024) and...

...will hamper / harm their rival (a nuclear attack on Iran will define the next Presidency / be a historical line in the sand in global history - the world before vs. the world after).

The scary thing is, their calculation will not go the way they think it will.

And the Iranian (kinetic) & global response (diplomatic & financial sanctioning) will be catastrophic.

To summarize: Trump & his ilk could well be planning to nuke Iran’s nuclear sites, believing it’s the only option they have left. I don’t think they’re correct in their reasoning, but fear they believe they are & will act on such, dooming us all.

@threadreaderapp unroll