88 Comments
User's avatar
Mac Smith's avatar

Given Bill Kristol's unconditional support for and lies around the Iraq war, maybe he should just STFU now for a few weeks.

Expand full comment
Gene Tidaback's avatar

Just a thought on the Iranian reaction: I of course agree that diplomacy is preferable to active war, and that the Iranian people deserve a better government. But it also seems likely that this latest use of force might cement Iran's determination to build a nuke (multiple nukes?). If I were in the Iranian gov I would say that the events of this last weekend means we absolutely need nukes asap. No one is willing to attack the North Koreans; so the shit obv works..

Expand full comment
Mary Finn's avatar

It doesn't seem to have worked, and the threat wasn't imminent. However, I believe this has been inevitable for at least 30 years, and it was only a matter of time. Iran has no way to retaliate, so it'll go back to terrorizing Americans and Israelis all over the world. I think we have to withdraw support from Israel until they can elect appropriate representation. They have a maniacal leader just like we do.

Expand full comment
Rita's avatar

The US has enormous military power and often that’s not enough to win the war, so to speak. What are the goals here? Regime change?? Again?? The collateral damage in terms of world alliances (trump’s destroyed those), economic (all the oil trade routes in the region) and other unknowns. The team in charge of our national security, Hegseth, Rubio and, of course, Trump, is pathetic.

Expand full comment
Michael Koller's avatar

Neocons arise. I thought Trump despised neocons and vice versa. Maybe Trump can play 3-dimensional chess!

Expand full comment
Mac Smith's avatar

He clearly scratched an itch of war wongers like Kristol and even Adam Kinzinger.

Expand full comment
Robert J Danolfo's avatar

Bill & Eric, Thanks for your reporting, commentary and analysis. With your impeccable credentials, I feel I owe it to myself to listen and learn. You never fail to impress me with your knowledge of how things work, intricate details and history. Unfortunately, the subject of this pod is was Trump right with the decision to attack Iran?. Now you have me questioning my eyes and my ears. After 10 years of this guy and what he has done to this country, what you have witnessed these last 5 months and his guiding principle of Trump first., you present this event in the light of historical norms and intelligent, competent people. I'm maybe just just a grain of sand in the big scheme of things, but I believe this decision was based solely on Trump wanting to look tough. The TACO thing was getting to his big, beautiful ego. He knew that Iran doesn't really threaten us and Israel already soften them up so like the school yard bully he piled on. Now we and the world will have to deal with the repercussions. Trump's not putting America first, he's putting America in danger.

Expand full comment
Steven Karl Thorson's avatar

I'm not sure about your conclusion, that he's putting America in danger in connection with this particular incident. There is a risk in inaction, as they say on this podcast, as much as in action. However, I do agree that with Trump his ego is first

Expand full comment
Michael Rubin's avatar

What about the jcpoa?

Expand full comment
Michael Rubin's avatar

Bill, you should have asked, why did tulsi say no danger? Why did tulsi say no attempt to build nukes? Why did tulsi say Iran was not a nuclear threat? Was tulsi lying? Mistaken? If so, Why does trump keep a team member who is so wrong? What does it say about trump?

Bill, you missed an opportunity to ask Edelman a good question.

Another question: what was wrong with jcpoa.

Expand full comment
Lisa Claire's avatar

It seems to me that the time for the US to use its bunker busting bombs would’ve been in the first day of the Israeli attack. Then it would have been a complete surprise. As it is, we gave time for Iran to move at least some of its nuclear materials out of Fordo, which it has claimed to have done. This seems very poor planning given how critical it is to significantly cripple their nuclear capabilities. Am I missing something?

Expand full comment
lirruping's avatar

Wow, interesting to see that these guys got pretty roundly whupped by commenters both here and in the YT comments. Just a slightly better reaction here.

Expand full comment
Diane Battista's avatar

No

Expand full comment
Jeff Rice's avatar

Like a leapord, I guess a neoconservative can't change his spot. The tone of this podcast is disgusting. Trump conducts an unconstitutional act of war and suddenly Bill Kristol sounds like MAGA to me. Disappointed.

Expand full comment
Mary Finn's avatar

I think the problem here is that most of our presidents have acted outside of congressional approval when it comes to war. They must obtain permission from Congress within a 30-day, 60-day, or 90-day timeframe. I forget which. It happens all the time, so we can't call Trump out on that.

Expand full comment
Michael Rubin's avatar

They did not even mention tulsi; if she is so wrong , why is she still in the administration?

Expand full comment
Jeff Rice's avatar

Did she lie under oath?

Expand full comment
Kerry Gough's avatar

Who is circulating the claim that weeks ago Iran had removed all its enriched uranium and centrifuges from the sites that were bombed? No evidence cited. BS, right?

Expand full comment
Ann P's avatar

Per the NYT:

“… there was also evidence, according to two Israeli officials with knowledge of the intelligence, that Iran had moved equipment and uranium from the site in recent days. And there was growing evidence that the Iranians, attuned to Mr. Trump’s repeated threats to take military action, had removed 400 kilograms, or roughly 880 pounds, of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity. That is just below the 90 percent that is usually used in nuclear weapons.

The 60-percent enriched fuel had been stored deep inside another nuclear complex, near the ancient capital of Isfahan. Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said by text that the fuel had last been seen by his teams of United Nations inspectors about a week before Israel began its attacks on Iran. In an interview on CNN on Sunday he added that “Iran has made no secret that they have protected this material.”

Asked by text later in the day whether he meant that the fuel stockpile — which is stored in special casks small enough to fit in the trunks of about 10 cars — had been moved, he replied, “I do.”…”

“ Officials Concede They Don’t Know the Fate of Iran’s Uranium Stockpile”, NYT, June 22, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/22/us/politics/iran-uranium-stockpile-whereabouts.html

Expand full comment
Kelly Hughes's avatar

The military is underfunded? 🙄

Expand full comment
Emma's avatar

I respect this discussion and enjoy hearing points of view to which I may not always subscribe. But as an American, I cannot support military action taken by an utterly un-American commander in chief who is attempting to destroy our democracy on a daily basis. I trust him about as much as I trust Putin -- with the caveat that Putin is far more intelligent. As for Bibi, he is a corruption riddled war criminal. You cannot have two morally bankrupt leaders running a war under the alleged banner of freedom. This is a war without honor.

And let's not forget, if there is a terrorist act taken in response on American soil, Trump will invoke martial law and become the dictator he has always longed to be.

Expand full comment
Steven Insertname's avatar

It can be unconstitutional even if Obama, Clinton, AND Trump all do it.

Expand full comment