Trump on Iran: "They have a nuclear weapon, or they want to have one. They were very close. They were two weeks away."

[Miles Archer]

Aaron Rupar

‪@atrupar.com‬
Trump on Iran: "They have a nuclear weapon, or they want to have one. They were very close. They were two weeks away. I call it the nuclear dust."

Trump on Iran: "They have a nuclear weapon, or they want to have one. They were very close. They were two weeks away. I call it the luclear dust."

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-03-27T22:21:03.875Z

[roamer65]

1. Lies.

[Bluetus]

2. So, let meunderstand ...

Last edited Sat Mar 28, 2026, 05:14 PM - Edit history (1)

Last summer, we completely obliterated their nuclear program like the world has never seen before -- so much that they would probably never recover.

8 months later, they have rebuilt that "obliterated" program from scratch and were two weeks away from launching a nuclear bomb, until ...

We dropped loads of bombs on Iran, but have not put any troops on the ground yet. And from this bombing, we are able to determine that they had nuclear bombs 2 weeks away, yet somehow nobody has been able to detect any radiation when we re-obliterated these bombs?

Neat trick. All things are possible when you have a magic Sharpie.

[Doodley]

9. And strangely, there's no intelligence reports to back that up. But maybe that's two weeks away!

[Buns_of_Fire]

3. It was probably going to be announced simultaneously with *'s healthcare plan. nt

[Jilly_in_VA]

4. Babble babble bafflegab my beautiful ballroom

and so forth.

[kairos12]

5. His only time reference is 2 weeks away.

[Doodley]

7. Yes! Two weeks away from a health care plan. Two weeks from having information about Obama's

birth certificate. It's always two weeks!

[paleotn]

6. Well, they sure as shit will fast track one when this is all over.

Conventional thinking on this is all wrong. It's not that Iran would be stupid enough to use them offensively. No one's going to do that for obvious reasons. If they do, others will use theirs on Iran and the world may very well end for everyone. No one is going there. No one. That's the reason Russia will not use tactical nukes on Ukraine no matter how much Putin blusters. Pakistan and India, no matter how much they hate each other, won't use their nukes offensively. Future scenarios in such an exchange are too horrible to contemplate for everyone.

The same reason no one is going to give them to terrorist organizations. Fissionable material is traceable and the fallout, pun intended, would be exceptionally bad, i.e., the distinct possibility of getting nuked themselves. That's probably why it hasn't happened though there have been more than ample opportunity in the last 30 to 40 years.

What nukes do provide is the ultimate insurance for regime survival, be it Tehran, Pyongyang, Islamabad, New Delhi, etc. The ultimate "dead man's switch." And a counter weight to the US, Israel and other's ability to project conventional military power at will.

THAT'S the rub that's got the US, and particularly Israel, in a twist.

They couldn't beat on Iran, or any other nuclear armed state, whenever they feel like it. There's no way the attacks of the last several weeks would have occurred if Iran had deliverable nuclear weapons. And Israel and the US want to keep it that way. Whether a regime is bad, good or indifferent, if they feel there's credible existential threats, without nukes they're potentially under someone's thumb.

[spanone]

8. They have one or they want to have one....Difference is day or night.