Meanwhile In America

[royal white]

1 hour ago, mickbrown said:

I'm confused.

So he's no longer THE DON? But a draft dodger?

It doesn’t take much 

[London Wanderer]

33 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

Pfft, don't believe the BBC, only THE DON! 

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a poster on here obsess over a politician as much as RW has over ‘The Don’.

The best part is just how oblivious he is to how daft he looks. Sharing some of the most idiotic things a US leader (or any leader) has ever posted as if they’re gospel. 😄

It’s very cute

[royal white]

3 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a poster on here obsess over a politician as much as RW has over ‘The Don’.

The best part is just how oblivious he is to how daft he looks. Sharing some of the most idiotic things a US leader (or any leader) has ever posted as if they’re gospel. 😄

It’s very cute

“A few months though” 😂😂

[mickbrown]

34 minutes ago, royal white said:

It doesn’t take much 

Oh very good. 👏

[Zico]

3 hours ago, royal white said:

And another bang on. Surprising so many on here for for those “leakers.”

 

To be fair to him, I'd have made an excuse not to have to go to war in Vietnam, or anywhere, had I found myself in the same position

[London Wanderer]

50 minutes ago, royal white said:

“A few months though” 😂😂

Whatabout Whatabout 😁

Still not quite grasped I was only showing another reports view have you 
 

It’s cute how much you idolise him. I’m probably just jealous 

[royal white]

3 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

Whatabout Whatabout 😁

Still not quite grasped I was only showing another reports view have you 
 

It’s cute how much you idolise him. I’m probably just jealous 

Nope. Not a clue. Parklife lyrics?

[London Wanderer]

3 minutes ago, royal white said:

Nope. Not a clue. Parklife lyrics?

I never confirmed whether I believed the ‘3 months’ report claim or not. Only said it came from a reliable source. 
 

What’s clear is we still don’t fully know & that’s all I said last night.

Though nobody apart DT is saying decades 😂

We’ve been here last night though ? No need to return.

Get back to your Twitter cesspit & find us another speech lapdog x

Edited June 26, 2025 by London Wanderer

[royal white]

1 minute ago, London Wanderer said:

I never confirmed whether I believed the ‘3 months’ report claim or not. Only said it came from a reliable source. 
 

What’s clear is we still don’t fully know & that’s all I said last night.

Though nobody apart DT is saying decades 😂

We’ve been here last night though ? No need to return.

Get back to your Twitter cesspit & find us another speech lapdog x

Why didn’t you say that in the first place?
 

Others are saying years. You went with months. Fkin months 😂😂😂🤪

[Sweep]

Just now, royal white said:

Why didn’t you say that in the first place?
 

Others are saying years. You went with months. Fkin months 😂😂😂🤪

I'd be very surprised if it is only months, but I'd be even more surprised if it is actually decades.... 

[London Wanderer]

1 minute ago, royal white said:

Why didn’t you say that in the first place?
 

Others are saying years. You went with months. Fkin months 😂😂😂🤪

Crikey that run of emojis in the last sentence is something else ? You okay pal ? 

Hope you’re not upset because people have been pointing out how stupid these Tweets are every time you share them.

I didn’t. If you care to look back over the ‘discussion’ I attempted to have with you last night, then you’ll see I left it very open as to whether it was months or years. I only pointed out that we’ve had different views & time will tell.

No point going in circles because you forgot though. You get back on X & see if your hero has posted anything else you can wank over.

 Feel free to share it with us all on here . If he’s gone quiet then looking back over the old ones might be nice for ya 👍

[royal white]

7 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

Crikey that run of emojis in the last sentence is something else ? You okay pal ? 

Hope you’re not upset because people have been pointing out how stupid these Tweets are every time you share them.

I didn’t. If you care to look back over the ‘discussion’ I attempted to have with you last night, then you’ll see I left it very open as to whether it was months or years. I only pointed out that we’ve had different views & time will tell.

No point going in circles because you forgot though. You get back on X & see if your hero has posted anything else you can wank over.

 Feel free to share it with us all on here . If he’s gone quiet then looking back over the old ones might be nice for ya 👍

As I keep saying. You say months I say years. 🤷🏻

[London Wanderer]

1 hour ago, royal white said:

As I keep saying. You say months I say years. 🤷🏻

Not really 😂

 I’m not saying months. I’m saying it’s open.  you’re saying years. At least you are now. We’ve had different views means we’ve been provided different views from US intelligence the past couple of days.

 It’s not even that you’re struggling to remember our conversation last night, it’s now that you can’t even read the last post 😂

 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

8 hours ago, kent_white said:

There's going to be all sorts of permeatations. What type of rock is it? How hard is it? Were they able to target weak points like ventilation shafts in the style of Luke Skywalker? Did sequential strikes mean it penetrated more deeply? Loads of different variables. 

Which is why I don't think it's unreasonable to wait for better evidence to make a decision. And why I think that DTs claim that it's been completely eliminated is a bit hasty at best! 

Of course, but that's the Don to a T.

Pinch of salt, and a smile.

From what I understand they did hit ventilation shafts as part of it.

In terms of actual evidence, it's going to need eye witness testimony to assess fully, as satellite imagery isn't going to show anything through a hillside. 

Latest calls today- from CIA to mon iirc- is that there is no evidence that the uranium was removed from the site, so maybe there are folk on the ground that can carry out necessary observations. 

That notwithstanding, it is somewhat bizarre that a strike that the western world is behind has been pilloried to a degree, which seems to be purely because Trump authorised it.

We all know what a bell he can be, but it's reasonable to take events on their own merits.

Whatever level of damage there actually is, it is going to put back their efforts, and put more financial pressure on Iran, and it is already reeling from sanctions, and now loss of much of it's offensive and defensive missile infrastructure. 

[Dimron]

Smoke and Mirrors

Smoke and Mirrors

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Plenty of smoke, and lots of broken mirrors. 

And that's just the houses of senior Iranian military officials.

[kent_white]

16 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Of course, but that's the Don to a T.

Pinch of salt, and a smile.

From what I understand they did hit ventilation shafts as part of it.

In terms of actual evidence, it's going to need eye witness testimony to assess fully, as satellite imagery isn't going to show anything through a hillside. 

Latest calls today- from CIA to mon iirc- is that there is no evidence that the uranium was removed from the site, so maybe there are folk on the ground that can carry out necessary observations. 

That notwithstanding, it is somewhat bizarre that a strike that the western world is behind has been pilloried to a degree, which seems to be purely because Trump authorised it.

We all know what a bell he can be, but it's reasonable to take events on their own merits.

Whatever level of damage there actually is, it is going to put back their efforts, and put more financial pressure on Iran, and it is already reeling from sanctions, and now loss of much of it's offensive and defensive missile infrastructure. 

I don't think anybody is pillorying it. Apart from some of the anti war crowd, but you'd expect that. He's a politician like any other politician and not immune from criticism. 

I think we all just want to be certain about what's happened in reality so that we can plan for any new eventualities. 

If he'd have come out after the strikes and said the mission was a success - but we will need to wait for a full intelligence assessment before understand the full extent of the damage and so that we can plan our next move accordingly. Or words to that effect. I don't think he'd be getting this many questions. 

He's desperate for a big win though. Probably because he's not been able to achieve what he promised he would in Ukraine. And I'm concerned that means he's putting pressure on people to tell him what he wants to hear, rather than what's actually the truth. 

It doesn't matter how much he wants it, or you want it, or I want it. All that matters is the reality of what's under that mountain. 

[royal white]

59 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

Not really 😂

 I’m not saying months. I’m saying it’s open.  you’re saying years. At least you are now. We’ve had different views means we’ve been provided different views from US intelligence the past couple of days.

 It’s not even that you’re struggling to remember our conversation last night, it’s now that you can’t even read the last post 😂

 

What was the name of the fella who’s  account you’re going off? I’m going off John Ratcliffe. 

[London Wanderer]

38 minutes ago, royal white said:

What was the name of the fella whose  account you’re going off? I’m going off John Ratcliffe. 

That’s a surprise, because John said several years. Not decades 😁

 

[royal white]

3 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

That’s a surprise, because John said several years. Not decades 😁

 

How long is several years? 
 

what’s the name of the person who said several months? 

[London Wanderer]

7 minutes ago, royal white said:

How long is several years? 
 

what’s the name of the person who said several months? 

"Several years" generally means more than two years but less than a decade, with the most common interpretation being around 3 to 5 years. It's a non-specific term and its exact meaning can vary based on context. While it often implies a duration longer than "a few years" (which is typically 3-5 years), it's not as long as "many years" or "a decade" 

 Maybe you can tell us all where your hero got decades from? 😄

The several months claim was a report from the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon.

It’s all open for interpretation depending on how you look at it 👍 The US have a track record of not always being honest. But I’ll believe them over Iran.

Why are you asking questions that were discussed & answered last night? Do you not get bored of having the same conversations? 

[royal white]

4 minutes ago, London Wanderer said:

"Several years" generally means more than two years but less than a decade, with the most common interpretation being around 3 to 5 years. It's a non-specific term and its exact meaning can vary based on context. While it often implies a duration longer than "a few years" (which is typically 3-5 years), it's not as long as "many years" or "a decade" 

 Maybe you can tell us all where your hero got decades from? 😄

The several months claim was a report from the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon.

It’s all open for interpretation depending on how you look at it 👍 The US have a track record of not always being honest. But I’ll believe them over Iran.

Why are you asking questions that were discussed & answered last night? Do you not get bored of having the same conversations? 

Do you know what irony means? Obviously not. 

So no name from the DIA. 
 

Several years" is a more vague term, but generally implies more than two or three, and can be less than a decade, or extend into multiple decades”

“A few months though” 

[DazBob]

I'm staggered by how many supposed grown-ups refer to Trump as The Don.

It's just plain weird.

[bolty58]

10 hours ago, Sweep said:

Indeed, however, it can't be nice being in an almost perpetual state of rage at the modern world

 "Bolty's rage". His imagination has moved on from 'shitting in peoples mouths' but is still functioning erratically. Good to see from an entertainment perspective for those who don't ignore him.

Serenity. Far closer to the mark. Out of the burgeoning bureaucracy; The Don in the White House; Sir Nigel soon to be in No. 10.

LG.

[bolty58]

10 hours ago, kent_white said:

What an absolute fucking fanny. Seriously - I don't know how you can be impressed by someone like this? He's so brittle that he can't even stand up to some medium scrutiny. 

The job of the press is a bit like the job of the opposition (in a healthy functioning democracy of course). And twatty bollocks should have the intellectual rigour and courage in his own convictions to be able to counter those very reasonable questions. 

It isn't the job of the press to cheerlead from the sidelines unless you have a state media. Which is probably where DT and PH would like to end up. 

This is very weak leadership for me. And the more you try and demand that everybody agrees with you, the more it looks like you're attempting to silence questions and/or cover things up. 

It's not WWF wrestling. 

You can't handle the truth.