Thanks for the clarification on the distinction between the WSJ reporter and the head of the IAEA.

My first comment on this thread provided the link regarding the IAEA Iran nuclear risk assessment and my previous comment provided the CFR analysis of risk assessment both of which stated the possibility of Iran being months away from developing nuclear weapons as of May 2025.

BTW the way text runs together in these comments can be confusing. Lawrence Norman is a WSJ reporter. Rafael Grossi, head of IAEA.

>>The IAEA for years has soft pedaled the Iranian nuclear threat so when they raised the warning flags within the last several months that Iran was months or possibly weeks away from having multiple nuclear weapons and ICBM delivery capabilities to launch a nuclear warhead 1000 plus miles that changed the equation from an observe and monitor approach to an urgent crises that needed prompt action..<< But IAEA did not make such a case. So citing them as the reason to go to war is unconvincing to start with, but even more so when you consider that Iran is now seemingly in a position to collect massive tolls on Hormuz shipping, which can pay for terrorism, nukes and more.

From the Council On Foreign Relations "in May 2025, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran’s cache of near-weapons grade enriched uranium had surged by about 50 percent over the prior three months. The surge put Iran just a step away from having enough enriched uranium for ten nuclear weapons, the IAEA found." They also stated that Iran was in violation of the nuclear nonproliferation agreements. At that time the estimates were that " Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in as quickly as several months—possibly a year." So obviously Iran's nuclear program was ramping up prior to the military operations of Rising Lion and Midnight Hammer the joint strikes by the U.S and Israel on Iran's nuclear and military infrastructure in June 2025. Since then The IAEA has had very limited access to Iran's nuclear facilities. I find it puzzling that Lawrence Norman Rafael Grossi would say that " Iran has an “ambitious” nuclear program but doesn’t have a program for building nuclear weapons currently." And then he makes the statement "we do not have the accesses that we should have” Grossi said, referring to Iran’s refusal to let IAEA inspectors visit its damaged nuclear sites. So in May 2025 when the IAEA had access to Iran's nuclear facilities they estimated that Iran was possibly months away from developing a nuclear weapon but in early March 2026 with several months of virtually no access to Iran's nuclear facilities Grossi makes the contradictory statement that "Iran doesn't have a program for building nuclear weapons." How is he able to make that assessment without IAEA inspectors having access to Iran's nuclear facilities. Grossi's muddled statements sound like pure conjecture and real head scratchers for those of us seeking the truth on the subject....https://www.cfr.org/articles/what-are-irans-nuclear-and-missile-capabilities

From the Wall Street Journal, March 2, 2026: >> Iran Has No Structured Program to Build Nuclear Weapons, IAEA Says By Laurence Norman Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iran has an “ambitious” nuclear program but doesn’t have a program for building nuclear weapons currently. “It is an evaluation that is based on the fact that Iran has a very big, ambitious nuclear program, that we do not have the accesses that we should have” Grossi said, referring to Iran’s refusal to let IAEA inspectors visit its damaged nuclear sites. “At the same time, I have said…we don’t see a structured program to manufacture nuclear weapons,” he added. <<

The IAEA for years has soft pedaled the Iranian nuclear threat so when they raised the warning flags within the last several months that Iran was months or possibly weeks away from having multiple nuclear weapons and ICBM delivery capabilities to launch a nuclear warhead 1000 plus miles that changed the equation from an observe and monitor approach to an urgent crises that needed prompt action.. Regarding the way the war started the Israelis had intelligence info that much of the Iranian leadership including the Ayatollah Khamenei would be gathered at one location at a precise time which presented the ideal opportunity to decapitate the Iranian leadership and at the same time decimate Iran’s conventional military capabilities. Going to congress would have eliminated the element of surprise and made the task of dealing with the Iranian threat much more challenging. When it comes to the recent ceasefire deal there is much disinformation and propaganda being reported so I would hesitate to jump to any conclusions until we have more clarity on the situation...I think criticism is fair in some aspects of the way the war has been carried out but to call it a blunder is way off the mark. Doing nothing and allowing Iran to become a threatening nuclear menace that destabilizes the Middle East and beyond for decades to come would be the real blunder in my view.

I was told, when Trump talked about "unconditional surrender," that was part of the skilled gamesmanship he's displayed in this conflict. Now he's accepted, as a basis for negotiation, Iranian demands for ongoing control and tolls in the Strait of Hormuz, and has even talked about a joint venture with them in this extortion. There are proposals for how the US military could wrest control of the strait from Iran, but it's extremely difficult and would've required everything Trump didn't do in terms of getting forces and alliances in place beforehand; which would've been a good reason not to start the war, and certainly not to start it without debate in Congress. As of April 8, it seems yet more clear this war was a blunder than it did when I wrote this piece in late March.

Phillips Payson O'Brien in the Atlantic piece makes a few good points regarding the U.S and its depletion of stockpiles of Tomahawk missiles and the slow replenishment rate as well as the lack of cost effective countermeasures against Iranian drone attacks. He then goes on to criticize Trump for lacking a contingency plan for dealing with the Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and the threats to oil tankers but he himself doesn't offer any strategic or tactical contingency plans. The truth is from a military standpoint the challenges that the U.S faces in the Strait of Hormuz is intractable largely due to the geographic narrowness of the Strait which creates a dangerous gauntlet that ships have to pass through. Even with the decimation of Iran's Navy and Air Force along with much of its missile battery capabilities, oil tankers because of their proximity to the Iranian coast can still be hit with small armed weapons such as RPGs and mortars as well as drones. In 2013 Author Robert Kaplan wrote an interesting book titled 'Revenge Of Geography' which outlines the significance and challenges of geography in warfare complete with historical examples.https://www.amazon.com/Revenge-Geography-Coming-Conflicts-Against/dp/0812982223... The Strait Of Hormuz would be exhibit A in his book. A negotiated settlement which appears to have taken place with the recent ceasefire and not further military confrontation is definitely the preferred solution here.

"A different set of leaders might have insisted on better contingency planning." Among other points in a somber article in The Atlantic. "Trump Is Putting America’s Weaknesses on Display." Gift link (may expire): https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/trump-military-weakness-china-iran/686695/?gift=5GG_p7RQSqePHB8EWFEnzq6pMF-DH9LMBewJHwRicMI&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

I've still never tried apple pie Peach would have been more obvious.

I'm not a big Netflix fan but I was tempted to sign up for a month just to see the MLB opening day match up between NY and SF but I ended up giving it a miss. After hearing your review and others regarding the Netflix broadcast it sounds like I may have made the right choice. I will be watching the Red Sox home opener on Good Friday though and I will be praying for a Padres victory while eating my fish dinner. I take my Good Friday's seriously.

Actually 299th, it seems.

thanks for the count!

My 300th Splice Today piece, btw.

This is your 507th column, Crispin, based on search of "ago" on your author page (a word you don't seem to have used in any headline) and on seemingly not having any pieces shunted to a separate author page (which can occur if tech glitch).

Mr. Judge, as to making you look human, I'm sitting here with the NSA's file on you, and I have something you need to know ... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/matt-gaetz-alien-human-breeding-program-b2949902.html

You're right. Thank you for the correction.

The closest Warren came to being an economist is that she was a bankruptcy attorney, She taught law at Harvard Law and has a JD. Her BA, from the University of Houston, is in speech pathology.

Easily? How does the FBI find the marks to take over for, and what do they do after they take over? And if they do, how do they bring them in from abroad to prosecute? This isn't bank robbery.

The FBI could shut down most of these scams very easily, by taking over for the marks and playing along until they make a case. Some new scams will always pop up, but look how bank robbery and kidnapping have been supressed by vigorous enforcement. Instead FBI mid-management are focused on big busts and headlines. Director Patel should realize how pervasive and sad this is for victims.

Some good news: "Anthropic wins preliminary injunction in DOD fight as judge cites ‘First Amendment retaliation’" https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/26/anthropic-pentagon-dod-claude-court-ruling.html

Yes, I'd previously read that Al Jazeera piece. It is as good a case as I've seen for a more optimistic view.

The real assessment of success will be comparing the prewar regime under the belligerent and tyrannical Ayatollah Khamenei who has been a destabilizing force in the region for decades with their funding of terror proxies and their quest to develop a nuclear arsenal and project power verses what will come next which will be at the very least an Iran who's military has been severely degraded if not debilitated and that has further isolated itself from its gulf neighbors and no longer has the where with all to fund its terror proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis which are all encouraging developments. I share some of the concerns that you outlined in your comment in regard to the costs, the unintended consequences and in particular the way in which the war has been carried out. The three operative words when over throwing a regime is 'and then what'. I have yet to see a sufficient answer to those three words which leaves us with three other words 'we shall see'. The linked article is an interesting analysis of why the U.S should be heartened with the direction of the war so far...https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2026/3/16/the-us-israeli-strategy-against-iran-is-working-here-is-why

I really enjoyed the interview. Great job making Johns feel comfortable while asking interesting questions, both technical and "spiritual". Will hunt down the book. 🙂

On "Coffee with Scott Adams" today (11/11) Scott Adams says, in discussing how to persuade people, you should watch Cheryl Hines on podcasts, and in particular this episode, if you want to know how to be on a podcast.

That and GQ?

I think seeing The Sting as a young teen or pre-teen helped turn me gay. THAT was a hot couple!

Trump has won twice, but neither of these guys have the slightest idea of why that happened. Try harder, Splice Today.

Hard to imagine thinking that Marc Maron has any real insights into the future of American politics. He's a good comedian and decent interviewer, but his talent stops there. And in this clip, he's talking to a fellow insufferably smug progressive, Sam Seder, who hasn't had an original thought in decades. Posting such material is a total waste of time. Thanks for nothing.

Actually the second littlest one was not her son because he was younger than my dad, i unfortunately don’t remember which cousin he was but the tallest boy was my great aunt’s son.

They are not going to school, my grandfather filmed this. It was a leisurely trip to the end of the line by lake Roland. The little blondie in white was my dad and the dark haired second tallest boy in stripes was my uncle. The lady that was on camera before they boarded was my aunt Bea and the two other boys I think were her sons

Such a great song. So sad youngin's don't know our music in the 60's and 70's was SO much better than their music is.

"If you only know a cup this way, you don't know the cup." David Thomas threw off sparks every time he opened his mouth.

A loving/moving biography of Les Baxter: https://lesbaxter.com/pages/biography

This is great. please add a blusky link one of these days.