There have been unconfirmed reports that nukes are being discussed as a possible solution to destroy pickaxe mountain.

Tucker Carleson was one of the first to report on this. Tucker Carlson on X: "Under pressure from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Trump administration may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran. The target would be Pickax Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuc… / X

Ex-CIA officer John Kirakou made a similar claim, and Glen Greenwald said the topic had been discussed "in more than a trivial way."

I didn't say he will use a nuclear weapon. I know for a fact that it's been discussed in more than a trivial way. The point isn't to "nuke Iran" but to destroy that one facility.

People are right to sound the alarm over extremely consequential policies, even if improbable.

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 2, 2026

What say ye? Yea or nay?

no, and why did this need another thread as it was already posted a week ago.?

but for ****s and giggles, that would be one way to get trump out of office immediately.

enough dems AND republicans would vote to send him packing.

No.

Why does Trump have to do it? Israel has nukes. They can do their own dirty work.

They may not have bunker buster type nukes like the B61-11 or MOPs to soften up the target before delivery.

zigag09 said:

---

They may not have bunker buster type nukes like the B61-11 or MOPs to soften up the target before delivery.

---

then maybe they should send a lot of their men in and take it out themselves.

this is like the scene in "the fifth element" when the president is ordering the evil blob to be nuked, and it just keeps growing in size the more it gets hit.

Negative

Nope to OP question

Should we, no. Why because then expect to see nukes hit Ukraine, South Korea and so on

Also Tucker the idiot has been 'reporting' this for months

Maybe someone should ask Trump's great advisor Mark Levin what he's telling the president.

Sid Farkas said:

---

Qatar Carlson is a lost soul. ignore him.

---

I think the same, but there is enough smoke to indicate that someone has suggested it in a serious matter and was entertained enough/not shot down fast enough for it to get out. May not have been Trump, in fact I wouldn't think it would be. Extremely doubtful anything comes of it and was probably just a random brainstorming/hypothetical scenario with mid level staffers if I were to guess. In which of course it would come up. Like it or not, it will always be an option. A terrible one that should never be used but it's there and when spitballing, people will bring it up. It's inevitable. Someone mentioned it and media did media things with it.

Just my $.02 of what likely happened. Who knows though. I am starting to question Trump's full rationality these days tbh.

But to answer OP, hell no. Beyond stupid slippery slope. Nuke Pickax mountain and it greenlights Putin to use one in Ukraine (in his mind) and that point, all bets are off.

NO!

this will impact the water systems for 100 million people in the region.

This will set the precedent with China, Russia, and North Korea and Pakistan.

This can never happen. Never.

If you could limit it to Pickaxe Mountain and immediate surrounding area, then hell yes. Because f* them, that's why.

But I don't think a tactical nuke can do that.

This is so stupid. The whole story is predicated on "discussions" about use of nukes. I'm pretty sure that wargaming of every scenario happens all the time. You discuss all options. In fact, I'd be pissed if they weren't discussing a nuclear option, not because I think it's wise or want to see it happen, but because it would be negligent for the strategists and decision makers to not discuss all options.

zigag09 said:

---

Tucker Carleson was one of the first to report on this.

---

That's all you need to know about the validity of this "story".

No. We should not. End of question. End of thread.

rocky the dog said:

---

Why does Trump have to do it? Israel has nukes. They can do their own dirty work.

---

Exactly this. If Iran is to be nuked, that is in the wheelhouse of Israel and countries near Iran. Not our job nor our concern.

Should they nuke us?

American Hardwood said:

---

This is so stupid. The whole story is predicated on "discussions" about use of nukes. I'm pretty sure that wargaming of every scenario happens all the time. You discuss all options. In fact, I'd be pissed if they weren't discussing a nuclear option, not because I think it's wise or want to see it happen, but because it would be negligent for the strategists and decision makers to not discuss all options.

---

I mean, this should be obvious to anyone, yet seems lost on most.

"OMG Trump has advisors that consider all options!"

Aust Ag said:

---

Should they nuke us?

---

I would have no problem with Iran being completely decimated. Along with many of the other Middle Eastern countries as well. But that's not reality.

Sadly, there are some good people over there. They're just being led by horrible ones.

No.

If they use it first on a NATO member, game on!

I would completely pull out of the region. Let Iran have the Strait and let them continue rebuilding their nukes.

dds08 said:

---

No.

If they use it first on a NATO member, game on!

---

And we should leave NATO asap.

dds08 said:

---

No.

If they use it first on a NATO member, game on!

---

They will use it on the US first!

The devices will be carried across during one of those caravans rushing the border. Hell you'll watch it on TV on a media clip in a large backpack or suitcase.

Straight into an Uber and on to the desired target which won't be a blue city. Refineries, large port cities, rail bottlenecks, etc...

HalifaxAg said:

---

dds08 said:

---

No.

If they use it first on a NATO member, game on!

---

They will use it on the US first!

The devices will be carried across during one of those caravans rushing the border. Hell you'll watch it on TV on a media clip in a large backpack or suitcase.

Straight into an Uber and on to the desired target which won't be a blue city. Refineries, large port cities, rail bottlenecks, etc...

---

Houston is a blue city.

If they do it, I could see them blowing the hell out of a refinery or chemical plant there.

If President Trump orders a nuke, it will be decades before another Republican is elected.

annie88 said:

---

I would have no problem with Iran being completely decimated. Along with many of the other Middle Eastern countries as well. But that's not reality.

Sadly, there are some good people over there. They're just being led by horrible ones.

---

Jesus

No nukes, but level the place!