Well, howdy there, Internet people, it's Bell again. So today, we're going to talk about

Trump's Senate briefing, Iran claims, and reactions. U.S. senators got their briefing about

U.S. operations in Iran and their effectiveness. The debate over the tactical effectiveness

is starting to overshadow the debate

over whether or not the strikes were a good move strategically. But reactions from senators,

even Republican senators, after the briefing, tends to suggest that it wasn't as effective

as the administration wants everybody to believe.

Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas was asked about whether the sites were obliterated and said,

I believe the goals of the mission were accomplished. I think that's an ambiguous term,

or could be interpreted different ways. So I would just say

the goals of the mission were accomplished. Republican Senator Rick Scott of Florida said,

It's all in your definition. Republicans are at the point where they're going to debate what obliterated means.

That sends a pretty clear signal that by the normal definition, the site was not obliterated.

Republican reluctance combined with the DIA report,

combined with Israel hitting the targets after the U.S. operation, combined with the European

findings suggesting that the U.S. operation missed most of Iran's uranium stockpile, because,

surprise, it had been scattered to multiple locations, would lead most to the conclusion that the operation was not as

successful as the Trump administration has been claiming.

Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware said, quote,

We got more relevant details about that, but I think it is too early to actually fully grasp a number of critical and currently

unanswered issues about what was exactly destroyed and exactly how long it would take to

reconstruct it and what the intentions of the Iranian regime are. When you're talking about

...