Well, howdy there, Internet people, it's Bell again.

So today, we're going to talk about Trump's need for war credit.

I'm recording this in the immediate aftermath of Trump's move in Iran.

As the world waits to see what Iran's response is going to be and how much new risk was foisted on the U.S.

There's one part that infuriates me. It didn't have to happen. And I don't mean that in the

way that most people saying that mean it. Sure, intelligence assessments said it was unnecessary,

and it appears Trump engaged in this because he was in a mood.

I mean the elevated risk to Americans didn't need to happen, but it did solely because of

Trump's ego. Let's be clear on something. Plains flew from the heartland of the U.S.

without being intercepted by Iranian air defense.

They accessed Iranian airspace and left without an issue. All evidence says this occurred.

This occurred while Israel was also freely accessing Iran's airspace.

So here's my question. Whatever happened to, our failures are known,

our successes or not? Trump needed to come out and say he obliterated Iran's facilities for some

reason, even though early analysis says that may not be the case. Has the entirety of the U.S. administration forgotten about

the concept of plausible deniability? Here's a crazy idea. Stop chasing likes on social media.

Let's pretend that Trump truly believed Iran was on the verge of a nuke. If the U.S. had just used the B-2s

and added an extra plane to drop some normal surface ordinance after the fact to obscure the

scene and then denied they had done it, what would have happened? Sure, major powers would have

said, hey, we think this happened. And maybe they'd show

some analysis. But if there's one thing Trump is good at, it's deflecting and explaining things away.

How convincing would the evidence have been? Would it be enough to convince Iran to escalate with the U.S.?

...