To Avoid 'Unconscionable Horror,' Trump Called to 'Unequivocally Rule Out' Nuclear Attack on Iran

US President Donald Trump, who has long sought the Nobel Peace Prize while bombing various countries, is under pressure to rule out launching a nuclear attack on Iran after former Fox News host Tucker Carlson reported Sunday night that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pushing for one."

The target would be Pickaxe Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuclear enrichment program," Carlson wrote on social media. "No conventional weapon in the American arsenal can penetrate 300 feet of solid granite to destroy the tunnels where enrichment is supposedly taking place. The only military option is a nuclear strike."

The US midterm election is on Tuesday, and according to Carlson, "close observers say Trump is likely to decide by next weekend whether or not to use nuclear weapons. That would be November 7... To his credit, he's hesitating. At the moment, Trump is listening to his vice president, JD Vance, and to his envoy and friend Steve Witkoff, both of whom argue a deal with Iran can be made."However, Netanyahu "is cornered and desperate," Carlson noted.

"After last week's election results, he can't form a government unless Trump intervenes directly in Israeli politics and brokers a deal with other parties that gives Netanyahu 61 seats in the Knesset. Otherwise, he is out as prime minister and on his way to ignominy, investigations, and possibly jail. Netanyahu must stay close to Trump. He needs this war."Responding to Carlson's post, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) said that "whether these allegations reflect serious military planning or reckless posturing, the very possibility of a US nuclear attack on Iran is an unconscionable horror.

After eight months of devastating war, Iranian Americans are once again being forced to wait in terror as the Trump administration reportedly weighs another catastrophic escalation at the urging of Benjamin Netanyahu." "NIAC demands that President Trump immediately and unequivocally rule out any use of nuclear weapons against Iran," the group asserted. "Congress must urgently intervene to prevent further escalation and bring an end to this devastating war before an already horrific conflict becomes an irreversible catastrophe."

The group's policy director, Ryan Costello, stressed that such an attack "would be an unimaginable catastrophe in its own right, and the radioactive plume of a blast could extend hundreds of miles and reach major population centers, depending on yield and wind direction. Isfahan province alone, where Pickaxe is, is home to more than 5 million Iranians.""The Trump administration would also have to consider the ramifications of breaking the nuclear taboo in a war of aggression," he continued, suggesting that the US and Israel using such weapons could spur similar action by the other nuclear-armed nations: China, France, India, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United Kingdom.Would Russian President Vladimir "abstain from using nuclear weapons in Ukraine if Trump had dropped a nuclear weapon in Iran?"

Costello wondered. "It would be a new, far more dangerous world."[twitter_embed https://twitter.com/AssalRad/statuses/2117078120905994751 text="" name="" screen_name="AssalRad" id="2117078120905994751" created_ts="" iframe_id="twitter-embed-2117078120905994751" expand=1 embed_desktop_width=550 embed_desktop_height=488 embed_mobile_width=375 embed_mobile_height=596]While people across the ideological spectrum expressed alarm, some dismissed Carlson's lengthy post.

However, Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim highlighted that "Tucker is extremely well sourced in the Trump administration and shouldn't be ignored if this is what he's being told," and fellow journalist Pablo Manríquez agreed. Pushing back against one skeptic, Andrew Day, senior editor at The American Conservative, pointed out that recently "Trump threatened to 'annihilate' Iranian civilization and unleash 'military terror' not seen since World War II.

Those statements are plausibly implicit nuclear threats. Now Trump is finding that conventional weapons don't force Iran's capitulation. Concern is warranted."[twitter_embed https://twitter.com/NaomiAKlein/statuses/2117339718019113135 text="" name="" screen_name="NaomiAKlein" id="2117339718019113135" created_ts="" iframe_id="twitter-embed-2117339718019113135" expand=1 embed_desktop_width=550 embed_desktop_height=693 embed_mobile_width=375 embed_mobile_height=695] Iran's government was already preparing its people for a possible US nuclear attack, and last Friday, more than 200 global civil society groups implored Congress to stop Trump from using such weapons in a bid to end the illegal war that he and Netanyahu launched at the end of February.

"In recent weeks, President Trump has threatened to ‘hit Iran hard’ after the US midterm elections next week," wrote members of the Back From the Brink Coalition. "On October 15, President Trump stated that he would not use nuclear weapons against Iran. But frequent, abrupt changes of policy have become a staple feature of his presidency, and the single statement that he will not use nuclear weapons stands against a string of threats to do just that."Even if Trump opts not to use nuclear weapons, there are mounting global concerns about his next steps.

After being briefed on the administration's military schemes behind closed doors, US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) declared last week that "their plan is insane."

The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that "America's Gulf allies are steeling themselves for a heavy US bombardment of Iran that they expect to trigger a vicious cycle of retaliation against their own economic and civilian infrastructure as early as this week."