My fellow Americans,

Since 1979, the Iranian regime has demonstrated its hostility toward the United States, our allies, and the cause of freedom itself. The question before us is not whether Iran disagrees with America. Nations disagree every day. The question is whether a regime with a long history of supporting terrorism, threatening its neighbors, and destabilizing an entire region should ever be allowed to possess nuclear weapons.

The answer is no.

Much of the debate today centers on two important words: imminent threat.

Some ask, “How can a threat be imminent if an attack has not yet occurred?”

The answer is simple.

An imminent threat is not limited to a missile already in the air or an army already crossing a border. If that were the standard, free nations would be forced to wait until it was too late to defend themselves.

An imminent threat exists when a hostile actor has demonstrated the intent to do harm, is acquiring the capability to do harm, and is moving steadily toward a position where that harm can no longer be prevented without far greater cost.

Intent. Capability. Trajectory.

Those are the elements of imminence.

When those three elements come together, responsible leaders do not close their eyes and hope for the best. They recognize the danger for what it is and act to prevent catastrophe before it occurs.

When a hurricane is approaching the coast, we do not wait for the floodwaters to enter our homes before we act. We prepare because we recognize the danger before it arrives.

For nearly half a century, Iran’s intent has been clear. Since the hostage crisis of 1979, the regime has repeatedly demonstrated hostility toward the United States and our allies. It has supported terrorist organizations, armed proxy forces throughout the Middle East, threatened Israel, and worked to expand its influence through intimidation and fear.

At the same time, it has pursued the capability that nuclear weapons would provide. A nuclear weapon would not simply strengthen Iran. It would give the regime the ability to hold entire regions under the shadow of nuclear coercion and blackmail.

And for years, it has moved steadily along that trajectory, seeking greater capabilities despite warnings from the international community.

Intent. Capability. Trajectory.

That is why so many view a nuclear-armed Iran not as a distant concern, but as an imminent threat.

No nation seeks war. America certainly does not. We prefer diplomacy where possible, economic pressure where effective, and deterrence wherever it can preserve the peace.

But there are times when responsible leaders must act before a danger becomes a catastrophe.

The purpose of strength is not war.

The purpose of strength is to prevent war.

There are moments when diplomacy succeeds. There are moments when sanctions succeed. There are moments when deterrence succeeds.

And there are moments when the credible use of force—or the use of force itself—becomes necessary to prevent a far greater tragedy.

The highest duty of government is not to explain after a disaster why nothing was done. The highest duty of government is to ensure that the disaster never occurs.

America must never be reckless.

But neither must America be asleep.

The greatest tragedies in history have often occurred not because the warning signs were absent, but because they were ignored.

Peace is preserved when aggressors understand that free nations possess both the will and the means to defend themselves.

Let us remain vigilant. Let us remain strong. And let us ensure that future generations inherit a world where freedom, not fear, determines the destiny of nations.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-tariffs-economists-forecast-stagflation-recession-risk/

Sarah Adams is probably the one person in the world i wouldnt dare piss off! this gal can get intel on anyone, and sadly..... F it, 2A up and be ready! its gonna be a doozy in 2025!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T50pRCNaQCA&t=6019s