[fldskfjdslkfj]

You are delusional. Iran lost most of its deterrence, its proxies have been decimated and its ICBM capabilities, although not nothing haven't really managed to cause any significant damage and have shown that they lack sufficient accuracy.

Will the balance of power change a few decades from now? Maybe, who knows, but for now Iran is in a tough spot.

[ein0p]

Uh-uh. The country which has just tested a nuke a couple of weeks ago and easily defeated the Iron Dome with its cheaper rocket stock is “totally decimated”. Sure buddy.

[fldskfjdslkfj]

What are you even talking about?

[ein0p]

Seek different news sources. That earthquake in Iran wasn’t an earthquake. It didn’t have aftershocks and USGS couldn’t determine the depth.

[fldskfjdslkfj]

Enjoy your speculative theories. Lots of minor earthquakes don't have aftershocks, not to mention that Iran is one of the most seismically active countries in the world.

But please feel free to provide a trustworthy news source backing your claim.

[ein0p]

What is a “trustworthy news source” these days. I saw the seismograph charts on Twitter. If you expect any “trustworthy” news in an environment where US MIC could get another trillion dollars in (borrowed) taxpayer money, I have a bridge I’d like to sell.

[fldskfjdslkfj]

A news source that has confirmed with at least one seismology expert who has conducted a thorough (preferably peer reviewed) analysis showing that the charts are abnormal for an earthquake and are more inline with those of an explosion.

It seems to me like it's should be extremely easy to distinguish the two, there's more than enough earthquake data - and that fact that there is no such report says it all. For starters i'd even take an amateur analysis, but just some dude on twitter saying "there was seismic activity - must be a nuclear test" - nah.