• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Israel/US Attacks Iran /Yet Another Country/Iran

m.economictimes.com

Iran wants to negotiate with Vance, not Kushner or Witkoff: Report - The Economic Times

Iran has indicated a preference for negotiating with US Vice President JD Vance. Representatives stated they do not wish to engage with Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. This decision stems from a lack of trust following previous negotiation breakdowns. President Trump confirmed Vance, Marco...
m.economictimes.com m.economictimes.com

i don’t think they’ll like vance much either. have they even said thank you?
 
it's pretty clever.
Vance needs a win, Trump needs a win. And Vance is less blind when it comes to Netanyahu and the likelihood of him sabotaging any deal.

And Trump can always ditch him later, as was the plan all along.
And Vance has already leaked that he was not that much for the war, so ending it is going to look good whether he's fired afterwards or not.
 
Sorry to be cynical but when Trump said he'd give them five days...well, it takes five days to get the troops there (if he and Frat Boy are stupid enough to put 'boots on ground' [and we know they are])...so when he says Iran is negotiating and they say they have heard nothing...seems to me, Orange Elvis has been told to stop giving the enemy step-by-step info on what your secret strategy is, so methinks perhaps this 'five days grace' is Trump's cunning plan for a 'surprise' invasion.

_DOH!
 
Vixen said:
Sorry to be cynical but when Trump said he'd give them five days...well, it takes five days to get the troops there (if he and Frat Boy are stupid enough to put 'boots on ground' [and we know they are])...so when he says Iran is negotiating and they say they have heard nothing...seems to me, Orange Elvis has been told to stop giving the enemy step-by-step info on what your secret strategy is, so methinks perhaps this 'five days grace' is Trump's cunning plan for a 'surprise' invasion.

_DOH!
Click to expand...
Not sure that envisioning such a scenario is being cynical …
 
The Great Zaganza said:
it's pretty clever.
Vance needs a win, Trump needs a win. And Vance is less blind when it comes to Netanyahu and the likelihood of him sabotaging any deal.

And Trump can always ditch him later, as was the plan all along.
And Vance has already leaked that he was not that much for the war, so ending it is going to look good whether he's fired afterwards or not.
Click to expand...
Trump has got a fall guy on either side now.
Pearl Harbor attack goes well? Sayonara, Vance!
War goes badly? Marg bar Hegseth!
Venezuela goes tits up? Hasta La Vista, Rubio.
 
Vixen said:
Sorry to be cynical but when Trump said he'd give them five days...well, it takes five days to get the troops there (if he and Frat Boy are stupid enough to put 'boots on ground' [and we know they are])...so when he says Iran is negotiating and they say they have heard nothing...seems to me, Orange Elvis has been told to stop giving the enemy step-by-step info on what your secret strategy is, so methinks perhaps this 'five days grace' is Trump's cunning plan for a 'surprise' invasion.

_DOH!
Click to expand...
I think that’s quite likely. Trump shoots his mouth off a lot even before the military is prepared such as when he told people to rise up and over throw the leaders but didn’t initially have anything to back up his claims that help was on the way.

But now that there are actually troops making their way there, I am sure that they will be used.
 
Ziggurat said:
You are moving the goalpost. You said "attack", not "war".
Click to expand...
it's not Iran attacking - it's its proxies.
Do you think that the US is attacking a country if one of the many dozens of militia groups the US is funding and supporting all over the world is attacking somewhere?
 
The Great Zaganza said:
it's not Iran attacking - it's its proxies.
Click to expand...
And that makes a difference... why?
The Great Zaganza said:
Do you think that the US is attacking a country if one of the many dozens of militia groups the US is funding and supporting all over the world is attacking somewhere?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Which proxy militia groups are we currently funding? Who are they attacking? Or are you just talking about cold war era stuff?
 
Axxman300 said:
Iran, and their sycophant proxies have been handled discretely since the 1980s. We have always downplayed Iran, being firm when necessary, but never crossing the line. We know they want us to take a swing at them, they always have. We won by NOT blasting away. Now we've unzipped our fly, and Iran couldn't be happier.
Click to expand...
I don't think the Iranian regime is in the least bit happy right now.

What I find peculiar about your assessment is that you treat suicide attacks as if everyone involved is willing to commit suicide. And they aren't. Islamic extremists all use suicide attacks as a tactic, sure, but it's a task for their foot soldiers. It isn't a task for the leadership. The leadership never engage in suicide attacks themselves. I have my own thoughts about why (namely, martyrdom is a way for low status males to achieve status, if you're already high status there's no point), but ultimately the why doesn't matter, it's enough to note that they don't do it. Which means they don't want to do it, because there's no other impediment to them doing it other than desire.

So when we're taking out the Iranian regime upper leadership in precision strikes, that isn't at all the same as them sacrificing pawns in their own suicide attacks, or even sacrificing their own civilians as shields. It's not supposed to work that way. This is absolutely not the model of war they wanted.
 
Iran’s state broadcaster Press TV says, quoting a “senior political-security official”, that Iran has rejected a US proposal aimed at ending the current war.

Press TV hasn’t named the official, nor their rank or title, but reports the official says: "Iran will end the war when it decides to do so and when its own conditions are met."

Iranian officials have repeatedly said they want a complete end to the war, not just a ceasefire.

According to Press TV, the official outlined five conditions, including:

A complete halt to "aggression and assassinations" by the enemy

The establishment of concrete mechanisms to ensure that the war is not reimposed on the Islamic Republic

Guaranteed and clearly defined payment of war damages and reparations

The conclusion of the war across all fronts and for all resistance groups involved throughout the region

International recognition and guarantees regarding Iran's sovereign right to exercise authority over the Strait of Hormuz

www.bbc.co.uk

Iran rejects US peace plan as 'excessive' and issues five conditions to end war, state media reports

The list of conditions laid out by an unnamed official include a conclusion to the war "across all fronts", as well as payment of reparations.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
Karoline Leavitt
@PressSec
Allies are lining up behind Trump to open the Strait of Hormuz — cue the media fury
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom