• 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

lionking said:
Are you suggesting for one second that Hezbollah was not attacking Israel? Wow, your hate of Israel is extreme.
Click to expand...
I think that has been made very clear by the poster in question for a long time.
And that is what drives me crazy, the suppoters of either side in this mess are totally blind and have a double standard. ANother reason I have come to a plague on both your houses attitude.
 
Bibi is not happy with this. He pretty much promjised his people regime change and that is not happening.
 
And Trump is defacto granting Iran the right to its uranium.
It's a huge L for Netanjahu, and he will try to sabotage the deal if he thinks he can get away with it.
Expect the Zionist Billionaires in the US to put maximum pressure through maximum bribes on Trump in the coming days.
 
The
theprestige said:
Leave me out of this. I never thought he wasn't.
Click to expand...
Okay, but what was gained from this war?

From what I can see, Trump couldn't or wouldn't escalate, so had to back down and offer concessions, which he now spins as "peace with Iran", as though the point of the war was to achieve peace or to open the Strait of Hormuz.

Are any of us any wiser about what the goals of this war were?
 
angrysoba said:
The

Okay, but what was gained from this war?
Click to expand...
Trumps cronies gaming stock exchanges?
angrysoba said:
From what I can see, Trump couldn't or wouldn't escalate, so had to back down and offer concessions, which he now spins as "peace with Iran", as though the point of the war was to achieve peace or to open the Strait of Hormuz.

Are any of us any wiser about what the goals of this war were?
Click to expand...
Oil money.
 
Some commentators have remarked that Trump is now almost always saying "The Islamic Republic of Iran";
It's him bending the knee. No more talk of regime change, or the People of Iran.
No more questions of sovereignty or invasivon.

This is an American President acknowledging the legitimacy of the Iranian Regime.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Some commentators have remarked that Trump is now almost always saying "The Islamic Republic of Iran"; It's him bending the knee. No more talk of regime change, or the People of Iran.
No more questions of sovereignty or invasivon.

This is an American President acknowledging the legitimacy of the Iranian Regime.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have noticed that. These posts were from May 25th and May 26th...

angrysoba said:
Hey! Those of you thinking that Pahlavi was about to become the shah of Iran, did you see your hero, Donald "dribbling imbecile" Trump refer to the country as the Islamic Republic of Iran? He wants the country to join the Abraham Accords, which would basically mean confirming the country's leadership.
Click to expand...

angrysoba said:
Is he now contractually obliged to refer to the country as the Islamic Republic of Iran?
That in itself looks like he’s kissing the ring of the Supreme Leader. What a loser!
Click to expand...
And it seems that Vance is at it too...

Andy_Ross said:
JD Vance
@JDVance
I'm seeing a lot of fake information about a potential deal to reopen the Strait and end Iran's nuclear weapons program. First, the Iranians are not receiving any cash, and no funds are being released for simply signing a deal or attending a meeting. The deal is structured to ensure that the US and its allies concerns are prioritized, and that if theIslamic Republic of Iran meets its obligations, then economic benefits will flow to them and to the entire region. This deal has the potential to remake the region and lead to lasting peace.

I've noticed a couple of bizarre things in the reporting over the last few hours. First, people who (rightly) said Donald Trump was a historic president a month ago now criticizing a deal based on unconfirmed media reports. Second, people who say you can't trust a word said by the IRGC who apparently believe anonymously sourced social media posts.

The president is going to get us a good outcome, one way or the other.

link
Click to expand...
So it really does, very strangely, look as though they are going out of their way to be deferential. It really is strange, and I am pretty sure that right wingers heads used to assplode when Obama once referred to the country that way...
 
I'll be interested to see if the deal, if and when it is agreed and the details become clear, is (a) better than the one Obama negotiated and Trump tore up and (b) better than the situation that pertained before Trump launched his invasion for either the US or Iran. Or indeed the rest of the world, given the hit the global economy has taken from the whole ill advised venture.
 
Pixel42 said:
I'll be interested to see if the deal, if and when it is agreed and the details become clear, is (a) better than the one Obama negotiated and Trump tore up and (b) better than the situation that pertained before Trump launched his invasion for either the US or Iran. Or indeed the rest of the world, given the hit the global economy has taken from the whole ill advised venture.
Click to expand...
"Better' depends entirely on whose propaganda you are reading. In the USA it will be presented as "THE BEST DEAL EVER!!!"
 
Pixel42 said:
I'll be interested to see if the deal, if and when it is agreed and the details become clear, is (a) better than the one Obama negotiated and Trump tore up and (b) better than the situation that pertained before Trump launched his invasion for either the US or Iran. Or indeed the rest of the world, given the hit the global economy has taken from the whole ill advised venture.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I am happy that Trump is signing a "deal" and telling his base that he has managed to pull off some unprecedented coup of peace with, his words, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Because at least there is now a chance that the global economy can have some chance of recovery. A worse outcome would be the US following some sunk cost fallacy route and deciding that too much damage has been done to stop doing damage now.

Glad he is thinking of cutting his losses.

Not that anyone will learn that maybe Obama was the one who actually managed to get a good deal after all if they didn't know that already.
 
dudalb said:
TRump failed to accomplish any of his goals when he started the war. I guess he will try to claim a win, but if this is a win I sure as hell don't want to see what a loss looks like.
Click to expand...
Trump wanted an unconditional surrender. This conditional surrender must be reckoned a partial success.

Although I think Trump was hoping Iran would be the one doing the surrendering.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Trump could have gotten a much better deal before he started bombing, that is obvious.
Click to expand...
Of course. He could have got a better deal by keeping the JCPOA and did a bit of tub thumping saying he wants more concessions. I don’t think he even tried that. Just decided to unilaterally pull out without using the advantage of an alternative to a negotiated agreement. Stupid “card” play.

The thing is, he is where he is as the result of a bunch of frankly “retarded” decisions (to use the word in vogue with the MAGAbots).

Now he is desperately trying to get himself out of the worst consequences for himself. I hope he manages to do it because he has made things worse for much of the world with the exceptions of some US oil companies and some weapons manufacturers. Everyone else is stuffed but they are mere plebs so they don’t count.
 
JD Vance confirms that Iran could get up to $300 billion in reconstruction funds as part of this deal:

Vice President JD Vance all but confirmed a detail being floated as part of the tentative U.S.-Iran peace deal: Iranian access to $300 billion in reconstruction funds.

Vance was asked by CBS’s Ed O’Keefe Monday morning about whether the rumored detail was true, and he said that it could be possible if Iran adheres to the agreement.

“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf coast coalition, so long as they honor their end of the obligation,” Vance said.
Click to expand...

We were told giving money to Iran was bad and a good reason to vote for Trump because he wouldn't do that:
Ziggurat said:
The best case for Trump is probably what he DIDN'T do.

He didn't get us, or anyone else, into war. He didn't give billions of dollars to Iran. He didn't drive up inflation. And he didn't open our borders to uncontrolled illegal immigration.
Click to expand...

It's fun to look at that checklist now, isn't it? Trump did the first three things with such enthusiasm it's like he couldn't wait to make his supporters look stupid.

In fairness, he probably won't do the fourth thing, but then again, it refers to circumstances that are divorced from reality, so it doesn't really matter.
 
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