2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran and elsewhere in region - News and Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
www.bbc.com

Iran and US agree to conditional two-week ceasefire and opening of Hormuz strait after Trump's threat - follow live

Pakistan says it will host talks between the two sides on Friday. Israel says it supports the ceasefire but it "does not include Lebanon".
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

Oil prices climbed to $111 per barrel on Tuesday, as investors grew increasingly uneasy over Donald Trump’s threat to bomb Iran if ceasefire deal is not reached.

Brent crude rose to about $111 a barrel, while West Texas Intermediate topped $115 – its highest level in a month.

The US president warned Iran that it must agree to a deal by 1am BST on Wednesday and reopen the Strait of Hormuz or be “decimated”.

Markets have been banking on a diplomatic breakthrough, but peace talks have so far made little headway.

“We are back on ⁠a Trump imposed countdown clock and there’s no way to predict with any confidence what will happen,” Kyle Rodda, senior markets analyst at Capital.com, said.

“The more intrepid traders might make a bet one way or the other. Others will look to hedge risk or stay out entirely. But there’s not much market participants can really do but wait and see.”

Equity markets were choppy in overnight trading, with US markets ending down but Asian stocks up. The FTSE 100 opened up 0.1pc on Tuesday morning while the FTSE 250 climbed 0.4pc.
Click to expand...

8:39AM

Iran blocks two Qatari tankers in Strait of Hormuz​

Two Qatari gas tankers that had been cleared to leave through the Strait of Hormuz were turned back by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp, according to Reuters.

The liquefied natural gas vessels, the Al Daayen and Rasheeda, both performed u-turns in the strait after previously being told they could leave the Persian Gulf from Qatar’s Ras Laffan oil depot.

A source told Reuters the ships had been due to depart as part of talks with Iran via Pakistan, but the ships were ordered to halt.

“This was part of an arrangement negotiated as part of talks spearheaded by Pakistan last week,” a source said. The Al Daayen was signalling its destination as China on Monday.
https://twitter.com/x/status/2041174868033511567
View: https://x.com/BashaReport/status/2041174868033511567?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2041174868033511567%7Ctwgr%5E479dc03ab6678a4c75c6abdb2ba08fdf4117b189%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fbusiness%2F2026%2F04%2F07%2Ftrump-iran-war-deadline-ftse-100-markets-oil-price-hormuz%2F
Click to expand...
 
Forest Green said:
Nobody said anything when Russia did it in the middle of an Eastern European winter
Click to expand...
That news received generous attention.
www.aljazeera.com

How Russia’s new tactics pose fresh winter threat to Ukraine

Russia's modified drones are piercing Ukraine's defences at greater rates than before, targeting energy infrastructure.
www.aljazeera.com www.aljazeera.com
apnews.com

Russia’s new energy assault pushes Ukrainians into another winter of blackouts

Millions of Ukrainians are preparing for another winter of blackouts as Russia renews its strikes on the country’s energy grid.
apnews.com apnews.com
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Nobody said anything when Russia did it in the middle of an Eastern European winter, and the difference is Europe will probably send aid for civilians afterwards. Iran has targeted a large perecentage of the world's energy in the Hormuz straight and cluster bombed cities, they have no right to expect anything else.
Click to expand...
Lol, this one is gold. "Hey look ! Tommy's mom didn't told him anything when he stole the candy, why can't I do the same ?!"
You do realize Russia is under sanctions since 2014, with even more from 2022, that US and Europe helps Ukraine militarily, that putin as been condemned as war criminal, that's a bit different than "nobody said anything" when putin bombs civilians infrastructures/energy plants.
The main reasons Ukraine wasn't helped more and enough is because Russia is a nuke power, and that trump came back to power and is now easing the sanctions to his eastern buddy.
Forest Green said:
If that were the case why didn't Iran just agree to stop enriching Uranium?
Click to expand...
Why ? Well maybe some there would like have some nukes to be left alone and not bombed every now and then ?
Like say, North Korea, but it's true that one is far from Israel.
Edit: and there was an agreement anyway, check @Arjen 's post.
 
Last edited:
On JCPOA, Iran did not agree to stop enrichment activity.
And JCPOA itself did not address the other critical components of the nuclear program, including its missile programs and regional proxies.
 
2018 statement by IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano on JCPOA

IAEA Director General's Introductory Remarks at Press Conference | IAEA

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano made the opening remarks at the press conference which took place in the IAEA headquarter on 5th of March.
web.archive.org web.archive.org
As I have said many times, I believe the JCPOA represents a significant gain for verification. The IAEA now has the world’s most robust verification regime in place in Iran. We have had access to all the locations that we needed to visit.

Our inspection work has doubled since 2013. IAEA inspectors now spend 3,000 calendar days per year on the ground in Iran. We have installed some 2,000 tamper-proof seals on nuclear material and equipment.

We have carried out more than 60 complementary accesses and visited more than 190 buildings since JCPOA Implementation Day.

We collect and analyse hundreds of thousands of images captured daily by our sophisticated surveillance cameras in Iran – about half of the total number of such images that we collect throughout the world.

We collect over one million pieces of open source information each month.

All of our activities are supported by state-of-the-art technology, including data collecting and processing systems. Our current verification capability is much stronger than it has ever been.

As of today, I can state that Iran is implementing its nuclear-related commitments. It is essential that Iran continues to do so. If the JCPOA were to fail, it would be a great loss for nuclear verification and for multilateralism.
Click to expand...
US withdrawal from JCPOA in 2018. Short shelf life.
www.haaretz.com

Trump: Netanyahu's speech on Iran deal proves that I was 100% right on Iran deal

'Iran Did Not Come Clean on Its Nuclear Program,' Netanyahu Says, Saying More Than Documents Israel Obtained Prove Nuclear 'Deal Is Based on Lies' AIPAC Praises Speech While J Street Says It Proves Need for Accord With Iran
www.haaretz.com www.haaretz.com
Suzanne Maloney, an expert on Iran at the Brookings Institution, stated that "nothing that Netanyahu has said undercuts the rationale for the [Iran deal]. That deal was predicated on a very clear and broad understanding by all the parties that Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapons program."
Rob Malley, a former senior official in the Obama administration who worked on Middle East policy, expressed a similar view. "For those who have followed the Iranian nuclear file, there is nothing new in Bibi's presentation. All it does is vindicate need for the nuclear deal," he said. Malley added, however, that "the Israeli prime minister has an audience of one: Trump. And he's unfortunately unlikely to reach the same conclusion."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
galgot said:
Lol, this one is gold. "Hey look ! Tommy's mom didn't told him anything when he stole the candy, why can't I do the same ?!"
You do realize Russia is under sanctions since 2014, with even more from 2022, that US and Europe helps Ukraine militarily, that putin as been condemned as war criminal, that's a bit different than "nobody said anything" when putin bombs civilians infrastructures/energy plants.
The main reasons Ukraine wasn't helped more and enough is because Russia is a nuke power, and that trump came back to power and is now easing the sanctions to his eastern buddy.
Click to expand...
I agree that he shouldn't have removed sanctions on Russia. But the fact remains that Iran has been attacking civilian tankers (many of which aren't anything to do with the US) since the start. I'm all for a fair game but if team B walks on the pitch with machetes, I'm not going to complain when team A walks on with AR-15s.
galgot said:
Why ? Well maybe some there would like have some nukes to be left alone and not bombed every now and then ?
Like say, North Korea, but it's true that one is far from Israel.
Edit: and there was an agreement anyway, check @Arjen 's post.
Click to expand...
Don't play the innocent, they're behind nearly every single terror group operating in the region, carrying out proxy attacks all the time, Iran arms and sponsors them while simultaneously claiming to be nothing to do with it. Then when someone starts getting serious against their proxies they lob missile salvos* at civilian areas. You don't do that if all you want is to be 'left alone'.

*And let me ask you what happens when the same missiles are fired by a nuclear Iran and the defender (a very small nation in this case) doesn't know whether they're nuclear or not? Probably far worse than a lack of electrical power.

Everything We Now Know About The Operation To Rescue The F-15E WSO​

www.twz.com

Everything We Now Know About The Operation To Rescue The F-15E WSO

We have gotten many new details about how the high-risk extraction effort deep in Iranian territory went down.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

How A Dusty Strip Deep In Iran Can Be Turned Into A U.S. Special Operations Base In Hours​

www.twz.com

How A Dusty Strip Deep In Iran Can Be Turned Into A U.S. Special Operations Base In Hours

An ex-USAF Special Tactics Squadron member tells how the impromptu airfield in Iran would have been rapidly established and defended.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

Grey Havoc said:
www.bbc.com

Iran and US agree to conditional two-week ceasefire and opening of Hormuz strait after Trump's threat - follow live

Pakistan says it will host talks between the two sides on Friday. Israel says it supports the ceasefire but it "does not include Lebanon".
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
Click to expand...
That is taking it way too far but then we know how Trump likes to exaggerate.
 
Last edited:
Grey Havoc said:
www.bbc.com

Iran and US agree to conditional two-week ceasefire and opening of Hormuz strait after Trump's threat - follow live

Pakistan says it will host talks between the two sides on Friday. Israel says it supports the ceasefire but it "does not include Lebanon".
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

Click to expand...
Could be a sign of a lack of centralized command, so different splinters of the irgc making their own final decisions
 
Forest Green said:
Don't play the innocent, they're behind nearly every single terror group operating in the region, carrying out proxy attacks all the time, Iran arms and sponsors them while simultaneously claiming to be nothing to do with it. Then when someone starts getting serious against their proxies they lob missile salvos* at civilian areas. You don't do that if all you want is to be 'left alone'.
Click to expand...
Shiites? Lol no.
Main sponsors of actual terrorism are on the other side of the gulf.
 
Ainen said:
And Hamas office is located in...
Hamas was supported by Iran, yes. Hamas also directly fought Iranian operatives just a few years ago.
B/c for starters, beginning with obvious, Hamas is sunni, islamic brotherhood aligned organization.
Click to expand...
That's the thing with arming and supporting terror groups and why you shouldn't, but Iran did.
en.wikipedia.org

Iranian support for Hamas - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Since the early 1990s, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been sponsoring Hamas with military aid, training and financial aid.[1] Iran has remained a key patron of Hamas, providing them with funds, weapons, and training.[2][3][4]

According to a 2020 US Department of State report, Iran provides about $100 million annually to Palestinian militant groups, including Hamas.[5] As of 2023, according to an Israeli security source, Iran had significantly increased its funding for Hamas to $350 million a year.[6]
Click to expand...

How Hamas secretly built a 'mini-army' to fight Israel​


So this notion or implication that Iran has just been minding its own business the whole time is comical.
 
Forest Green said:
That's the thing with arming and supporting terror groups and why you shouldn't, but Iran did.
Click to expand...
Everyone in this region does. Iranian proxies are - were, - less about terror and more controllable than most others.
Furthermore, there's reason all Iranian proxies follow same pattern - opressed state-like groups, born out of foreign invasions(by whom?).
Note, that of the two your examples, one is effectively false(Hamas) and shows typical(western) lack of basic research, and the other (Hez) was borne as a shiite resistance movement to ethnic cleansings, and became prominent when they managed to defeat israeli(good guys) invasion.
Forest Green said:
So this notion or implication that Iran has just been minding its own business the whole time is comical.
Click to expand...
Iran never was just minding its own business, on day two when they tried (and no, iranian revolution wasn't about building world khalifate) they got Saddamed. But it was consistently attacked first, and with far more civilian blood (to the point one can't help but wonder if Iranian leadership values their own blood at all).
You can't run with Putlers and then justify invasions. Russia also attacked under cover of charter article 51, you're at the exact same spot here. And yes, Russia did rather ugly energy campaign a few months ago(and failed to achieve its means, wasting missiles which could've been far better used supressing drone production) - it isn't something to learn from.
 
Arjen said:
2018 statement by IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano on JCPOA

IAEA Director General's Introductory Remarks at Press Conference | IAEA

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano made the opening remarks at the press conference which took place in the IAEA headquarter on 5th of March.
web.archive.org web.archive.org

US withdrawal from JCPOA in 2018. Short shelf life.
www.haaretz.com

Trump: Netanyahu's speech on Iran deal proves that I was 100% right on Iran deal

'Iran Did Not Come Clean on Its Nuclear Program,' Netanyahu Says, Saying More Than Documents Israel Obtained Prove Nuclear 'Deal Is Based on Lies' AIPAC Praises Speech While J Street Says It Proves Need for Accord With Iran
www.haaretz.com www.haaretz.com
Click to expand...

US, European powers express alarm at Iran enriching uranium to 84%​

The U.N. nuclear watchdog found uranium particles enriched to up to 83.7% at Fordow, a site dug into a mountain and the second place where it is continuously enriching uranium to up to 60%. Weapons grade is around 90%.
Click to expand...
 
Ainen said:
Everyone in this region does. Iranian proxies are - were, - less about terror and more controllable than most others.
Click to expand...
:D After reading my post, how can you seriously state that?
Ainen said:
Furthermore, there's reason all Iranian proxies follow same pattern - opressed state-like groups, born out of foreign invasions(by whom?).
Note, that of the two your examples, one is effectively false(Hamas) and shows typical(western) lack of basic research, and the other (Hez) was borne as a shiite resistance movement to ethnic cleansings, and became prominent when they managed to defeat israeli(good guys) invasion.
Click to expand...
Literally everything written above is false.

en.wikipedia.org

1982 Lebanon War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Ainen said:
Iran never was just minding its own business, on day two when they tried (and no, iranian revolution wasn't about building world khalifate) they got Saddamed. But it was consistently attacked first, and with far more civilian blood (to the point one can't help but wonder if Iranian leadership values their own blood at all).
Click to expand...
Like their diplomat assassination campaign?
Ainen said:
You can't run with Putlers and then justify invasions. Russia also attacked under cover of charter article 51, you're at the exact same spot here. And yes, Russia did rather ugly energy campaign a few months ago(and failed to achieve its means, wasting missiles which could've been far better used supressing drone production) - it isn't something to learn from.
Click to expand...
Did Ukraine fire salvos of missiles at Moscow before 2022, or even before 2014, since Russia invaded Crimea then. Was it arming terror groups to murder a few thousand civilians inside Russia before those dates? There was literraly no threat to or violence conducted by Ukraine against Russia or any other state directly or indirectly.
 
From the Daily Telegraph livestream:
The energy shock unleashed by the Iran war is worse than all other oil crises combined, the head of the International Energy Agency (IEA) has warned.

Fatih Birol said the current oil and gas supply squeeze caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz was “more serious than the ones in 1973, 1979 and 2002 together”.

“The world has never experienced a disruption to energy supply of such magnitude,” he said in an interview with France’s Le Figaro newspaper.

He warned that European nations will suffer from soaring oil and gas prices, although he stressed that developing countries were most exposed to higher fuel costs and rising food prices.

Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has cut off around 20pc of the world’s oil and gas supplies since the US and Israel attacked the country in late February.

The 1973 oil crisis was prompted by an embargo by Arab countries in the wake of the Yom Kippur War, while the 1979 crisis followed the Iranian revolution. The 2002 crisis was triggered by surging demand from China and tensions ahead of the Iraq war.

Oil prices climbed to $111 per barrel on Tuesday after Donald Trump threatened to “wipe out” Iran if it did not agree to a ceasefire deal.

The US president has warned Iran that it must agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by 1am BST on Wednesday or be “decimated”.

The FTSE 100 rose 0.3pc on Tuesday morning while the FTSE 250 climbed 0.6pc.
Click to expand...
 
 
Last edited:
Arjen said:
That was five years after US withdrawal from the deal.
Click to expand...
They withdrew sanctions relief because the regime was still sponsoring terror groups and it gave Iran the funds to work of nuclear weapon designs and delivery systems in the mean time. The fact the deal still allowed buried enrichment facilities was also inadequate for the purpose of safeguards.

Additionally:

www.hudson.org

Seven Myths about the Iran Nuclear Deal

View PDF
www.hudson.org www.hudson.org
Myth 6: “The IAEA repeatedly affirmed that it saw no violations of the deal by Iran prior to Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA.”

Reality: Iran blindfolded the IAEA by strictly limiting where it can inspect.

Iran’s violations of its obligations under both the JCPOA and the NPT are well documented. They include the assembly and concealment of the nuclear archive and the possession of undeclared, unexplained nuclear materials. Many of these violations have taken place in locations that Iran concealed from the IAEA, attempted to sanitize before inspection, or prevented the IAEA from inspecting altogether. The IAEA cannot document violations in places it cannot see or access.

Before, during, and after Iran’s “compliance” with the JCPOA, the IAEA reported that, because of Tehran’s refusal to cooperate regarding undeclared nuclear activities and materials, the agency cannot provide assurances that the Iranian nuclear program is peaceful.
Click to expand...
Myth 3: “President Trump’s decision to leave the deal and pursue his maximum pressure policy prompted Iran to increase uranium enrichment levels.”

Reality: Iran did not resume 20 percent enrichment until after President Trump lost the 2020 presidential election.

Iran’s nuclear violations and other escalatory steps toward the United States are not retaliation against Trump; they are negotiating tactics against Biden.

Iran resumed enriching uranium to 20 percent in January 2021, by which time then President-elect Biden had clearly indicated that he would abandon the Trump administration’s maximum pressure policy and would seek a speedy return to the JCPOA framework. While the Biden administration consistently tried to conciliate Iran, Tehran increased enrichment further to 60 percent. During that time its proxies attacked American troops in Syria; its agents attempted to kidnap journalist Masih Alinejad on American soil with the intention, almost certainly, of killing her; and its Qods Force conducted plots to kill former American officials, including, among others, former National Security Advisor John Bolton and Hudson Distinguished Fellow and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Iran is an aggressive power that seeks to undermine the American-led order in the Middle East. A credible military deterrent backed by strong economic and diplomatic pressure is the only way to moderate its behavior. Conciliation from Washington breeds contempt in Tehran.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
:D After reading my post, how can you seriously state that?
Click to expand...
By comparing them with literally everyone else, from Sudan to Syria.
Forest Green said:
Literally everything written above is false.
Click to expand...
And? Look at back story of Hezbollah. If you have a horse in the game, whatever, it doesn't change the original story.
Forest Green said:
Like their diplomat assassination campaign?
Click to expand...
Oh, i wonder who started that particular one. Like, how cars in Tehran with scientists tended to spontaneously blow up through 2010s. Should we call it induced combustion instability, or attacks after all?
Forest Green said:
Did Ukraine fire salvos of missiles at Moscow before 2022, or even before 2014, since Russia invaded Crimea then. Was it arming terror groups to murder a few thousand civilians inside Russia before those dates? There was literraly no threat to or violence conducted by Ukraine against Russia or any other state directly or indirectly.
Click to expand...
Ukrainian nationalists sent proxies to Chechen war, which was in 1994 (and as you may notice - it was inside Russia); 1994 was before 2022 and certainly before 2014. You can't put out one part of the story without touching another.
I won't bother with full story of mutual grudges(burned civilians, cut drinking water and elictricity full decade ago,whatever) - but whatever the case, end result is that even after being invaded and standing on the "right" side, it wages war in regions full of "zhduny", by grabbing whomever was unlucky enough on the streets, in a country barbwired on its entire western border.
I.e. far more hostile to its certified democratic government than oppressed Iranians. Hostile to its own and friendly to invading one.

And no, Iran did not send Hamas to Israel - there's reason it didn't join it there, despite that being clearly Sinwar's intention. Iran did fire only after Israel explicitly and openly started attacking Iranian embassies, which is attack against Iranian territory.

If you justify war - you justify all wars with luggage. There's no split whose luggage is more worthy than other's. UN charter doesn't differ between scourge of their, blessing of our war.
If you justify counter value campaign - you also justify all similar campaigns.
And all these campaigns are as ugly as they're pointless. Old women are as important for strait of Hormuz as they're for frontlines in eastern Ukraine - i.e. they don't matter.
Both are actions of people who failed their direct military responsibilities, and find powerless victims as a way out. And this is of course the irony of it - as it literally has no influence on the flow of war. Strait will remain as choked as it was before, Iran will continue making money from it, gulf will be same hostage as before, and my damn gas tank will grow by another half. Tyvm!
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
I agree that he shouldn't have removed sanctions on Russia. But the fact remains that Iran has been attacking civilian tankers (many of which aren't anything to do with the US) since the start. I'm all for a fair game but if team B walks on the pitch with machetes, I'm not going to complain when team A walks on with AR-15s.
Click to expand...
And where did I wrote the IRGC aren't fucking war criminals themselves ?
Problem is, the more one kills the only peoples in power willing to negotiate, not only from the other side mind you, an Israeli Prime Minister in charge was killed for trying to, the more they are replaced by some more radical and ready do stupid things. Like as with Hamas, Hezbollah etc... and now Iran.
And once only the most fanatics/radicals are left in charge, then one found every justification for bombing the area they control – civilians included – because, you know... ‘war is not a crime’, and eventually level down the place, occupy, or eliminate a neighbour that could be a competitor, making it a failed state that you can bomb at will whenever one needs a 'threat" to justify staying in power.
Does that ring a bell ?
Forest Green said:
Don't play the innocent, they're behind nearly every single terror group operating in the region, carrying out proxy attacks all the time, Iran arms and sponsors them while simultaneously claiming to be nothing to do with it. Then when someone starts getting serious against their proxies they lob missile salvos* at civilian areas. You don't do that if all you want is to be 'left alone'.
Click to expand...
Of course they are, but this is the result of what I wrote above, and anyway doesn't give any valide justifications for nations calling themselves "democratic and civilised" to respond by slaughtering civilians. The main reasons it is seen as "acceptable" by certains is because these civilians are for the most part browner in colour and from another religion.

Forest Green said:
*And let me ask you what happens when the same missiles are fired by a nuclear Iran and the defender (a very small nation in this case) doesn't know whether they're nuclear or not? Probably far worse than a lack of electrical power.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, that nuke they are 2 weeks from getting since like 6 to 8 years now...
And let me ask you what happens if Israel eventually finds itself without enough defences against these conventional missiles, and decides to finish it once and for all (it wouldn't "finish" anything anyway) by nuking Tehran ? Acceptable for you ?

Forest Green said:

​


That is taking it way too far but then we know how Trump likes to exaggerate.
Click to expand...
Understatement of the day.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
They withdrew sanctions relief because the regime was still sponsoring terror groups
Click to expand...
That was not the justification for withdrawal offered by the US in 2018. Previous work on Iran's nuclear weapons was explicitly given as the reason for withdrawal by Trump et al.
www.huffpost.com

Netanyahu's Bombastic Iran Claims Found A Perfect Audience In Trump

Last month's "Iran lied" presentation went over better than the "Bibi Bomb."
www.huffpost.com www.huffpost.com
Then last month, Netanyahu delivered a presentation complete with props and a large screen, on which he spelled out one key message in letters almost as tall as himself: “Iran lied.” He said the display included details from secret documents that proved Tehran had pursued nuclear weapons in defiance of the Iran nuclear deal.

Experts quickly noted that much of the material from the presentation predated the nuclear agreement, which the U.S. and other world powers established in 2015 to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb in exchange for sanction relief.

But U.S. President Donald Trump, an outspoken critic of the deal who watched “a little bit” of Netanyahu’s presentation, interpreted it as confirmation that his views on Iran were “100 percent right.”

Little more than a week later, Trump announced that the U.S. would withdraw from the deal, which is known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The highly controversial move comes in defiance of U.S. allies’ pleas to save the agreement from collapse, and leaves an uncertain future for Iran’s nuclear program. Trump also said he will reinstate the sanctions on Tehran that had been lifted under the JCPOA.

While making the announcement on Tuesday, Trump hailed Netanyahu’s presentation as “definitive proof” that Iran was indeed lying about its nuclear ambitions.

“At the heart of the Iran deal is a fiction, that Iran only desired a peaceful nuclear energy program. Today we have definitive proof that this Iranian promise was a lie,” Trump said. “Last week Israel published intelligence documents, long concealed by Iran, conclusively showing the Iranians’ regime and its history of pursuing nuclear weapons.”

However, just last month, Trump’s own Secretary of State Mike Pompeo testified before Congress that there was no evidence of Iranian noncompliance with the JCPOA.
Click to expand...
I referred to JCPOA when you asked ...
Forest Green said:
If that were the case why didn't Iran just agree to stop enriching Uranium?
Click to expand...
There was a deal in 2018 - JCPOA - and then ...
Forest Green said:
Iran resumed enriching uranium to 20 percent in January 2021
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The US is in a poor position to complain about Iran not adhering to the deal, when the US withdrew from that deal first.
European powers also complained about Iran not adhering to the deal, but they had not withdrawn from the deal.
 
Arjen said:
That was not the justification for withdrawal offered by the US in 2018. Previous work on Iran's nuclear weapons was explicitly given as the reason for withdrawal by Trump et al.
www.huffpost.com

Netanyahu's Bombastic Iran Claims Found A Perfect Audience In Trump

Last month's "Iran lied" presentation went over better than the "Bibi Bomb."
www.huffpost.com www.huffpost.com

I referred to JCPOA when you asked ...

There was a deal in 2018 - JCPOA - and then ...

The US is in a poor position to complain about Iran not adhering to the deal, when the US withdrew from that deal first.
European powers also complained about Iran not adhering to the deal, but they had not withdrawn from the deal.
Click to expand...
I've already referred to that in my post above.

www.hudson.org

Seven Myths about the Iran Nuclear Deal

View PDF
www.hudson.org www.hudson.org
Myth 6: “The IAEA repeatedly affirmed that it saw no violations of the deal by Iran prior to Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA.”

Reality: Iran blindfolded the IAEA by strictly limiting where it can inspect.

Iran’s violations of its obligations under both the JCPOA and the NPT are well documented. They include the assembly and concealment of the nuclear archive and the possession of undeclared, unexplained nuclear materials. Many of these violations have taken place in locations that Iran concealed from the IAEA, attempted to sanitize before inspection, or prevented the IAEA from inspecting altogether. The IAEA cannot document violations in places it cannot see or access.

Before, during, and after Iran’s “compliance” with the JCPOA, the IAEA reported that, because of Tehran’s refusal to cooperate regarding undeclared nuclear activities and materials, the agency cannot provide assurances that the Iranian nuclear program is peaceful.
Click to expand...
Myth 3: “President Trump’s decision to leave the deal and pursue his maximum pressure policy prompted Iran to increase uranium enrichment levels.”

Reality: Iran did not resume 20 percent enrichment until after President Trump lost the 2020 presidential election.

Iran’s nuclear violations and other escalatory steps toward the United States are not retaliation against Trump; they are negotiating tactics against Biden.

Iran resumed enriching uranium to 20 percent in January 2021, by which time then President-elect Biden had clearly indicated that he would abandon the Trump administration’s maximum pressure policy and would seek a speedy return to the JCPOA framework. While the Biden administration consistently tried to conciliate Iran, Tehran increased enrichment further to 60 percent. During that time its proxies attacked American troops in Syria; its agents attempted to kidnap journalist Masih Alinejad on American soil with the intention, almost certainly, of killing her; and its Qods Force conducted plots to kill former American officials, including, among others, former National Security Advisor John Bolton and Hudson Distinguished Fellow and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Iran is an aggressive power that seeks to undermine the American-led order in the Middle East. A credible military deterrent backed by strong economic and diplomatic pressure is the only way to moderate its behavior. Conciliation from Washington breeds contempt in Tehran.
Click to expand...
 
This is what the Huffington Post reported at the time - 2018:
However, just last month, Trump’s own Secretary of State Mike Pompeo testified before Congress that there was no evidence of Iranian noncompliance with the JCPOA.
Click to expand...
I am by now quite used to the US government first saying one thing, then contradicting itself a little later.
 
galgot said:
And where did I wrote the IRGC aren't fucking war criminals themselves ?
Problem is, the more one kills the only peoples in power willing to negotiate, not only from the other side mind you, an Israeli Prime Minister in charge was killed for trying to, the more they are replaced by some more radical and ready do stupid things. Like as with Hamas, Hezbollah etc... and now Iran.
And once only the most fanatics/radicals are left in charge, then one found every justification for bombing the area they control – civilians included – because, you know... ‘war is not a crime’, and eventually level down the place, occupy, or eliminate a neighbour that could be a competitor, making it a failed state that you can bomb at will whenever one needs a 'threat" to justify staying in power.
Does that ring a bell ?
Click to expand...
Tankers were targeted by Iran in the first week.

As regards whether targeting power infrastructure is a war crime, it depends on purpose. If the purpose is so that a civilian population freezes to death during an Eastern European winter with double digit negative temperatures, then it might well be. If the purpose is to curtail a criminal strikes on tankers by making military production difficult, with zero risk of population freezing to death*, then it isn't.

*Hence infrastructure is not indespensable to survival of civilian population.

Starvation of civilians as a method of combat is prohibited. It is therefore prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless, for that purpose, objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works.
Click to expand...

So you can see 'drinking water' is mentioned, Iran has broken that rule. It claims US/Israel did the same but they have both denied it, Iran has not.

A power station or, more generally, the power supply can be of fundamental importance to the civilian population. Any attack should take account of this aspect.
Click to expand...
I.e. can be if they have -20degC temperatures. They don't in Iran.
galgot said:
Of course they are, but this is the result of what I wrote above, and anyway doesn't give any valide justifications for nations calling themselves "democratic and civilised" to respond by slaughtering civilians. The main reasons it is seen as "acceptable" by certains is because these civilians are for the most part browner in colour and from another religion.
Click to expand...
Show me deliberate slaughter of civilians please? The only such I see is Iran killing 30,000+ protestors and bombarding cities indiscriminately.
galgot said:
Ah yes, that nuke they are 2 weeks from getting since like 6 to 8 years now...
And let me ask you what happens if Israel eventually finds itself without enough defences against these conventional missiles, and decides to finish it once and for all (it wouldn't "finish" anything anyway) by nuking Tehran ? Acceptable for you ?
Click to expand...
84% enriched Uranium is not for glow in the dark toys.

Missiles are getting through right now, cluster munition released at high altitude, Iran hasn't been nuked. Maybe don't fire the missiles also... and don't give terror groups $350m dollars per year and act all surprised when they don't spend it on team building exercises and new business cards... and then have your proxies join in (Hezbollah)... and strike tankers (Houthis)... and then fire the alleged missiles after the leader of one of the above is killed.

When they find defending difficult, then they go on the offensive, as demonstrated here.

galgot said:
Understatement of the day.
Click to expand...
Yep, agreed on that.

Arjen said:
This is what the Huffington Post reported at the time - 2018:

I am by now quite used to the US government first saying one thing, then contradicting itself a little later.
Click to expand...
If they refuse to co-operate as regards undeclared sites, the 'no evidence' part is meaningless, hence:
Before, during, and after Iran’s “compliance” with the JCPOA, the IAEA reported that, because of Tehran’s refusal to cooperate regarding undeclared nuclear activities and materials, the agency cannot provide assurances that the Iranian nuclear program is peaceful.
Click to expand...

The purpose of withdrawal from the JCPOA was to get a better deal that avoided this issue by allowing checks at undisclosed sites, which was a problem criticised from the start.


The delay could be up to 24 days, which was never going to provide for proper verifiction.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2041522252668145908
View: https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2041522252668145908?s=20
 
Last edited:
Hamas: (I do not consider this organization to be a terrorist organization. But someone say)
theintercept.com

Blowback: How Israel Went From Helping Create Hamas to Bombing It

Hamas wants to destroy Israel, right? But as Mehdi Hasan shows in a new video on blowback, Israeli officials admit they helped start the group.
theintercept.com theintercept.com
www.analystnews.org

How Israel helped prop up Hamas for decades | Analyst News

What is Hamas, and why has Israel deliberately enabled its existence for years?
www.analystnews.org www.analystnews.org

ISIS: (I think the ISIS rarely apologizes. As far as I know, they have never apologized to Iran.)

Israel forgives Daesh for attack following ‘apology’​

 
Forest Green said:
If they refuse to co-operate as regards undeclared sites, the 'no evidence' part is meaningless, hence:
Click to expand...
Mike Pompeo was US Secretary of State at the time, testifying to Congress, one month before US withdrawal from JCPOA, with the US President declaring Netanyahu's presentation convinced him to withdraw. Meaningless?
This earlier Haaretz quote:
Suzanne Maloney, an expert on Iran at the Brookings Institution, stated that "nothing that Netanyahu has said undercuts the rationale for the [Iran deal]. That deal was predicated on a very clear and broad understanding by all the parties that Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapons program."
Rob Malley, a former senior official in the Obama administration who worked on Middle East policy, expressed a similar view. "For those who have followed the Iranian nuclear file, there is nothing new in Bibi's presentation. All it does is vindicate need for the nuclear deal," he said. Malley added, however, that "the Israeli prime minister has an audience of one: Trump. And he's unfortunately unlikely to reach the same conclusion."
Click to expand...
 
Arjen said:
Mike Pompeo was US Secretary of State at the time, testifying to Congress, one month before US withdrawal from JCPOA, with the US President declaring Netanyahu's presentation convinced him to withdraw. Meaningless?
This earlier Haaretz quote:
Click to expand...
The US does/did not have the intelligence Israel has in Iran, and it is entirely feasible the US was reliant on Israel for intelligence on Iran's nuclear program.
The JCPOA being built on the premise of Iran pursuing a nuclear weapon, does not automatically mean Iranian violations of the JCPOA are excused.
When Israel provided evidence of Iranian violations, the relevant US intelligence agencies examined and confirmed it, and updated their intelligence assessment that Iran was in violation of the JCPOA. Which they haven't done until then because of lacking intelligence on the subject.
Iran chose to violate the terms of the JCPOA. The withdrawal from JCPOA was thus an Iranian decision, first and foremost.
 
Big_Zukini said:
When Israel provided evidence of Iranian violations, the relevant US intelligence agencies examined and confirmed it, and updated their intelligence assessment that Iran was in violation of the JCPOA.
Click to expand...
From the Haaretz article quoted earlier:
his [Netanyahu's] critics emphasized that his speech didn't include information about violations of the nuclear deal, and only dealt with information from the years before it was negotiated
Click to expand...
In the end, who do you believe?
 
Arjen said:
In the end, who do you believe?
Click to expand...
Notice I made no mention of Netanyahu or other politicians. I referenced only the intelligence.
If you look in to that "speech", you will see it was the presentation of intelligence (parts) which later went to the relevant intelligence agencies.
What they examined was not the speech, but the intelligence itself.
I have no reason to doubt the validity of this intelligence given how it retains coherence with Iran's demonstrated actions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom