Once again, Iran
Commenter “physicsguy” writes:
… [W]e have:
“Trump has set a final offer on the table with his minimum demands while pointing a gun at the IRGC’s temple: “Sign or die.” ”
And we’ve seen this same scenario of “final offer” multiple times for the past 7 weeks with no “sign or die” result happening. So why believe it this time? The Iranians just keep stringing it out
I think many of us (including me) share at least some of that impatient and uncertain feeling of unease. Why wouldn’t we? The outcome is uncertain and the propaganda around this enormous. Everyone reporting on the possibilities or probabilities has an agenda. Most of the agenda is anti-Trump.
Last night I was thinking about the need for patience. As physicsguy says, it’s been something like seven weeks since the ceasefire began. In the culture in which we live, that seems like a long time to wait while seemingly being jerked back and forth. But is it a long time, really? I submit that it is not, especially considering the stakes and the players.
Now, you may think – as I sometimes do – that there shouldn’t be negotiations at all with this entity. But I know I don’t have the full story. I strongly suspect (without actually knowing) that the reasons for the negotiations are as follows: (1) to reset the clock on the war for purposes of the need for Congress’ approval (2) intelligence gathering and planning (3) turning up the economic screws and letting the Iranian leadership fester in the problems that result (4) giving the Gulf States a needed rest; and (5) waiting to get what we want – the open Straits and the nuclear material – and then following up with more regime-weakening moves. The latter could definitely involve Israeli action, probably behind the scenes.
In the past, the only war endings that didn’t take a lot of time were situations in which one party surrendered unconditionally. Otherwise, when for example an armistice was involved, it ordinarily took many many months to iron things out. I’m not going to take the time to analyze each case, and often the peace achieved wasn’t on terms that were so great, but seven weeks is very short compared to the examples that come to mind (Versailles, Korea, Vietnam). For Korea, for example, Google AI says, “Negotiations for the armistice spanned over two years (1951-1953), the longest negotiated armistice in history.”
I don’t think there’s any chance of these talks going on that long. But at what point Trump will run out of patience I don’t know. It could happen any day now, or it could go on for another month or two. As a society we lack the patience for any more. Perhaps we lack the patience for even seven weeks.
If I had a dime for every headline I’ve seen lately with things like “disastrous deal” and “Trump surrenders,” I’d have a fair amount of extra cash. This is something to remember:
I hope people understand what’s happening because it’s been the same story over and over again.
The Islamic Republic and their allies leak their preferred details as if they are agreed to western sources. Then when U.S. refuses to agree to those absurd terms and insists we… https://t.co/3bU7bf1LUO
— AG (@AGHamilton29) May 25, 2026
The whole message is this:
I hope people understand what’s happening because it’s been the same story over and over again.
The Islamic Republic and their allies leak their preferred details as if they are agreed to western sources. Then when U.S. refuses to agree to those absurd terms and insists we stick to the deal that had already been under discussion, they claim the U.S. is backing out of the deal.
Then they blame America or Israeli influence for the lack of a deal instead of The Islamic Republic making unreasonable demands for a settlement after they lost the military fight and are facing an economic crisis.
We saw the same thing with Gaza repeatedly.
And Trump himself has warned about that, for what it’s worth – in his own characteristic braggadocio style:
I laugh at all of the Dumocrats, RINOS, and Fools who know nothing about the potential deal I am making with Iran, things that haven’t even been negotiated yet, weak and ineffective people like failed Senator Thom Tillis (Soon out of office!), Bill Cassidy, who just suffered a massive Primary loss, really bad Congressman Thomas Massie, a major sleazebag who lost in a landslide to a great American Patriot (Endorsed by “TRUMP”) after showing tremendous disloyalty to his Party (and Country!), and almost all Dumocrats, people that have totally lost their way, constantly supporting bad policy and even worse candidates, but are constantly critical of each and every fantastic win I have. These people should go home and rest, they do nothing but create division and loss. In other words, they are losers! The deal with Iran will either be a great and meaningful one, or there will be no deal. It will be the exact opposite of the JCPOA disaster negotiated by the failed Obama Administration, which was a direct and open path to a Nuclear Weapon for Iran. No, I don’t do deals like that! President DJT
Trump is responding to this sort of thing:
Having started something he cannot finish, the US president, egged on by Israel’s warmonger-in-chief, Benjamin Netanyahu, has boxed himself into a corner. Either he resumes the illegal bombing of Iran on an even bigger scale, brazenly threatening war crimes in hopes of forcing surrender; or else he accepts a negotiated compromise that falls embarrassingly short of his initial aims, including eliminating Iran’s nuclear programme, and leaves an angry, more hardline, strategically strengthened regime in power. …
A peace deal, with add-ons, that is broadly in line with Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear pact with Tehran, which Trump foolishly wrecked and is now the most Iran seems willing to offer, would rightly be counted an abject Trump failure. It would represent a landmark US strategic defeat with significant implications for the global contest with China and Russia. And any deal that left the regime charging transit fees in the strait of Hormuz would be utterly humiliating. No amount of spin could conceal such a presidency-defining calamity.
You can feel the author’s excitement at the prospect.
Of course, The Guardian, voice of the Euro Wankers, not content with surrendering their own country to Islam.
How’s that working out for Sir Kier?
I think you nailed it Neo. Trump will take his time, letting the economic pressure on Iran continue to build, at already intolerable levels, while his team (and allies??) try to find a meaningful leader that can be worked with, a la Venezuela.
I’m a type A, so impatience is my middle name, but I’m willing to give him time, so long as it doesnt cost us the midterms.
“You can feel the author’s excitement at the prospect.” BINGO
Simon should fellate a cactus.
The demMEDIA are one of the biggest providers of divisive statements designed to undermine Trump, and/or his policies. Iran is counting on their propaganda to extend negotiations through to the mid-terms in hopes of applying pressure on Trump. Nothing new under the (democrats FIRST) Sun.
Simon and the entire crew at the Guardian are nitwits.
Dimsdale is very much like monbiot for which the word moonbat was coined
Its striking how many flawed premises you can put in one post, the camel corps of sir richard dalton and other chathamists are like bourbons they have learned little
They grovel to xi while they pretend to do so, a cynic would say lloyds bank is shaping some of this commentary
I fail to understand Trump’s leverage here. What other options is he able (and willing) to take that he hasn’t taken already? Are there really any other significant targets remaining that Iran would value enough to give up their uranium and their leverage over Hormuz? I don’t know. Maybe.
If my hunch about leverage is correct, then Trump is going to get the best bad deal available and try to sell it with bluster. Kind of like this:
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5893185-trump-pompeo-iran-deal-criticism/
CC™-R:
Here are some clues: the blockade continues, Iran’s economy is obliterated, their oil production capability is progressively degraded.
Try to pay attention.
@Bauxite: I fail to understand Trump’s leverage here. What other options is he able (and willing) to take that he hasn’t taken already? Are there really any other significant targets remaining that Iran would value enough to give up their uranium and their leverage over Hormuz? I don’t know. Maybe.
Clearly you don’t.
However, back in the real world it’s obvious that Trumnp could destroy most of Iran’s power and oil production with a week or two of intense bombing.
As we have done in past wars. And so have other nations.
Trump is holding back for the sake of a future Iran and so the US doesn’t damage global energy supplies.
“No amount of spin could conceal such a presidency-defining calamity.”
That brings to mind Joe’s Afghanistan withdrawal.
I wonder, a bit, how Simon felt about that disaster.
And if he donated to Joe and/or Kamala’s campaigns.
(Not that that would be legal, of course.)
“the reasons for the negotiations …”:
Your list of 5 reasons makes total sense to me!
I do wish America wasn’t so divided, was more patriotic — and wiser! — so that the pain of higher gas ( et al) prices was more acceptable.
Hopefully, the spirit that animated Ronald Reagan is quietly whispering into the ‘ear’ of Trump’s unconscious…. a reminder that at base, a good strategy comes down to, “We win… they lose.”
huxley – You’re entirely too smart to be drinking that deeply from the Kool-Aid.
You admit that Trump isn’t willing to do the things that the “real world” knows it’s “obvious” he could do. Well, if he’s not willing to do something, it’s not leverage. It’s equally “obvious” in the “real world” that Trump could launch a ground invasion, or even nuke Tehran, but everyone knows he’s not going to do those things, so they do not give him leverage over the regime. Same difference.
The Iranian regime has a pretty good idea what Trump is and isn’t willing to do. It’s not going to cave because it is “obvious” that Trump could theoretically do something that both he and they know he’s never actually going to do.
The Iranian regime also knows that blockading Hormuz hurts the US in general and Republican midterm prospects in particular even while it also hurts them. If the Iranian regime believed that the US blockade was going to cause them significant damage sooner than it causes the US enough pain for Trump to cry uncle and agree to a bad deal, they would be offering better terms. If that’s right, the only move we have is to wait them out, show them they’re wrong about how long we’re willing to bear the oil price pain of our own blockade, and hope that our blockade really does harm the regime enough that it either collapses or decides to make a deal to our liking.
If you’re seeing something I’m missing, please point it out.
Since I’m at the top of this post, I will admit that I have become impatient. And many others here have counciled me to be less so. And so has Trump. I appreciate that.
Then just before coming here I see that the Navy just took out two Iranian fast boats attempting to lay mines, and a SAM site that was targeting our planes. The IRGC is not serious about any of this.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/josephchalfant/2026/05/25/us-forces-launch-self-defense-strikes-n2676629
One aspect that I don’t see mentioned much, is that Trump is also seeking to manipulate the internal politics of Iran. He wants some to gain power and influence, some of the negotiators perhaps, and others to lose it, the IRGC in particular. We aren’t dealing with a country that possesses a unified ruling power, we ruined that. Folks warn that the IRGC will never surrender and will lie, and yes, that is so. But we can make that attitude detrimental to the IRGC and reward those who are more reasonable. It is a tricky strategy, but I think it is part of the play.
In any case, I am not going to worry about things that I can’t control and that are out of sight. Trump’s requirements are rather simple, and I don’t think he is going to give them up. It is a beautiful day here, I’m enjoying the weather.
Is the IRGG getting tired of the FO loop they are in?
Truth is I’m not all that certain that FO is the Twelver vocabulary.
Time to introduce a new concept?
Barry Meislin:
I guess they will never know what is killing them. Tough being a 7th century warrior in the 21st century. Timmy from Quom isn’t coming out of that well. Did Lassie know all along?
On this Memorial Day, let’s not forget that President Trump doesn’t want to spill American blood unnecessarily!
I think “TACO” is a Democrat talking point.* Trump _Always_ Chickens Out?? Can you say Suleimani, Venezuela op, original Iran op…?
*Or, alternatively, he’s a reckless, feckless warmonger!
Barry.
Agreed/ And see Wretchard’s Three Conjectures. Given enough time, it’s inevitable and will result, among other things, in the deaths of tens of millions of Muslims. Also inevitable.
If Trump is successful here, it will delay the Final Accounting. But only that.
CC™-R is always ready to surrender, to Progressives, to Twelvers, but never to The Great Orange Whale. It’s a clue to what CC™-R values.
If the Iranians (i.e, IRG) were smart they would just agree to all of TRump’s demands.
Why?
Because as soon as the demonrats gain control of the White House and Congress, Iran will be free to do whatever it chooses, including violating all agreements they signed with Trump.
They know that the Dems are more apt to send them a few plane loads of US $$$ cash than to force them to abide by any agreement they signed with Trump.
This is a slam dunk.
om – As is par for the course, your comment is completely absurd. I’m not suggesting surrender to anyone. I’m merely noticing what Trump is doing, which many around here don’t seem to be willing to do.
Iran has leverage because it can close Hormuz at will and manipulate world oil prices. Iran has leverage because it has demonstrated that is willing to take out the oil, gas, and desalination facilities of our gulf allies, causing our gulf allies to pressure us not to resume active attacks on Iran.
What is our leverage? We’re going to threaten to destroy Iran’s oil facilities? Ok, but they don’t believe we’ll do it because it will hurt us by spiking oil prices and it will cause pain with our allies because Iran will retaliate by destroying Saudi and UAE facilities. We’re going to destroy Iran’s power plants? How much would the regime really care if its people are without power? And think of the propaganda victories the regime would win as the western press filled with story after story of patients dying in Tehran hospitals for lack of power. So, no. We’re not going to destroy power plants or oil facilities and Iran knows it. That’s not leverage.
Our only leverage is our own Hormuz blockade, which turns off the funding flow to Iran, but also spikes oil prices and hurts us. And the supposed pressure point after which Iran would allegedly exhaust its storage capacity and have to begin capping wells was two weeks ago, and still no movement from them.
So tell me why Iran isn’t holding a stronger hand than us right now. Seriously.
If Iran thinks it can hold out without oil revenue longer than Trump can bear the political pain of higher oil prices and an unresolved conflict, they have no incentive to offer acceptable terms. In fact, if they think they can hold out another few months, they have a huge incentive to do so, cause Trump as much political pain as possible, and bet that he’ll agree to a bad deal to get the whole thing over before the mid-terms.
So Trump has very limited options: (i) change the leverage (e.g., demonstrate that we’re willing to do something that Iran thinks we won’t do); or (ii) make a bad deal and count on his showmanship to sell it as a victory.
I think he’s chosen (ii), and I think that a lot of people around here are easy marks.
And if anyone has a rosier point of view, or can tell me how I’m wrong without ad hominem about “CC” or “great orange whale,” I’d love to see it.
CC™-R gives the Iranian “capabilities” full veracity. You don’t need to read further than his second paragraph. LOL
He will never surrender to a President Trump, but to anyone else, yes.
I suppose that it is inevitable that the commentariat here and elsewhere is full of people making predictions about the future based on their perceptions of current events. Predictions are merely opinions looking forward and both are like noses; everybody has one. Of course, some noses are more sensitive than others and some noses are more attractive than others, but they are still noses and none are perfect in form or function. It is, in the end, fun and games for us, while the ones who know aren’t really telling. Meanwhile, I continue to hope for the best but prepare for the worst. Semper paratus as the Coasties say. Or more specifically, si vis pacem, para bellum. And I do hope that my store of para is sufficient for the possible bellum.
“What is our leverage?”, he asks, while Mojtaba hasn’t been seen in either public or contemporaneous photo/video evidence since late February, but is presumed to be living well if very cautiously deep underground, never to emerge again.
O yes, surely, the question to be asked, what indeed is our leverage! For we have no leverage.
I see one reasonable answer from Steve, and his point is that maybe there are things going on that we don’t know about. I’m with you. I sure hope there’s a lot more going on than what we know, because what we know doesn’t look good.
om – I have never seen you post an actual argument, just MAGA cliches.
sdferr – The current Iranian leader hasn’t been seen in public. So what? Why does that give us leverage? Why does that motivate Iran to agree to our terms? The new Supreme Leader is going to cave and give up Iran’s nuclear program and open Hormuz because he’s sad about not being able to go out in public? Nope. Sorry.
And if you’re suggesting that the new Supreme Leader is incapacitated, how does that give us leverage? You don’t think they’ll just appoint another new Supreme Leader if the Israelis get this guy? Really?
See? No leverage! Q.E.D.!
CC™-R:
I continue to highlight your dogged pursuit of The Great Orange Whale, that isn’t a MAGA cliche. You are the poster child of malevolent monomania.
I agree with your five points. Seems clear to me that Trump is fully aware that a deal is not possible with muzzies nor commies… let’s just say those with no honor whatsoever. The Persians have been disarmed and beaten down for almost fifty years, so that dough will take some time to rise. In the meantime, why not play the muzzie game right back in the faces of their oppressors… let them bastards dangle and kick for a while before they finally choke out. Art of the deal indeed.
om – Once again, you have no argument, only insults and cliches. This is getting embarrassing. Even Trump has an actual argument every once and a while.
Information about the MoU being worked on (based on leaks at this point) should receive the same skepticism as any other reporting about something President Trump has supposedly said or done. Some/most is propaganda from Iran/Iran sympathetic sources, some from anti-Trump sources. Even the administration sources are in the form of leaks that likely are bureaucrats critical of Trump or critical of any effort to resolve the conflict diplomatically.
It appears that most of what we “know” about the MoU is Iran’s version.
President Trump has been consistent throughout the conflict about Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. The US goals when entering the conflict were (1)eliminating the potential of an Iranian nuclear weapon, (2)elimination of Iran’s long/medium/short range ballistic missile production as well as drone production and (3)eliminating Iran’s support use of terrorist proxies in the region.
We’ve severely degraded 2 and 3, but 1 is the issue the President has been the most adamant about.
Mark Dubowitz of the FDD was on Dan Senor’s podcast recently and pointed out a larger issue than the 1000 lbs of 60% enriched uranium. According to him, there are several thousand more pounds of uranium enriched to 3.6%. Why should we be as concerned about this uranium?
In the process of enriching uranium to weapons grade, 75% of the effort is enriching to 3.6%. It only takes an additional 15% to enrich to 60%, and only 3% to enrich to weapons grade.
The IAEA was warning the world that Iran had been enriching beyond the 3-5% limit and it was only weeks away from enriching to weapons grade.
President Trump realized the critical nature of what had been happening. I don’t think he will settle for anything less than the destruction/removal of the material. Even diluting the uranium down to 3%, would only buy a few years time before Iran could again have weapons grade uranium.
I don’t think the President is going to allow Iran, at minimum, to retain possession of the material enriched to 60%.
What should be the greatest concern is why the western governments are so ambivalent about this. Iran is not North Korea. Iran with a nuclear weapon raises the threat significantly that a nuclear weapon will be detonated at some point, and the resulting chain as other nations respond in kind.
Bauxite:
Turtler has destroyed your “arguments” so many times that it isn’t worthwhile to assume you have an honest argument when the president is involved.
That is the bed you have made since 2016. You have become a caricature, CC™-R (risible).
What will you do in January 2029? He won’t be the president then, Ahab.
Brian E:
Thank you for the reminder about what is at stake with Iran.
CC™-R can’t seem to remember why this all began (thank you BHO (sarc)).
om – If by “destroy,” you mean insult and bluster his way through a 5,000 word post, than yeah, you got it. And I doubt the spittle on turtler’s screen had dried to this day. 🙂
Brian E – How does Trump bring this about? I know the stakes. You know the stakes. The issue is how to make it happen. Simply resolving to not make a bad deal is not a strategy.
A** handed to him multiple times by Turtler and CC™-R acts like the Black Knight.
Maroon.
Comedy on Tuesday.
“How does Trump bring this about? I know the stakes. You know the stakes.” -Bauxite
President Trump this morning posted “The Enriched Uranium (Nuclear Dust!) will either be immediately turned over to the United States to be brought home and destroyed or, preferably, in conjunction and coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran, destroyed in place or at another acceptable location, with the Atomic Energy Commission, or its equivalent, being witness to this process and event.”
The Islamic regime has said they won’t even begin talks about the uranium until a future date.
Which do you believe and why? President Trump has said the negotiations are going well, with only 5% left to agree on. What do you suppose is the “5% left to agree on”?
You and I are drawing conclusions with almost no actual knowledge of what is going on. Do you agree that most of the reports at this point about what is contained in the MoU is slanted to the Iranian perspective?
The President is balancing global oil prices on one hand while achieving the objectives of removing/destroying the enriched uranium. As a bonus, opening the Strait.
If the President can achieve opening the strait and the removal/destruction of the 60% enriched uranium and some level of monitoring, would you consider the conflict a success or failure?
I would suggest we need to reconsider what was achievable, given the constraints put on the conflict at the beginning. Part of the Mossad plan to topple the Islamic regime was using the Iraqi Kurds as the military ground force to go against the IRGC. There was no second option. But that was opposed by the Persians and the Arab Gulf States– and by extension the US. We don’t know if that would have worked, but with Israel providing air support it may have been viable– except it would have required supplying missile defense capabilities to the Kurds. Would that have resulted in the Kurds defending against both Iraqi and IRGC forces?
Regime change in the short or medium term doesn’t seem to be possible.
Why do we assume that destroying the energy infrastructure, oil facilities, other physical infrastructure would result in the IRGC collapse? No doubt they all have generators and facilities to continue operation, while the Iraqi citizens suffer even more.
The continued blockade and economic strangulation probably has the best option as at some point, the Artesh would likely oppose the IRGC for survival.
But then we have allies like Qatar who have considered offering Iran a “loan” equaling the $8-12 billion in frozen Iranian assets held in Qatar. Or the possibility China could be “prepaying” for oil held in the blockade. This would lengthen the time of economic collapse.
While we’re talking about the Arab Gulf states, it’s likely they’re opposed to restarting full scale operations.
You might criticize the administration for not gaming all of these twists and turns to the conflicts, but at some point the decision had to be made to go after the uranium.
I’m going to suggest that the bluster of the Islamic regime is for internal consumption and the President will achieve his goal of retrieving/destroying the 60% uranium. All in all, a success, but not as satisfying as the regime falling– which could happen in the longer term.
What is unfolding may be the longer term strategy. Targeted strikes on the tiny boats and coastal missile installations while maintaining the slightly fictional ceasefire.
Refined uranium is likely not available but raw material is as good for a dirty bomb or missile (the latter was on an episode of jag) more than 20 years ago
This is the part that isnt spelled out reducing the irgcs compliment aa well as the basij is a good thing without damaging civilian infrastructure dont you think unless you think there is another way to cut the gordian knot im all ears
Iranian kurds were betrayed back in 1975 and 1991 and they have a weaker presence in the society like the baloch (which the iraqis employed in various capacities)
Why we suspected ramzi yousef of being state sponsored) perhaps we were mistaken on that point
Again who is running the regime and to what degree, we kept being told the junior ayatollah but no proof is given
Again the sourcing of the officials
No deal with the IRGC will outlast Trump’s administration, unless Vance, Hegseth or some such are elected. And….I’m not sure about them. No amount of iron-clad promises will last from the next dem POTUS election to his inauguration.
If the IRGC or it’s religious/cultural lookalike remains in power, no deal is worth the time to write it down.
The “uranium as a basis for a dirty bomb” myth just won’t die.
It is very very expensive to enrich.
It is not particularly toxic and is not particularly dangerous from radiation or radiological contamination.
Other things are much more deadly for a much lower cost.
Stop the stupidity or is it willfull ignorance?
Uranium is about as heavy as lead and like lead is a chemically toxic metal. Lead bullets are deadly but high explosive, incenderiary materials, or poison gas/nerve gas are the materials of choice that militaries fill warheads with to have the most lethal destructive terminal effects. Not a warhead of solid lead or uranium.
Use your brain.
I think what we see here are two sides misunderstanding the other. The IRGC has seen the threats Trump made to destroy the infrastructure (Bridges and Power) and seems cognizant that it could be done with minimal threat to American forces. They know they would do that and more to Israel or the US if they could and at 10 or a 100 times the cost, they do not fight limited wars other than due to the limitations of resources. So, to the IRGC, this unwillingness reads as cowardice or inability. Conversely, Trump sees that we COULD easily level Iran and expects the heads in Iran to act rationally like someone performing a real estate transaction and take the loss when clearly outmatched. Honestly, I see no way in which this ends well for Iran unless a miracle occurs and somehow the IRGC/ Mullahs are deposed. If we balk at the destruction, Israel can not and will not. Iranian Nuclear weapons are a direct threat to Israel, and given the missiles used to try and attack Diego Garcia ALL of Europe and much of the UK. The cowardice of the UK and western European countries totally comes from their utter inability to deal with the issue. None of them can project force to any useful degree so they just sit on the sideline mimicking Sgt Schultz of Hogan’s Heroes. It’s a poor precedent from MacBeth, but if it were done, it is best it were done quickly. Even though Israel is very discriminating in its targeting, we are still better at that than anyone in the world.
The trouble is I keep hearing the voice of Ralph Kramden “This is the last time, Alice. The last time.”
The nice thing about the enriched uranium is that once out of Iranian hands, it’s not necessary to go on trusting them about it.
Both sides are of course acutely aware of this. If they keep it they can cheat and pick up where they left off, if they don’t have it they have to start over.
Tregonsee314:
I don’t think Trump believes the Iranian leaders are rational. He’s hoping for some who might be, but I don’t think he trusts that he has found any. Rubio is also well aware of their apocalyptic frame of mind. Please see this post of mine on the subject, especially the parts about Rubio.
The problem is the regime won’t surrender and the Gulf states won’t fight even if attacked again. For better or worse POTUS is attempting to create a new reality in the region where the expanded states of the Abraham Accords maintain regional security as NATO was originally intended for European security. In my view, allowing the Iranian regime to survive makes their ultimate demise more difficult if not impossible. The pressure needs to be placed on the Gulf states in order to pressure or end the Iranian regime. Muslims fight other muslims all the time but they’re not inclined to fight with US and Israel against a regime they hate as much as we do.
Crasey, you make a legitimate point. Add to the odd circumstances is the Pakistan deployment of forces to Saudi Arabia.
Ground Troops – 8,000 – 13,000; Fighter Jets – 16–20 aircraft, mostly JF-17 Thunder; Air Defense Systems – HQ-9 systems (Chinese-made) medium-to-long range surface-to-air missile system; Drones – Two squadrons; Support Aircraft – Included in the jet deployment.
I can see the soldiers as having value, and the HQ-9 systems would help against drones and cruise missiles but ineffective against ballistic missiles.
Are the Pakistan forces protection against the IRGC or against potential backlash inside Saudi Arabia to Islamists unhappy that the Saudis are aligned with the US? Are they part of forces to help the Saudis make a decision to deny US access to their bases if the war heats up?
Qatar has offered a loan to Iran of the frozen assets they hold of approximately $8-12 billion. What? Sending a lifeline to the IRGC to send more missiles/drones to countries other than Qatar if the conflict begins in even a limited form?
The “dirty bomb” doesn’t have to be “effective”, whatever that means in physical terms. It only has to be scary.
The other thing we need to consider is that Iran has always had the ability to close the Straights of Hormuz. Now they’ve done it and with much less leverage than say, had we all waited until they were a nuclear power to do so.
There was/is a cost of doing nothing too. For those that assume doing nothing was both cost and risk free then of course the conclusion is that this was a bad idea.
On what basis do we assume a nuclear Iran would not close the straight in an attempt to extort the global economy?
Thought experiment- if you could swap out the current Iranian regime and replace it with the current N. Korean regime would that make you more or less optimistic about the eventual outcome?
The uranium dirty bomb, with no fission involved, is truly stupid scary.
But let’s just keep the stupid going shall we?
@Bushehr Bauxite
Firstly, I leave my spittle not on the computer screen but on the desk like a halfway civilized person, and it has indeed dried. I leave true, rabid projectile spittle onto valuable computer hardware to the likes of you.
Secondly: my pattern of quoting and in detail responding to what I address – which by definition is going to include the full or almost full text of it – is not to be mistaken for independent insults or blustering when it is addressing you or others doing it.
Thirdly: It is funny considering so much of your replies to me have been naught but bluster, sophistry, insults, and bad faith denial. As I have documented many, many, many times over.
Let us have a few:
https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/13/how-the-ny-times-presents-the-negotiations-with-iran/#comment-2847998
Complete with literally delusional nonsense about how the New York City real estate mogul with a track record of working on sites personally especially early in his career has no long term horizons.
https://thenewneo.com/2026/03/26/killing-leaders-in-war/#comment-2845967
Whereupon you get caught egregiously misreading your own source to try and problematize the whacking of the Ayatollah and egregiously ignoring much of the context behind Yamamoto’s elimination.
Two such examples, and those are just on Iran. There are literally dozens more such as you misreading the Lloyd’s report and then calling me the equivalent of Baghdad Bob, which is why I and others dumpster you as the real equivalent of that, Baghdad Bauxite. And mangling basic stats regarding GOTV.
Suffice it to say, I have been busy doing job hunting and helping with an edutainment project, in addition to burying my tragically prematurely departed pet Turtle. I might go back to Fisk your post here but I am not even sure it is worth it. Your integrity, competence, and credibility are essentially nil when it comes to Trump, as well as on many other things. Too much dishonesty, stupidity, ego, and incompetence packed together.
@Richard Aubrey:It only has to be scary.
If it’s only scary, that won’t last long. After a few years people will be a little embarrassed they made such a fuss about it and a lot of people will claim they knew it all along.
Just like every other unsubstantiated scare. Like when cell phones were supposed to give us cancer, and power lines were supposed to give us cancer, and when Satanists were running our day cares and preschools.
Nikita
There’s a difference.
First, commuting to the affected area will dry up for as long as the scare lasts. In your view, that could be a couple of years. That’s a big deal.
After that, what does your pocket counter of Geigers do when you emerge from the subway?
When your Geiger counter detects an increase caused by the polished granite on building you are standing next to. Yep it has always had higher natural radioactivity levels.
But somehow the fallout from the stupid uranium bomb was not washed away by the firehouses or the natural rainfall. Because we are in the stupid scenario.
But then the stupid will never take the subway or get out of bed because it is too risky to live.
Back to Iran — Mike and Gadi with a new edition of Israel Update, guest Tamir Morag,”What Israel Should Do” (1:23:03): https://youtu.be/n27d038OBxo
Look there for an analysis of the probable destination of the MOU negotiations (beginning at roughly min 24:00 onward till the conversation moves on).
Additionally, Caroline Glick has been dispatched to speak — JNS interview, ” The Media Think the Iran War Is Over, They’re Sorely Mistaken” (24:53):
https://youtu.be/sQ18tglgVA4
Uranium bomb’s a damp squib, ya’ say?
Well maybe so—and I certainly hope it is—-but look at the hysteria our glorious elites were able to whip up merely by whispering those wondrous words: “toilet paper shortage”….
I try to zero on why the focus on ‘nuclear dust’ after fordow and thats my best guess there is a ladder of escalation on the iranian side which they have not availed themselves of
They did strike jubail ras tanura and even into riyadh proper but with limited success similar hits in the emirates and qatar the usual sources dont even why that is,
Much of the commentary is just noise trying to cover for their previous failings
I dont put mike and gadi or caroline in that category
Like robert pape insisting on a ground invasion we already read his book
That many commenters add nothing but insead degrade this website is sad.