More on the Iran deal – maybe
I continue to be disheartened as news like this comes out. I try to wait for the actual unveiling on Friday – and even after that, to see how it plays out in reality, which is the most important thing of all.
But how can this possibly be reassuring? Is it even correct, though? It’s based on Israeli sources, and I imagine Israel knows quite a bit, but who are those sources and what is their agenda?
Anyway, here’s some of the story:
Newly revealed details of the secretive US-Iran MOU lay out that it would extend the cease-fire to Lebanon, allow Iran to manage the Strait of Hormuz, temporarily waive Iranian oil sanctions and establish a pathway toward a comprehensive peace agreement, Israel’s Channel 12 reported Tuesday.
The framework, which would serve as the basis for broader negotiations between Washington and Tehran, outlines commitments on nuclear issues, sanctions relief, maritime security and the eventual withdrawal of American forces from the region.
Channel 12 is called both mainstream and center-left, but the NY Post reporting the story is on the right.
At any rate, it sounds like the agreement is just an agreement to ease pressure on Iran in order to have some future negotiations. Why? Is this mainly a temporary measure about oil prices?
There are 12 points listed at the article, but the points were revealed by Axios. That doesn’t automatically make them wrong. But we’ve had so many articles and supposed revelations of this type that have turned out to be wrong, and so I refuse to believe the report until the official word comes out.
Trusting Iran on anything seems like a fool’s errand to me, however.
I hate reading articles like that. But my Inbox is bombarded with them, with titles like “worst deal ever.” I remind myself that we still don’t know. But all the reports resemble each other, and so I wonder if that’s because they’re based on the real thing.
Trump has already announced no Strait toll. I’m waiting until Friday.
The Editorial Board at the WSJ vents its frustrations.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/iran-deal-donald-trump-cease-fire-nuclear-weapons-e2ce72ef?st=V2Wn6q
They go on to praise his willingness to use military force when no one else would and acknowledge the damage done to the nuclear program, military and industrial base.
Then they get nasty, even hurling the ultimate insult – comparing Trump to Obama.
Read the whole thing, as they say.
Someone I greatly respect tells me to ignore the details because this is really just a deal to make a deal. Iran is in a mess and no one knows what Trump has up his sleeve, which is of course exactly how he wants it.
By the way, Walter Russell Mead also has a great editorial today on Trump and his style.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/trump-cynicism-and-the-deal-00cfce74?st=FXiq3h
Our time is better spent listening to the complete piano works of Louis Moreau Gottschalk than fooling around with these enemy ops as they repeat week after week in endless hyperbolic succession. It’s crap. We’ve seen it over and over again. How come we can’t learn from the fourth time rather than wait around for the seventh?
Our time is better spent listening to the complete piano works of Louis Moreau Gottschalk…
Agreed.
How come we can’t learn from the fourth time rather than wait around for the seventh?
I don’t know, but it seems to be something fundamental to human nature.
I am told time after time by various sources that Trump knows what he is doing and will not accept a bad deal.
I hope they are right.
As for me, I listen to a couple of people.
Gen Keane. He is fairly diplomatic, but—.
Brit Hume doesn’t appear often, and he doesn’t say a lot when he does; but his tone sounded a lot like Gen Keane’s last time I heard him.
Victor Davis Hanson. He has been pretty quiet; but sounded concerned.
My opinion which is worthless; but it is mine.
Trump has lost a ton of credibility. Maybe he will recover it; but he has work to do.
I honestly believe that Vance is taking himself out of the ’28 sweepstakes. First, he would not distance himself from Carlson; now he is mouthing inanities about the deal.
Rubio is suddenly very quiet. I find that significant
Vance just had this to say:
“Look, they’re going to have to do some serious compliance of very good things for the Americans in order for them to get any of the benefits of the bargain,” Vance said of the Iranian regime.”
He continued:
“”I kind of want to figure out how real are they, how fake are they,” he said. “They’re making a lot of promises. Are those promises actually going to be met with real action?”
“That’s why I’m going to show up to the negotiation”
I also think the timing is to get the oil prices down.
Since the American public will not support a boots-on-the-ground military ouster of the Iranian theocracy… and since Congress won’t support a continuance of Trump’s proactive ‘police action’… all Trump can really do is set back the Mullah’s nuclear timetable. Such that he can rightly say that on his watch he kept America safe.
It’s probably best to remain calm until we see what actually happens.
“Worst deal ever” is what Obama did. For this one, whatever its shape, the Iranian military has been heavily damaged, its capacity to produce replacement weapons has been heavily damaged, its funding mechanisms for regional terror groups are heavily damaged, and its enriched uranium is entombed. No deal at this point is going to be like what Obama did.
We all hoped that the mullah/IRGC control would collapse, and we’re disappointed it hasn’t so far. Try to recall that “regime change,” while hoped for, was never one of the objectives of the military operation.
Oil at around $76/barrel today. Down from a high of something like $114, though that was quite brief.
I was shocked to hear today that Iran is free to sell oil. Yes, that will help bring the price down, but it smacks of capitulation.
Since the American public will not support a boots-on-the-ground military ouster of the Iranian theocracy… and since Congress won’t support a continuance of Trump’s proactive ‘police action’… all Trump can really do is set back the Mullah’s nuclear timetable. Such that he can rightly say that on his watch he kept America safe.
I think GB’s comment bears repeating.
The negotiations did not happen in a vacuum, and the snakes are not all on the other side of the negotiating table.
The same people who were mad at him for not doing something when the IRGC was killing Iranians were also mad at him for threatening to rain death and destruction down on everything in Iran (OMG WWIII!). The people who were mad at him for continuing the police action past the initial bombing runs (OMG no new wars – he promised!) are now mad at him for negotiating for peace. No matter what he does there will be hand wringing and pearl clutching.
He is negotiating from the position that whatever he does will be touted as the worst thing ever, and I’m pretty sure he knows that both the US and the IRGC will stab him in the back first chance they get. Congressional support is a joke – they’re more likely to work against whatever he tries to do.
I like the comment I saw somewhere recently that when (not if) the IRGC goes back on their side of the bargain, Trump can then go back to raining death and destruction down on their heads – after all, he did give peace a chance. And that would also reset the Congressional approval clock too, so no need for an official declaration of war.
There have to be other major factors. I suspect we are running dangerously low on some major weapons systems,
TommyJay thinks allowing Iran to sell oil “smacks of capitulation.”
That was my first reaction, then I reflected on the fact Iran’s economy is teetering right now. Some 75% of their oil storage capacity is filled, and when they can no longer store or move oil after it comes out of the ground, they have to shut down wells. That’s a death sentence unless the well is re-opened very soon.
So my question is, if Iran loses its ability to produce and sell oil, what do they have left? Pomegranates, pistachios and terror. Maybe we’d rather have them exporting oil to the world than terror.
I don’t worry about Iran earning an honest living off the sale of oil. I do worry about them exporting terror and putting a “service fee” on passage through the straits. I cannot say the draft agreement we are hearing about will stop the export of terror, but I’m pretty sure it will give the an alternative that gives us a little leverage.
My main concern about the agreement is one Neo has written about: the trustworthiness of the Iranian government. I don’t trust them. I would not trust them if we had concrete promises written down on paper and signed. They have lied and they will in the future. If the alternative is to invade and conquer, we won’t be doing that. So maybe, just maybe, we can identify issues that will make them accept alternatives to nuking Tel Aviv.
neo writes, “At any rate, it sounds like the agreement is just an agreement to ease pressure on Iran in order to have some future negotiations. Why? Is this mainly a temporary measure about oil prices?”
Anybody here think that the fact that the midterm elections are only four-and-a-fraction months away plays into things?
(physicsguy (6:18 pm) did mention timing “to get the oil prices down,” so there’s that.)
Israel Update, where Mike and Gadi disagree over the question “The Deal: Is it Really So Bad?”, (1:05:39):
https://youtu.be/YTojC12sQro
I’ve been watching tusiTV on youTube. He broadcasts live from London and has family in Iran.
The last few days the internet has been on in Iran and broadcasting scenes of riots and burning buildings plus large crowds saying nasty things about the regime and calling for the Shah to return. I just watched an officer publicly defect from the mullah.
I’m guessing that Trump is well informed about this and takes it into account for negotiations. Sixty days of this could overthrow the Islamic State if it accelerates. There’s no guarantee that the IRGC won’t pull out their weapons but we can hope.
Tusy tv link
https://www.youtube.com/live/ZehgwIxh4eA?is=3j5QsPXRkYtAN7sC
Rod Dreher is pretty blunt and says this is a loss. The new situation is no better than it was before the war. The government of Iran is still basically in charge. Now Iran recognizes *they* control the Straight of Hormuz. If correct then that is a major loss.
It amazes me how people leap to conclusions about something we have no concrete, official information, just “nes” reports and openers opining.
What is most amazing is the Rod Dreher (who??) saying things are no better than before the war. Military and industrial base virtually destroyed, enriched uranium impossibly buried, proxies severely weakened, multiple national leadership layers dead, Chinese and Russian military gear discredited, US now the undisputed energy dominator, Iran’s neighbors now hostile to Iran and aligned with the US, OPEC crumbling, China’s Taiwan aspirations severely set back…..so yeah,things are no better than before the war. Are you that oblivious?
We still hold all the cards, so if ( when, actually) theIRGC reneges, rinse and repeat, only this time all the way.
“What is most amazing is the Rod Dreher (who??) saying things are no better than before the war. Military and industrial base virtually destroyed, enriched uranium impossibly buried, proxies severely weakened, multiple national leadership layers dead, Chinese and Russian military gear discredited, US now the undisputed energy dominator, Iran’s neighbors now hostile to Iran and aligned with the US, OPEC crumbling, China’s Taiwan aspirations severely set back…..so yeah,things are no better than before the war. Are you that oblivious?”
Where do you get this bafflegab? From Fox?
USN has been backed off 800-1000km in Arabian Sea because too risky to go within anti-shipping missile and drone range of Iranian coastline. No US naval assets have transited Bab el Mandeb since last year because Houthis can sink anything which tries. With those ‘discredited Chinese weapons’ Fox told you all about.
You people don’t seem to grasp that this time there has been a huge revolution in military affairs — except that it’s actually for real this iteration and not some marketing term dreamed up by US defense contractors and their Pentagon and Senate gimps.
Even the ‘bombing’ of Iran. Most of that has been standoff weapons. It’s too dangerous to overfly the landmass too often.
You’ve been lied to. Willingly, doubtless. But it’ll all come out in the wash with time.
Whoever Rod Dreher is, he’s not very perceptive. In addition to having no factual knowledge of the actual agreement, he overlooks many things when he says the situation is no better now than before the war:
Their military and their industrial base is hugely reduced if not destroyed.
Multiple layers of national leadership killed.
Enriched uranium buried and irretrievable for all practical purposes.
Iran’s neighbors now hostile to Iran and allied with the US.
US global energy dominance fully established
OPEC falling apart
China and Russia military hardware and systems shown to be impotent vs America’s
China’s Taiwan ambitions put on the back foot if not eliminated
Why people think Trump suddeybecame a patsy is beyond me. We still hold all the cards. If Iran reneges, death and destruction follows for them. Meanwhile, maybe the populace finally gets the gumption to overthrow the government.
And getting set for winning the mid terms is more important to us as than anything else we need to inflict on Iran for now. We cannot lose the mid terms or all the good stuff going on grinds to a halt.
Sorry, I didn’t realize my first post re Dreyer (whoever he is, never heard of him) had actually posted , so I wrote a second one, motivated by his stupidity.
And after reading his response to me, “stupid” may actually be too kind. He’s obviously a Legend in his own mind and ignorant in almost every respect.
Bill:
Our trolls aren’t very clever and give dolts a feeling of deserved superiority. Rod (whatever) isn’t even up to troll level.
I assume this Rod Dreher fellow is the same guy who called himself Berkeley yesterday with a similarly abusive commenting style:
https://thenewneo.com/2026/06/15/iran-now-iran-then/#comment-2854802
Here’s the real Rod Dreher for those who don’t know and might be interested:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Dreher
Philip of Macedoine:
I have reservations about Dreher but I haven’t read enough to touch bottom. “The Benedict Option” sounded unrealistic.
Goetterstarmerung:
Opinions vary.
If you wish to influence others, you might consider not liberally insulting them from the outset.
Zaphod, is that you, honey chile?
I wondered.
Mr Can Do! has somehow snuck back.
How long before he starts singing the praises of Xi and Xi’s Temu tofu weapons systems, of the glories of their cultural conformity?
Who exactly is the US satapry Zaphod? Don’t be coy or try to hide your real disease behind a mask.
Zaphod:
Are you still so bullish on China and bearish on the US?
The US has its problems, undeniably, but I doubt the CCP version of China will last another ten years. Demographics, economics, top-down governance, dependance on food and energy imports.
I guess there was a Chinese century somewhere back there, but it’s not the 21st.
I’m betting on the USA.
I’m guessing it’s just a sock puppeteer and the name “Zaphod” is just one sock they picked today.
I guess that was part of THE DEAL—i.e., that Neo MUST unfreeze Z.
(No wonder then that negotiations were so drawn out, so painstaking, so exasperating…)
I imagine we’ll find out more on—Good? Awful? Tenterhook?—Friday…if we can wait that long…
File under: Juneteeth? Or Junetoothless…?
Mildly? Wildly?
What difference does it make, I guess…(to quote one of the all-time grates).
Always entertaining, though; which is to be applauded…and for which to be—yes!—grateful…
(Never thought you’d go the “more-sinned-against-than-sinning” route, though…)
“…We could all do well to learn from that…”
Well, Keir Starmer (et al.) certainly has!
Anyway, babble on…
All Rhodes lead to…?
As for Keir Starmer (and ideologues of similar persuasion), Roger Kimball explains why the
conceptphenomenon of “Islamophobia” had to be invented and why it MUST BE maintained:“The Face of Modern Britain: Jihad’s Triumph;
“Britain’s leaders celebrate multiculturalism even as the ideology reshaping the nation grows increasingly hostile to the civilization that welcomed it.”—
https://amgreatness.com/2026/06/14/the-face-of-modern-britain-jihads-triumph/
H/T Powerline blog.
Gosh, looks like Z (or most of him) was zapped.
Not even a brief reprieve? A smidgeon of mercy…?
Sigh…
(Makes my comments look even more irrational than they usually are… Oh, well…)
Bloomberg now has what it identifies as a leaked version of the MOU, if you have a Bloomberg subscription:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-06-16/read-the-14-point-draft-memorandum-between-the-us-and-iran
Powerline Blog has comments here:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2026/06/the-terms-of-our-surrender.php
It appears that Trump settled for a “promise” from Iran that they will never obtain nuclear weapons. (Apparently, no Mullah was available this time to issue a “fatwa” to that effect.) Also, Scott Johnson at Powerline notes that, as bad as these terms look, the Iranians are still claiming that they are inaccurate.
Until the official “reveal” of the MOU on Friday, I understand maintaining hope that the actual terms are better. I only hope that when those terms are officially revealed that people won’t stick their heads in the sand.
Unless something very unexpected happens on Friday, this is an unmitigated disaster. Trump has actually managed to give Obama the last laugh on Iran.
In foreign affairs, the US’ most potent enemy is the democratic party. A republican administration has to complete whatever it’s trying to do before the dems get organized and prepared to make it an issue in congress and the next election. If the timing doesn’t work out, we “lost”.
I presume, which isn’t exactly the same as hope, that Trump will bomb the hell out of Iran if they don’t comply. But, of course, that would be another of Trump’s stupid, unnecessary wars. And the pressure will not let up until Iran rearms.
Gosh, the fun I miss when I go to bed early!
Apparently JD Vance was on Fox’s “The Five” yesterday. He called these “leaked” reports “Iranian propaganda.” This would probably apply to Bloomberg as well.
From Glenn Reynolds, at the Instapundit, this morning: “I’m not super excited or concerned with the Iran agreement because my expectation is that Iran will violate it and we’ll bomb them again. It’s an iterative process…” Yup.
From Glenn Reynolds, at the Instapundit, this morning: “I’m not super excited or concerned with the Iran agreement because my expectation is that Iran will violate it and we’ll bomb them again. It’s an iterative process…” Yup.
Bears repeating.
Like RA said – when he does bomb the hell out of Iran, it will be just another one of his unnecessary wars.
Also agree with RA that the US’ most potent enemy in foreign affairs is the US democrat party. With their media mouthpieces on blast they can sow discord and despair, endlessly, on repeat.
Bears, indeed.
The only question being, WHEN they break the MoU / change the rules / interpret the MoU differently (or “creatively”) / ignore it while claiming to honor it / etc., then HOW will DJT respond…
…keeping in mind that the Mullahs WILL break it BECAUSE the criminal, racist Zionist regime IS FORCING THEM to do so…and the Left, the Media and whackademics will lap it up, tripping over one another trying to repeat that MOST EXCELLENT talking point” furiouser and furiouser …
Barry Meislin – How will he respond? How has he responded for the last 2.5 months? He’s going to bluff, bluster, threaten, and ultimately do nothing, militarily at least.
So, Bauxite, do you favor the “bomb them into the Stone Age” option, or the “American boots on the ground” option?
As bauxy says an unmitigated disaster, just like when OMB “destroyed trillions of dollars of value” in the stock market lol
I start from the premise that Iran will not surrender. Bombing won’t push them there, and we aren’t going to invade to dispose of the government. So the question becomes how to move forward without surrender. Which is to say, Iranian surrender without the appearance of surrender. To achieve that we need to be clear about our own goals, which AFAICT, are opening the strait of Hormuz and no nuclear bomb. I think opening the strait is pretty much done at this point whatever Iran does, and work on bypassing the strait will finish in a couple years. That leaves the bomb. From the US point of view I think nothing else matters much. Israel would probably prefer limiting support of Iranian proxies be part of the deal. But doing that directly is probably tricky.
The reporting from Iran about casualties estimated very low deaths of civilians AND military personnel. Part of it is the precision weapons we use, but part of it is the doctrine that Iran and its proxies use– embedding among civilian populations.
Unless we were/are willing to kill high numbers of civilians (and look at the criticism of Israel during the Gaza war) it would/will be impossible to kill sufficient number of IRGC members to cause a capitulation without a ground component, and we’re not conducting a general invasion ala Iraq.
We have seriously degraded their conventional military capability. If anything, the obvious truth is intelligence seriously underestimated the remaining/reconstituted missile/drone numbers. Until we can come up with a reliable missile defense that can target swarm attacks of drones/multiple missile barrages, Iran has/will again have a tactical advantage.
I think the fact that killing a sufficient number of IRGC personnel would require a high civilian casualty rate is one of the reasons the President decided another round of high intensity bombing wasn’t going to topple the regime.
— Grok
Here’s an estimate of the number of attacks on Iran targets during the first months of the conflict:
– Grok
Military planners knew how embedded IRGC targets were. President Trump specifically said regime change wasn’t our goal. It’s my understanding Mossad’s plan was to use the Kurds as the beginning ground operation. This would have required a protracted support phase to the ground forces. Add this to the fact the Persians were against that plan along with the President/US planners it was never given an opportunity.
@Kate: “bomb them into the Stone Age” option, or the “American boots on the ground” option?
I’m guessing it’s the “should have nominated DeSantis” option. It’s always that. And DeSantis would have used his superpower of Not Being Trump to make everything work out perfectly in some unspecified way, if only we’d listened.
It’s all important, “What does the electorate think”?
Bauxite (CC™-Risible) has outdone himself in foolishness.
He claims President Trump will do nothing militarily to the twelver mullahs using metric of the last 75 days, not what President Trump has done to Iran since January 2025.
CC™-R might just as well use the last 24 hours as his metric.
What a utter unabashed unashamed maroon.
@Sennacherib:It’s all important, “What does the electorate think”?
They may have forgotten in six weeks if there’s no more Iran news, and be on to whether there’s too much bleach in the reflecting pool or who knows what.
From a WSJ article: munitions expended in Iran would represent roughly 27% of Tomahawk stockpiles, about 23% of Jassm missiles, a third of SM-6 missiles, nearly half of SM-3 missiles, more than half of Patriot interceptors and up to 80% of Thaad interceptors.
“It’s going to be years before we can rebuild those inventories,” Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at CSIS who co-wrote the report, told the Journal.
The THAAD were the systems stopping the missles from hitting the carriers, they were dangerously depleted. They cost $12.6 million per missile.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_High_Altitude_Area_Defense
IMHO running out of ammo is the major factor in all things Iranian.
I’m thinking the munitions data would be classified, and I don’t trust WSJ in any event, so I’ll file their article under continued fake news.