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 all 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 somewhat so the US doesn’t show up as a complete bully. Though that may be moot for much of world opinion and perhaps yours as well.