Używasz przestarzałej przeglądarki. Może ona nieprawidłowo wyświetlać tę lub inne strony. Powinieneś zaktualizować przeglądarkę lub użyć alternatywnej przeglądarki.
Iran Crisis & the 2026 War between Iran and the United States, Gulf States, and Israel - Please focus on news and coverage, not argumentation.
Arrival of Iranian delegations in Switzerland for so called "negotiation talks" with US.
5:43
Full story behind betraying Iran’s leader, as narrated by Khanalizadeh
According to Khanalizadeh, a prominent Iranian journalist, after the Leader’s martyrdom, the US quickly asked for a ceasefire, which Iran naturally rejected.
After the new Leader was chosen, Iranian officials prepared a 5-point plan for talks with the US, but the Leader rejected it.
After several rounds of revision, a 10-point framework was produced, which became the basis of the first SNSC statement. The Leader also added 8 extra conditions to that framework, including that there should be no nuclear negotiations at all.
He says the US initially accepted those 10 points as the basis because it needed a ceasefire, but once the Iranian team reached Islamabad, the Americans refused to negotiate on that basis.
Despite the Leader’s written instruction, the Iranian side reportedly discussed the nuclear file.
This made the Americans conclude that Iran did not really want to continue the war, and that if they pushed hard, they could extract concessions.
After Islamabad, the negotiating team sent reports to the Leader.
The Leader reacted negatively and objected, saying they had acted against religious/legal duty by discussing the nuclear issue and by failing to impose the 10 conditions.
Some SNSC members then wrote to him, arguing that talks could not happen without the nuclear issue and warned about continued war and attacks on infrastructure.
The Leader replied that “these negotiations would benefit neither their worldly affairs nor their afterlife,” and would not prevent Iran’s infrastructure from being hit.
After that, the negotiating team restarted message exchanges, completely set aside the 10-point framework, and pursued a new 14-point plan initiated by the Foreign Ministry, which became the Islamabad MoU.
The SNSC approved it and sent it to the Leader, but he gave no answer for about 2 weeks.
SNSC officials then considered treating his silence as approval, but at that meeting a letter from the Leader arrived with questions for each SNSC member.
Each member answered, and officials gave written commitments explaining how the clauses would be interpreted and implemented.
One example given is that the “non-interference” clause (US not interfering in Iran’s affairs( would mean shutting down some hostile anti-propaganda media outlets (such as Iran International, ManotoTV, …).
Only after these written commitments did the Leader authorize the MoU.
Khanealizadeh says this is the context behind the Leader’s phrase: “I had a different view.”
The Leader was not merely opposed to parts of the final MoU; he was against the whole post-Islamabad negotiation path once it moved away from the original 10-point framework.
The process, according to him, went forward because of pressure and insistence from the SNSC.
Iranian hardliners are going to blame the SNSC for everything. Countdown to a purge starts now.
US President Trump:
"There will be no tolls in the Hormuz Strait for 60 days during the ceasefire period, and there will be no tolls after the 60 day period has expired, unless they are imposed by and for the USA, should the deal not be completed, for services rendered as the Guardian Angel to the countries of the Middle East for purposes of both past, present, and future reimbursement of costs".
To the overwhelming majority of Americans, the events happening on the other side of the world are ephemeral and meaningless outside of the domestic sport of politics. Many want to see Trump win because they want the Republicans to retain power, others want to see Trump lose because they want the Democrats to take power.
America winning or losing in ME is substantively irrelevant and the loss of face simply isn't a factor because most Americans don't ever think about people outside of America (save for a few scant moments during bar trivia or exotic porn searches) during their lives. Even in this thread, the people are here to be entertained and argue. They don't really care about the outcome one way or another.
Nukiwiboomers will fill out this form and send it back to the listed P.O box. Then you have my permission to sunset yourselves you mindbroken slaves to the international jew.
The IDF has allegedly outflanked, encircled, and now holds most of the Ali al-Taher ridge they unsuccessfully directly assaulted several times east of Nabatieh. Allegedly, the ridge has the Hezbollah Southern Command HQ (all Hezbollah in southern Lebanon + all attacks on northern Israel are allegedly commanded from this HQ), and there are a couple dozen Hezbollah holed up deep in the HQ. Ali al-Taher is one of the most strategically important locations in southern Lebanon, that's why Iran has been sperging so hard about fighting in Lebanon must stop nownownow. Hezbollah denies this and states they are still successfully defending the ridge
Why do we say the responsibility for the Islamabad memorandum lies with the government and the negotiation team? And why is the notion of "justification and imposition" of the Leader's message wrong?
Kian Abdollahi, editor-in-chief of Tasnim, in Farhikhtegan Gap: The country, based on a set of assets, realities, thoughts, capabilities, and calculations, has reached an understanding. Whether good or bad, it is the responsibility of the negotiation team.
Interpreting the Leader's text is also important; the message is very clear and explicit. Even if we want to look at it hermeneutically, it is clear that the Leader's horizon differs from the government's horizon, but it is not the case that an imposition has been made on the Supreme Leader. The notion of imposition is true only when you lack the ability to prevent an event. The Islamic Republic has strong popular backing, and believing that something has been imposed on the Leader means underestimating the capacity of the Islamic Republic and the Leader himself. Therefore, both justifying and imposing interpretations of the Leader's message are wrong.
More blame being placed on the civilian government.
4:38
What were the misinterpretations of the Leader's message? / If we convey an image of the Leader as someone who is imposed upon, we have not helped him; well-wishers should be careful
Ehsan Salehi, political analyst, in "Farhikhtegan Gap": One interpretation of the Leader's message was that, contrary to the Leader's view, a process had taken place and its structure was imposed on him!
Another negative reading was that those responsible were left empty-handed and in the future they will face obstacles! My understanding is not that anything was imposed on the Leader or that those in charge were left empty-handed. In my opinion, if the Leader had wanted to impose his own view, this would have happened, but he allowed this process to take its natural course.
Another proposition that was refuted was that everything was coordinated with the Leader [meaning that everything was with his consent]; and on the other hand, other statements such as "People rise up, capitulation has occurred" or "Iran has become a colony of America" were also wrong.
The IDF has allegedly outflanked, encircled, and now holds most of the Ali al-Taher ridge they unsuccessfully directly assaulted several times east of Nabatieh. Allegedly, the ridge has the Hezbollah Southern Command HQ (all Hezbollah in southern Lebanon + all attacks on northern Israel are allegedly commanded from this HQ), and there are a couple dozen Hezbollah holed up deep in the HQ. Ali al-Taher is one of the most strategically important locations in southern Lebanon, that's why Iran has been sperging so hard about fighting in Lebanon must stop nownownow. Hezbollah denies this and states they are still successfully defending the ridge
If Israel really is on the cusp of finally cleaning out the Hezbollah stronghold, I could see a lot of Trump's current rhetoric being simply a delaying action that gives them cover to continue grinding while not pissing off Iran to the point that they go full retard again (outside of the occasional IRGC commander who unilaterally declares the Strait is closed, only to be immediately overridden).
Wyświetl załącznik 9171191
Nukiwiboomers will fill out this form and send it back to the listed P.O box. Then you have my permission to sunset yourselves you mindbroken slaves to the international jew.
Throwing the Jew in the well poisons the well and is a war crime. Those wells are all MUSLIM wells. Widdle Muslim chilluns are going to die of dehydration if all their wells are tainted by Jews getting thrown in them
If Israel really is on the cusp of finally cleaning out the Hezbollah stronghold, I could see a lot of Trump's current rhetoric being simply a delaying action that gives them cover to continue grinding while not pissing off Iran to the point that they go full retard again (outside of the occasional IRGC commander who unilaterally declares the Strait is closed, only to be immediately overridden).
Its best to take out Hezbollah now rather than later because Iran's economy needs the ceasefire to hold now, now now! so they are more inclined to excuse violations and screech on X . It also removes the annoying spoiler for future talks if Hezbollah is dead. Israel has been at war for 3 years now, they're not going to turn back when they are so close to victory.
Russia and Ukraine are killing each other and gaining nothing out of it, and Trump knows that. We can all see it.
Ukraine is completely drained, and Russia is being deep striked to bring them to the table. The Russians cannot survive if their entire infrastructure is shit upon, and that is the main form of assistance that the Trump administration have given the Ukrainians.
They are at a stalemate, attritioning each other to death.
The best part, is ultimately if the slavs want to kill each other it benefits Trump in the end. Everything Trump has done is based around the idea that the longer you struggle, the more it costs you. This applies to every single country that he's been involved with negotiating/militarily. Trump could swing the US military at any conflict he wants, but he is just doing it from highest priority to lowest.
If you hate trump, you project onto him. The only way to be objective is to stop having TDS for 2 seconds and think if a strategy will work.
"My style of deal-making is quite simple and straightforward. I aim very high, and then I just keep pushing and pushing to get what I'm after. Sometimes I settle for less than I sought, but in most cases I still end up with what I want."
Retards can keep destroying their own future and current day stock of young men though, that's working WONDERS for everyone isn't it?
I mean look at Europe, look at how well they're doing as a global super power after depleting themselves for a century.
What’s the difference between the USA charging tolls and Iran? At least if Iran charges then you will
Know no one will shoot at you.
Trump really misses the whole point of the Iran war and why he can’t get international cooperation - because he is as bad as the Iranian leadership and would do what they do if he didn’t have the constraints of a democracy.
Thread quality and Jew sperging have an inverse correlation. It’s so much bigger than “DA JOOOOS.” By making it about Jews, you’re missing key components, such as all the non Jew reasons to be against the Iranian regime. For instance, I really don’t think the Iranians protesting back in December cared about Jews all that much, so much as disliking their tyrannical government. The US also has reason to dislike the Iranian government too, such as their funding of terrorist proxies that destabilize multiple nations, and make it necessary for US intervention. Making this about Jews over simplifies multi dimensional foreign policy, in which multiple parties have differing views on the same issue.
Thread quality and Jew sperging have an inverse correlation. It’s so much bigger than “DA JOOOOS.” By making it about Jews, you’re missing key components, such as all the non Jew reasons to be against the Iranian regime. For instance, I really don’t think the Iranians protesting back in December cared about Jews all that much, so much as disliking their tyrannical government. The US also has reason to dislike the Iranian government too, such as their funding of terrorist proxies that destabilize multiple nations, and make it necessary for US intervention. Making this about Jews over simplifies multi dimensional foreign policy, in which multiple parties have differing views on the same issue.
Nice try, Shlomo Shekelsteinbergowitz. We all know literally everything is caused and happens because of DA JOOOOOZE. Your toilet paper roll runs out when you're pooping? Jews. Traffic making you run late? Kikes. You getting negrated for having the CORRECT OPINION in a Happening thread? JIDF shills. Getting threadbanned? Null is a jew.
Per the old saying, to a man with a hammer every problem looks like a nail. Jewspergs are that man - monomaniacs pounding away at everything and anything in sight. Frankly, all that noise is fucking tiring and distracts from discussion of what's actually going on.
The country, based on a set of assets, realities, thoughts, capabilities, and calculations, has reached an understanding. Whether good or bad, it is the responsibility of the negotiation team.
