Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

[Meengla]

And the fact that you think because Israel PRETENDED to be against it, there must have been something in the JCPOA for Iran shows your level of intelligence and proves how serious your analysis should be taken. Average Muslim IQ and your obsession with Israel on display. There's a reason why the whole world from China and Russia to Europe and the US look down on Muslims.

Go on and betray your gems of wisdom to this forum!
BTW, you have also accused your own political class of agreeing to a deal like JCPOA and even called it a 'capitulation'.

 

[ShapurII]

Go on and betray your gems of wisdom to this forum!
BTW, you have also accused your own political class of agreeing to a deal like JCPOA and even called it a 'capitulation'.

It was capitulation and treason all in the same deal. Iran had hardly signed such one-sided agreement in modern times after the Turkmenchai Treaty. We literally gave up on our rights under the NPT for promises that were obviously empty and were never meant to be fulfilled.

Go read about the snapback mechanism and then come back and explain how that is anything but treason.

 

[BHAN85]

Some people seem to have an inaccurate understanding of history.
The JCPOA was established under a clear agreement between Obama and Israel. At that time, both Syria and Hezbollah were still intact, so Obama and Netanyahu agreed that attacking Iran was not feasible.
It was later revealed by officials within the Obama administration that Israel then staged a pretense of collaborating with Obama to bomb Iran, forcing Iran to submit and agree to the JCPOA.
The JCPOA was a trap designed from the outset to neutralize Iran, and the 2025 bombing was a pre-planned action all along.
The US never intended to lift restrictions after ten years.
The US and Israel are completely united, yet foolishly, the Iranian people are utterly deceived.
Netanyahu must be laughing uncontrollably at how Iran falls for this good cop/bad cop scam every single time.

Israel was mad as hell with JCPOA and Iran perfectly happy, it was not a "zio-usa" trap to Iran, it was just another USA backstab to longterm allies, like they did hundreds time last decade.

Last decade USA is a very promiscuous USA, backstabbing everybody in the daylight, and it doesnt matter, because backstabbed keep coming for more. Like Iran coming back for negotiations when they have been just bombed half year ago by USA.

Common people understand the world thinking in emotions, ruling elites understand the world thinking in interests and money, and this declining USA empire is specially backstabber and blatant when they backstab, they just dont care, because they know it will have no real consequences, and vassals will come back for more.

Last decade USA is like a whore who have sex with everybody and then instigate fights among former f*ckmates. It's what happened last June, USA pushed Israel to act in the middle of Iran negotiations.

 

[Meengla]

It was capitulation and treason all in the same deal. Iran had hardly signed such one-sided agreement in modern times after the Turkmenchai Treaty. We literally gave up on our rights under the NPT for promises that were obviously empty and were never meant to be fulfilled.
Go read about the snapback mechanism and then come back and explain how that is anything but treason.

You need to re-read my post above instead of jumping on me or calling your leadership to have committed 'treason'. It was not a great deal and I agree to that extent but it was a start and everything pointed toward the Iranian republic accepting that as a path forward and it was bitterly opposed by Israel. But for you to imply, as you said above, that Israel 'PRETENDED' to dislike really shows you little understanding you had of JCPOA and the geopolitics surrounding that.
JCPOA was a good start and Iran would take a JCPOA 2 if offered today. And Iran should. Not many options are on the table for Iran.

 

[ShapurII]

You need to re-read my post above instead of jumping on me or calling your leadership to have committed 'treason'. It was not a great deal and I agree to that extent but it was a start and everything pointed toward the Iranian republic accepting that as a path forward and it was bitterly opposed by Israel. But for you to imply, as you said above, that Israel 'PRETENDED' to dislike really shows you little understanding you had of JCPOA and the geopolitics surrounding that.
JCPOA was a good start and Iran would take a JCPOA 2 if offered today. And Iran should. Not many options are on the table for Iran.

OK. Let's talk about a hypothetical deal now:

You will hand over your car to me, sign it as mine in a contract, and I will promise you that if everything goes well, I will pay you eventually.
And in the contract, I will put a clause that I have the right not to pay you if I think that your car has issues, and the person that decides whether your car is OK or not is only me.

Will you sign it?

That's basically the JCPOA and the snapback mechanism in short. And it wasn't the USA that activated it, but the Europeans, and only after Iran had wasted 10 years on it.

 

[Meengla]

OK. Let's talk about a hypothetical deal now:

You will hand over your car to me, sign it as mine in a contract, and I will promise you that if everything goes well, I will pay your money eventually.
And in the contract, I will put a clause that I have the right not to pay you if I think that your car has issues, and the person that decides whether your car is OK or not is only me.

Will you sign it?

That's basically the JCPOA and the snapback mechanism in short. And it wasn't the USA that activated it, but the Europeans.

Nice try to simply a hugely complex geopolitical situation while totally ignoring the bitter Israeli opposition to JCPOA; easier for you to come up with conspiracy theories like Israel 'PRETENDED' to oppose JCPOA and easier for you to just accuse your leadership of 'treason' then to look at all the aspects of the JCPOA deal and just come up with your car sale simplistic scenario.
Anyway, I have said enough about it. There is no convincing you on this nor you convincing me. Peace!

 

[BHAN85]

OK. Let's talk about a hypothetical deal now:

You will hand over your car to me, sign it as mine in a contract, and I will promise you that if everything goes well, I will pay you eventually.
And in the contract, I will put a clause that I have the right not to pay you if I think that your car has issues, and the person that decides whether your car is OK or not is only me.

Will you sign it?

That's basically the JCPOA and the snapback mechanism in short. And it wasn't the USA that activated it, but the Europeans, and only after Iran had wasted 10 years on it.

Iran Deal meant a lot of money for Iran.

Who cares if it could be better, it was good for Iran interests and that is enough to be wished by Iran and to be hated by Israel.

USA could start a war supporting one side or/and the opposite at the same time. Who cares.

If the final target is make mayhem, destabilize, and decrease energy and raw materials consumption, it doesnt matter who start or win the war.

What it matters it's to trigger the war and the more destructive the better for USA interests.

Understanding USA interests as keeping life standards for USA ruling elite, keeping USD value, and dont giving a F about USA military or vassals interests (Israel, GCC, Europe).

 

[ShapurII]

Nice try to simply a hugely complex geopolitical situation while totally ignoring the bitter Israeli opposition to JCPOA; easier for you to come up with conspiracy theories like Israel 'PRETENDED' to oppose JCPOA and easier for you to just accuse your leadership of 'treason' then to look at all the aspects of the JCPOA deal and just come up with your car sale simplistic scenario.
Anyway, I have said enough about it. There is no convincing you on this nor you convincing me. Peace!

There is no conspiracy theory. It is a fact that Iran received nothing from the JCPOA while Iran handed over 13 tons of 3.5% LEU to Russia and diluted hundreds of kilograms of 20% HALEU right at the beginning of the JCPOA.

If you think Israel was unhappy with that, you really need to think again.
In last year's June, they bombed and destroyed our nuclear facilities with the world's strongest conventional weapon that took 2 decades to develop (GBU-57) specifically to target Fordow and Natanz fuel-enrichment plant, which by the way did not exist in 2013, and even then they still couldn't destroy our nuclear stockpile as evidence has proved. The JCPOA resulted in Iran's complete handover of our nuclear stockpile peacefully in a situation that both the US and Israel had no way of doing that otherwise. How was that bad for Israel? In return, Iran received nothing but vague empty promises. Iran received a dozen of ATR 72-600 airplanes that are not used that much in Iran anyway and a couple of other useless sales and that's it.

My simplistic car sale is exactly what the snapback mechanism was.
In the snapback mechanism, The United States and the Europeans could "claim" that Iran had not fulfilled its obligations at any point in the deal for any reason whatsoever. Then a session would be held where Iran would be forced to justify its actions and prove it had observed all of its obligations. If any of the UNSC members felt Iran's defense was not convincing enough, they could've unilaterally returned all UNSC sanctions on Iran again.

How is that anything but treason and capitulation? It's hilarious that you guys are defending such a terrible deal and your only argument is that Israel claimed it didn't like the deal.

 

[ShapurII]

Iran Deal meant a lot of money for Iran.

Who cares if it could be better, it was good for Iran interests and that is enough to be wished by Iran and to be hated by Israel.

USA could start a war supporting one side or/and the opposite at the same time. Who cares.

If the final target is make mayhem, destabilize, and decrease energy and raw materials consumption, it doesnt matter who start or win the war.

What it matters it's to trigger the war and the more destructive the better for USA interests.

Understanding USA interests as keeping life standards for USA ruling elite, keeping USD value, and dont giving a F about USA military or vassals interests (Israel, GCC, Europe).

Yeah, money that was never supposed to be given to Iran. Just like my car sale scenario.

Anybody who defends the JCPOA, should be OK to sell his assets to me with similar conditions. If you are not, and you are not Iranian, then respectfully, shut the f*ck up because it is not your country's resources that were sold like that, for empty promises.

And the United States played the game with more honor than the Europeans. Trump could've activated the snapback mechanism in 2018, but refused to do so and simply left the agreement. The Europeans were the ones who triggered it at the end of the deal.

 

[Immortals]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[aerospace_enthusiast_newb]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I guess he means Iranian officials

 

[Eşbah]

Under the draft, Iran would suspend uranium enrichment for seven years, while Washington is seeking a ten-year commitment.

A major dispute concerns Iran’s stockpile of several hundred kilograms of uranium. Iran refuses to ship it abroad and is only willing to dilute it.

The U.S., however, insists the material be removed from Iranian territory.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Can someone knowledgeable explain why Iran is ready to dilute its stockpile but against shipping it out of the country? Is it technically possible to enrich the diluted stockpile to higher grades?

 

[Oldenwisdom...قول بزرگ]

There is no conspiracy theory. It is a fact that Iran received nothing from the JCPOA while Iran handed over 13 tons of 3.5% LEU to Russia and diluted hundreds of kilograms of 20% HALEU right at the beginning of the JCPOA.

If you think Israel was unhappy with that, you really need to think again.
In last year's June, they bombed and destroyed our nuclear facilities with the world's strongest conventional weapon that took 2 decades to develop (GBU-57) specifically to target Fordow and Natanz fuel-enrichment plant, which by the way did not exist in 2013, and even then they still couldn't destroy our nuclear stockpile as evidence has proved. The JCPOA resulted in Iran's complete handover of our nuclear stockpile peacefully in a situation that both the US and Israel had no way of doing that otherwise. How was that bad for Israel? In return, Iran received nothing but vague empty promises. Iran received a dozen of ATR 72-600 airplanes that are not used that much in Iran anyway and a couple of other useless sales and that's it.

My simplistic car sale is exactly what the snapback mechanism was.
In the snapback mechanism, The United States and the Europeans could "claim" that Iran had not fulfilled its obligations at any point in the deal for any reason whatsoever. Then a session would be held where Iran would be forced to justify its actions and prove it had observed all of its obligations. If any of the UNSC members felt Iran's defense was not convincing enough, they could've unilaterally returned all UNSC sanctions on Iran again.

How is that anything but treason and capitulation? It's hilarious that you guys are defending such a terrible deal and your only argument is that Israel claimed it didn't like the deal.

You are right. However, Iran was negotiating from a weak hand. Besides they actively were seeking integration into the global economy, buy new passenger planes, spares of older ones etc...

Iran was not in a position to dictate terms... and the aspirational angle didn't help the cause either. You're right... Iran was being cornered just like everyone else before ... there is no guarantor against might and right there lies the flaw... they can walk away... as they did. And if it wasn't orange it would have been someone else... it has worked like charm in the past.

What is somewhat different is that Iran is now frustrating the empire when it expects, same old same old. Remember if US gets foiled here... the whole complimentary financial setup to extract, already teetering, will collapse along with muscle to prop it up. It is a catch 22!
Which is why I said in my previous post that orange clown has cornered the empire on behalf of zion... losing a carrier or prized possessions while not able to achieve a political end goal is a death nail. How can he extract US out of it... silence here held greater power than exposure.
Hindsight is always 20/20 and just like everyone else that has been played assumed they were interacting with an honest broker... in fact those are conduits... to gauge response and weigh the enemy.

 

[ShapurII]

Can someone knowledgeable explain why Iran is ready to dilute its stockpile but against shipping it out of the country? Is it technically possible to enrich the diluted stockpile to higher grades?

Yes, you will need to enrich it again starting from 3.5%, which still takes time but much less than starting from natural uranium, and since Iran is accepting a full pause on uranium enrichment in the agreement, it is still useless and makes no sense.

Nothing the Islamic Republic does makes sense. Iran is ruled by a bunch of idiots. May God have mercy on our people.

EDIT: Unless Iran also agrees to convert the diluted uranium stockpile to fuel rods. In that case, it won't be reversible easily.

 

[Eşbah]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

For years, IRI's leaders have been saying they won't make the bomb, and so far, they haven't. If stopping the nuclear bomb is still their goal, then why did they ditch the JCPOA in the first place? This just doesn't make sense to me.