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

[KHORSHIDSIYAH1488]

Relax bro
If US was so hard about Iran,
They would have done this when Iran was very weak like in 1980s & early 1990s.
US just keeps playing with Iran for Israel.no direct enmity.
US will never (at least for foreseeable future) go all out to attack Iran.

People keep saying this and don't look out the window- it's happening, right now! They didn't do it before, but now with Iran's proxies gone and deterrence lost, they are actively implementing the attack. B-2's in Diego Garcia suggests they want shorter flight time and continued sorties. There are 8 B-2s and more B-52, extra fighter wings, A10s, tactical nuke talk, 3 CBGs.

You can keep saying they would have done it if they could and I'm here to tell you WAKE UP, it's starting!

 

[KHORSHIDSIYAH1488]

not just Zarif, Khamenei signed off on it as well, it just suits their interests to blame it all on Zarif

withdrawing from NPT in case of snapback is already Iran's stated position, but I am not sure it is convincing enough for Europe to waive their right to invoke snapback by October and let UNSC sanctions regime against Iran fall entirely (and likely permanently)

from now until October will be very decisive and potentially difficult months. we are at a major crossroads

It's not convincing and no one takes it seriously because it takes time and gives others the perfect justification to destroy Iran...

Iranian leadership backed themselves into a corner and are taking all Iranians to hell with them.

Just to remind you, here's a Benny Morris quote about Iran. We see it happening in Gaza. This is the Jewish mentality. Do you doubt their intentions now? They don't differentiate between government and people because they are the most tribal group of humans on earth. They will kill Iranian children because in their mind, Iranians should have thought of Jews and overthrown their government for its threats against Israel:

Quote from Benny Morris

'Realistic leaders in Washington and Jerusalem cannot allow Tehran to have the Bomb. And, in the coming months or year, must do what is necessary to halt and destroy the Iranian nuclear project. And if this involves a protracted, conventional air assault on the Iranian nuclear facilities—then so...

zionism.observer

People always ask me why I don't tolerate these "people". If 109 countries saw you as problematic enough over 1,000 times to kick you out or collectively destroy you, there is something to be said about the character and culture of the people. No one is afraid of saying Gypsies have a garbage culture, because they do- they don't respect property or boundaries, and they exalt trickery, theft and cleverness- wherever they go they exploit, engage in crime, and property crimes. No one is hesistant to say this. People just don't say the obvious about the Jews because the Jews have power. To me they are an Ahrimanic influence, purveyors of Druj, dregvants in the purest sense, they have lost their way, as we say in Zoroastrianism their history has made them susceptible to the Druj more than others- and they eschew the Truth, the task to do the right thing despite the hand dealt to them, and actively do the selfish thing. These are a people who have earned the spite of the world.

 

[Sultan Baybars]

Turkey reacts to Trump's bombing threat against Iran

TEHRAN, Apr. 05 (MNA) – Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has reacted to the threats made by US President Donald Trump on bombing Iran if a nuclear deal is not reached between Tehran and Washington.

en.mehrnews.com

Turkish FM: “We cant tolerate a war against Iran.”

 

[Bharatah]

you have some misunderstandings

US did not try because it left the deal and was no longer a party, and only a party to JCPOA can invoke snapback

there is no requirement for other parties to not be in violation to invoke snapback

and the vote does not need unanimous approval of UNSC and it cannot be vetoed. in fact, it is the opposite: it needs unanimous approval to NOT be invoked once you pass the first stage.

As i studied the subject :​

On the U.S. and the Legitimacy to Trigger Snapback​

• "The US did not try because it left the deal" → Partially correct.
  • The U.S. did attempt to trigger snapback in August 2020 (even after leaving the deal in 2018), claiming it was still an original "participant."
  • However, the UN Security Council rejected the U.S. legitimacy (UN Resolution 2231 does not grant rights to former participants).

On Prior Violations and Snapback​

• "No requirement for other parties to not be in violation" → Correct.
  • Article 37 of the JCPOA does not require other countries to be in full compliance to invoke snapback.

On the Veto in the Security Council​

• "Vote does not need unanimous approval... cannot be vetoed" → Incorrect.
  • Snapback is only automatic if no opposing resolution is passed by the Security Council within 30 days.
  • In practice, any permanent member (U.S., Russia, China, etc.) can block sanctions reinstatement by proposing an opposing resolution (which would need to be rejected for snapback to proceed).

---

Practical Example​

Scenario 1:

• France (or any European nation) proposes snapback.
• China does nothing → After 30 days, sanctions are automatically reinstated.

Scenario 2:

• France (or any European nation) proposes snapback.
• China submits a resolution to keep sanctions suspended→ This resolution must be voted on.
  • If China, Russia, the U.S., etc. approve it, snapback is blocked.
  • If any permanent member (e.g., the U.S.) vetoes it, the resolution fails, and snapback is activated.

---

"So if the U.S can block this process, snapback takes effect? Is it really that easy?"​

No. Let me explain:

Snapback is a "Legal Zombie"​

• Theoretically possible? Yes, if a JCPOA country insists.
• Effective in practice? No, because:
  • Russia/China would boycott any reinstated sanctions.
  • Iran would ignore them, escalating conflict.
  • The U.S./Europe already impose unilateral sanctions (bypassing the UN), so nothing changes.

OR​

• Russia/China could:
  • Create procedural obstructions (e.g., delay votes, demand new reviews).
  • Retaliate diplomatically against whoever proposes snapback.

---

Hypothetical Example (2024):​

If Germany tried to trigger snapback:

1. Russia would propose a resolution to maintain suspended sanctions.
2. The U.S./UK would veto that resolution.
3. Technical result: Snapback activated.
4. Real-world result:
   • Russia/China would first create procedural delays (e.g., stall votes, demand audits) and it can take years...
   • Even if snapback proceeded fast, they would ignore the sanctions, and Iran would follow suit, rendering snapback useless.

 

[Persian Gulf]

On the Veto in the Security Council​

• "Vote does not need unanimous approval... cannot be vetoed" → Incorrect.
  • Snapback is only automatic if no opposing resolution is passed by the Security Council within 30 days.
  • In practice, any permanent member (U.S., Russia, China, etc.) can block sanctions reinstatement by proposing an opposing resolution (which would need to be rejected for snapback to proceed).

---

Practical Example​

Scenario 1:

• France (or any European nation) proposes snapback.
• China does nothing → After 30 days, sanctions are automatically reinstated.

Scenario 2:

• France (or any European nation) proposes snapback.
• China submits a resolution to keep sanctions suspended→ This resolution must be voted on.
  • If China, Russia, the U.S., etc. approve it, snapback is blocked.
  • If any permanent member (e.g., the U.S.) vetoes it, the resolution fails, and snapback is activated.

I studied this topic to a very high level

but that is not necessary, the procedures and words are clear from the text

"Snapback is only automatic if no opposing resolution is passed by the Security Council within 30 days." --> correct

but that opposing resolution requires a unanimous vote (to continue lifting UNSC sanctions), meaning anyone can veto it --> meaning the opposing resolution cannot be passed if any state vetoes it --> snapback of UNSC sanctions then automatically occurs

^ please read these words very carefully so you understand your initial mistake

 

[Sultan Baybars]

@Persian Gulf @Bharatah

What is a snapback? I dont get it.

 

[Persian Gulf]

Withdrawing from the NPT is practically impossible. Iran needs to inform the agency of her intention to withdraw from the NPT 3 months before it implements the decision. And of course, 3 months is more than enough time for the West to put together a military force against Iran and even annex parts of Iran.

in practice iran can withdraw and kick out IAEA inspectors immediately

 

[Persian Gulf]

@Persian Gulf @Bharatah

What is a snapback? I dont get it.

under the JCPOA (Iran Deal), UN Security Council sanctions against Iran are lifted 'temporarily' for 10 years

but if one party to the deal believes iran is not complying with its obligations, they can effectively force all the UNSC sanctions to 'snapback' on Iran within that 10 year period

after that 10 year period (which expires in October 2025), the snapback procedure no longer applies and UNSC sanctions against iran are permanently lifted

 

[Sultan Baybars]

under the JCPOA (Iran Deal), UN Security Council sanctions against Iran are lifted 'temporarily' for 10 years

but if one party to the deal believes iran is not complying with its obligations, they can effectively force all the UNSC sanctions to 'snapback' on Iran within that 10 year period

after that 10 year period (which expires in October 2025), the snapback procedure no longer applies and UNSC sanctions against iran are permanently lifted

So all Iran just have to do is win time till October 2025?

That is 6 months from now on.

I hope Iran can win the time (and time is also getting faster and faster).

Trump and Netanyahu will do everything to force a war before October 2025.

Iranians are the best chessplayers of the world and they have the time on their side - they should know how to play this game.

 

[Persian Gulf]

So all Iran just have to do is win time till October 2025?

That is 6 months from now on.

I hope Iran can win the time (and time is also getting faster and faster).

Trump and Netanyahu will do everything to force a war before October 2025.

Iranians are the best chessplayers of the world and they have the time on their side - they should know how to play this game.

well there is a debate about how important the UNSC sanctions are given US primary and secondary sanctions are already in effect anyway

there is not much iran can do to 'win time' except make threats about how they will respond if Europe invokes the snapback (leave NPT)

 

[Khorasan Black Flags]

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

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

 

[Khorasan Black Flags]

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

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

 

[Khorasan Black Flags]

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

 

[Khorasan Black Flags]

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

 

[ShapurII]

in practice iran can withdraw and kick out IAEA inspectors immediately

Yes, but that isn't leaving the NPT. It's violating the NPT. As soon as Iran does that, they will understand that Iran wants to build the bomb and Iran's case will be immediately referred to the UN Security Council.