Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds
- Thread starter Khorasan Black Flags
- Start date
FUB
Trusted Member
Captured!
This interview was before Raisi’s death.
He led IDF intel gathering on Iran, was ignored and fears Israel is now paying price
“Citrinowicz was subsequently dispatched to Washington, where he served as the Military Intelligence deputy attaché to the US, coordinating intel sharing with American counterparts for three years during which Netanyahu pushed then-US president Donald Trump to vacate the JCPOA.”
“
In an interview with The Times of Israel, Citrinowicz characterized Jerusalem’s policy on Iran as a “failure,” and lamented his government’s decision to ignore the shift taking place in the Islamic Republic that he and his colleagues had identified. By encouraging the Trump administration to withdraw from the deal and to impose “maximum pressure” sanctions against Tehran, Israel helped dramatically weaken a more moderate force and blunt the impact of that shift, the retired major argued.”
He led IDF intel gathering on Iran, was ignored and fears Israel is now paying price
Danny Citrinowicz, ex-head of Military Intelligence research, says politicians' inability to adopt a nuanced approach led to 'colossal' policy failure, sped up Tehran's nuke effort
www.timesofisrael.com
Hack-Hook
INT'L MOD
As I said in the nuclear archive there is videos that show working on an explosive device
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
It's not my "theory". You are a very naive person, but I will teach you: Russia is not proposing a deal that in 6 months will enact the snapback with its support... that is what the Zionist media wants you to believe (just another one of their narratives to hide the fact that the snapback coming from the E3 is illegal).
What RUSSIA is proposing is that the expiration date in Oct/2025 be extended for another 6 months (and in 6 months it will ask for another +6 months...). This is a negotiation strategy where Russia is trying to show the rest of the world that the E3 is being externally pressured, is acting in bad faith, and its sole aim is to harm Iran.
Russia's opinion has already been issued by the Russian representative(Mikhail Ulyanov) in Vienna :
"The above-mentioned European states are themselves in violation of res.2231 and the #JCPOA. Therefore, legally speaking, they as violators don’t have the right to launch SnapBack." [Complete text below in twitter]
Your argument is invalid because when you buy a car, the document won't state that you have to pay for it without receiving it; the law is greater than the agreement between the seller and the client. In international law, it works the same way: Every treaty must comply with INTERNATIONAL LAW, otherwise IT IS INVALID.
The JCPOA states:
” Article 28 JCPOA (EU Sanctions): 'The European Union shall promulgate legislation to remove all nuclear-related sanctions of the EU... simultaneously with the start of Iran's implementation of its key nuclear commitments.”
The European Union did not remove the sanctions in their entirety; on the contrary, it reimposed them and even increased them, VIOLATING THE TREATY. Iran paid and did not receive the car... so, the agreement is INVALID, as stated by the Russian diplomat on Twitter above. The E3 could only activate the SNAPBACK if it were complying with the treaty.
you don't know what you are talking about. if your nonsense theory (which is not supported in the text of the JCPOA) was right, that the Europeans cannot invoke snapback because they are in violation of their obligations themselves, Russia would not need to try to extend the snapback deadline in the first place.
Russia also adopts Iran's argument that Europe cannot invoke snapback since they are in breach, but they contradict themselves by proposing extension of their supposedly non-existent right to invoke snapback.
The reality will be as I described yesterday. Snapback will be invoked and all sanctions will in fact be re-applied to Iran and the UNSC resolutions will apply in full again. But this time Russia and China might dispute the legitimacy of the resolutions and use this to justify not complying with them. But they can also use the UNSC resolutions as an excuse to cease any type of trade with Iran (as they did before), so Iran is entirely at their mercy.
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
Europeans wil trigger snapback today
Let's see if they also notify the UNSC and start the 30 day clock or not. if not, they still want to leave some time for an alternative agreement to avoid snapback (for now).
ShapurII
Trusted Member
The issue of possible military dimensions (PMD) to Iran's nuclear program happened in 2003 during the presidency of Khatami.
Rohani negotiated with E3, admitting that Iran had worked on plutonium reprocessing.
That was the basis that Iran's nuclear case was referred to the UN Security Council from the IAEA and eventually we reached this point.
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
Hack-Hook
INT'L MOD
First it was more than 34% in tehran seconds since when tehran votes decide legitimacy? what about fars , semnan, khorasan , qom , markazi and isfahan with more than 50 % turnout or bushehr , hormozegan , hanadan , kerman , khuzestan, mazandaran, qazvin and yazd and chaharmahal and bakhtiary with more than 40% turnout ?
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
the culmination of 20+ years of strategic indecision and naivety
if this means they have formally notified the President of the UNSC, the 30 day deadline begins today
if so, full snapback of all UNSC resolutions and sanctions against Iran will occur in 30 days
The Europeans seem to think they can halt the process if there is a deal before the 30 days are up. But even if there is a deal to extend the deadline, the US can now veto any attempt to pass a resolution to continue sanctions relief, so by the letter of the JCPOA, they cannot extend the deadline without the USA's approval.
FUB
Trusted Member
The Iraq model playing out . What is the point? American demands which is Israeli’s demands . No enrichment
“The Europeans are also pressing Iran to rejoin nuclear talks with Washington; however, the Iranians have made clear that the US can no longer be trusted - as it bombed the Islamic Republic in June at the very moment the sides were engaged in talks.”
www.zerohedge.com
“The Europeans are also pressing Iran to rejoin nuclear talks with Washington; however, the Iranians have made clear that the US can no longer be trusted - as it bombed the Islamic Republic in June at the very moment the sides were engaged in talks.”
IAEA Nuclear Inspector Team Returns to Iran In First Since Israel War | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
ShapurII
Trusted Member
It was 33.2% for both rounds in Tehran. For the first round, it was under 30% in Tehran.
In your own province, Khuzestan, only 29.6% participated.
And this is the only time that both reformists and conservatives agree that even these numbers could be higher than the real figures lol
TruthSeeker
Trusted Member
Iran Update, August 27, 2025
The E3 (the United Kingdom, Germany, and France) will reportedly initiate the JCPOA snapback process as soon as August 28.
www.understandingwar.org
Iran Update, August 27, 2025
The E3 (the United Kingdom, Germany, and France) will reportedly initiate the JCPOA snapback process as soon as August 28.
www.understandingwar.org
Iran Update, August 27, 2025
Aug 27, 2025 - ISW PressBen Rezaei, Ria Reddy, Nidal Morrison, Avery Borens, Adham Fattah, Ben Schmida, Kelly Campa, Henry Jenks, and Annika Ganzeveld
Information Cutoff: 2:00 PM ET
Information Cutoff: 2:00 PM ET
The E3 (the United Kingdom, Germany, and France) will reportedly initiate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) snapback process as soon as August 28, according to three European diplomats and one Western diplomat.[1] The JCPOA snapback mechanism allows JCPOA signatories to reimpose UN Security Council (UNSC) sanctions on Iran in the event of “significant non-performance” of JCPOA commitments.[2] The snapback mechanism is currently set to expire on October 18, 2025. The E3 imposed a deadline of August 31 on Iran to make meaningful progress toward a nuclear deal, such as by renewing cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and resuming negotiations with the United States.[3] The E3 offered to postpone the expiration of the snapback mechanism to allow Iran more time to negotiate with the United States.[4] Iran reportedly failed to make “sufficiently tangible commitments” during the most recent Iran-E3 meeting in Geneva on August 26.[5] Another source stated that Iran offered “very little to work with” to secure an extension.[6]
It is unclear if the E3 will initiate the dispute resolution process outlined in the JCPOA or directly refer Iran's non-compliance to the UNSC. The dispute resolution process can take up to 35 days and involves a series of steps that aim to resolve non-compliance issues.[7] The E3 can choose to engage in the dispute resolution process and then refer the issue to the UNSC if it believes that Iran continues to show "significant non-performance." The E3 can, conversely, bypass the dispute resolution process and directly refer the non-compliance issue to the UNSC. The E3 would be required to include a description of "the good-faith efforts the [E3] made to exhaust the dispute resolution process" when they refer Iran’s non-compliance to the UNSC.[8] The JCPOA gives the UNSC 30 days to pass a resolution to extend sanctions relief for Iran, but UNSC permanent members (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, and Russia) can veto such a resolution. The E3 is reportedly hopeful that Iran will make unspecified commitments regarding its nuclear program within 30 days that will allow the E3 to avoid reimposing UNSC sanctions on Iran.[9] The snapback mechanism would reimpose six UNSC resolutions on Iran, including bans on the transfer of conventional arms to and from Iran, international support for Iran's missile program, enrichment-related activities, and the testing and development of nuclear-capable missiles.[10]
Hardline Iranian parliamentarians criticized the return of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors to Iran and argued that their return undermines a recent law that parliament passed to restrict cooperation with the agency.[11] These criticisms arose after IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi announced on August 26 that IAEA inspectors would soon resume inspections in Iran.[12] Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Spokesperson Behrouz Kamalvandi stated on August 27 that IAEA inspectors will supervise the fuel replacement at the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) to ensure that electricity is produced in a timely manner.[13] The Iranian parliament passed a bill on June 25 to suspend all cooperation with the IAEA.[14]
The Iranian Parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Commission warned on August 26 that the AEOI and Foreign Affairs Ministry must fully comply with the law suspending cooperation with the IAEA.[15] Hardline parliamentarians separately accused the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) on August 27 of concealing decisions from parliament and the public.[16] Hardliners warned that continued government cooperation with the IAEA would justify legal action against senior SNSC officials for undermining parliament’s authority.[17] Foreign Affairs Minister Abbas Araghchi stated on August 20 that Iran cannot completely end all cooperation with the IAEA since the upcoming fuel replacement at the BNPP requires inspectors to be present. Araghchi emphasized that the return of IAEA inspectors to Iran would take place within the framework of the law that parliament passed on July 25.[18] The IAEA inspectors currently in Iran are reportedly only permitted to oversee the fuel replacement at the BNPP and cannot access or inspect damaged nuclear sites such as Natanz and Fordow.[19] These sites remain largely inaccessible to any party.
