Iran

[GlobalNav]

Who do you believe when neither tells the truth! Oh my.

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by GlobalNav

Who do you believe when neither tells the truth! Oh my.

Neither one. Was this an attempt at a trick question?
(Mind you, Iran is involved, but I'd not rely on DJT as my source for that).

[ORAC]

Delivered 2 weeks ago, so just over 6 weeks to go.....

https://www.axios.com/2025/03/19/tru...n-nuclear-deal

Scoop: Trump's letter to Iran included 2-month deadline for new nuclear deal

President Trump's letter to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei included a two-month deadline for reaching a new nuclear deal, one U.S. official and two sources briefed on the letter told Axios.

Why it matters: It isn't clear whether the two month-clock begins from the time the letter was delivered or from when negotiations start. But if Iran rejects Trump's outreach and doesn'tnegotiate, the chances of U.S. or Israeli military action against Iran's nuclear facilities would dramatically increase.

The big picture: Iran's nuclear program has advanced over the past four years and it is closer than ever to producing a nuclear weapon.
n

• Its stockpile of 60% enriched uranium is enough for six nuclear bombs if enriched to 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
• Iran has denied it is pursuing nuclear weapons.

Catch up quick: Two weeks ago in an interview with Fox News' Maria Bartiromo, Trump revealed that he sent a letter to the Iranian leader proposing direct negotiations.
n

• A day later Trump said the U.S. is "down to the final moments" with Iran.
• "We can't let them have a nuclear weapon. Something is going to happen very soon. I would rather have a peace deal than the other option but the other option will solve the problem," he said.
• The letter was delivered a few days ago by Trump envoy Steve Witkoff to the president of the United Arab Emirates Mohammed Bin Zayed (MBZ) in a meeting in Abu Dhabi.
• A day later, MBZ's envoy Anwar Gargash travelled to Tehran and gave the letter to the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Behind the scenes: The sources said Trump's letter to Khamenei was "tough." On the one hand, it proposed negotiations on a new nuclear deal, but on the other hand warned of consequences if Iran rejects the offer and continues to push forward with its nuclear program.
n

• Trump said in the letter that he doesn't want open-ended negotiations and mentioned a two-month period for getting a deal, two sources said.
• Before the letter was delivered to the Iranians, the White House briefed several U.S. allies including Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE about its contents, a U.S. official and a source with knowledge told Axios.
• The White House declined to comment. The Iranian mission to the UN did not respond to requests for comment.

What they're saying: Last week Iran's leader Khamenei called Trump's letter and his proposal for negotiations "a deception" that is only meant to create the impression that Iran refuses to negotiate.
n

• Khamenei said he didn't support negotiations with the U.S. but several hours later the Iranian mission to the UN issued a statement on X and didn't rule out negotiations between Iran and the U.S. over the nuclear program.

• "If the objective of negotiations is to address concerns vis-à-vis any potential militarization of Iran's nuclear program, such discussions may be subject to consideration," it said in the statement.
• The Iranian mission to the UN added however that if the aim of the talks is "the dismantlement of Iran's peaceful nuclear program to claim that what Obama failed to achieve has now been accomplished, such negotiations will never take place."

What to watch: Iran's foreign ministry said in a briefing with reporters earlier this week that Trump's letter is still being studied and Iran's response is being drafted.
n

• Trump said on Monday that the U.S. will consider any further attacks by the Houthis in Yemen as emanating from Iran and threatened the Iranian government with "dire consequences." Iran has said it doesn't control the Houthis.
• In a post on Truth Social on Wednesday, Trump said there are reports that Iran is reducing its military support for the Houthis but "they are still sending large levels of Supplies." He reiterated his call for Iran to stop supplying the Houthis.
• Trump's national security adviser Mike Waltz said on Sunday that Iran needs to "hand over and give up" all elements of its nuclear program including missiles, weaponization and enrichment of uranium "or they can face a whole series of other consequences," adding that "Iran has been offered a way out of this."

[Lonewolf_50]

Another Party heard from:

North Korea said it wants the United States to stop its "indiscriminate use of force" as a new wave of U.S. airstrikes hit the Houthi militia group backed by Iran.Ma Tong Hui, who is concurrently the top North Korean envoy to Egypt and Yemen, said the U.S. military's operations against Houthi positions in Yemen were "gravely violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries"; an intervention that pointed to Pyongyang's growing alignment with Tehran—along with Moscow and Beijing—on global affairs.

Mr Ma Tong, you can want in one hand and defecate in the other.
See which one fills up first.

Looks like W was wrong. The Axis of Evil was Norkors, Iran, and Russia all along.

[ORAC]

3 x B-2s in Diego Garcia, another 4 reported to be airborne en-route to join them.

https://x.com/polymarketintel/status...721587326?s=61

According to Open Source intelligence, four additional B-2 stealth bombers are en route to Diego Garcia, bringing the total to seven—a record deployment.

The island, about 3,500–4,000 km from the Middle East, serves as a key launch point for U.S. bombers with aerial refueling support.

https://www.twz.com/air/signs-u-s-ma...n-diego-garcia

Signs U.S. Massing B-2 Spirit Bombers In Diego Garcia

A significant force of B-2 Spirit stealth bombers looks to be currently wending its way to the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. Satellite imagery shows at least three C-17 cargo planes and 10 aerial refueling tankers forward-deployed in the last 48 hours to the highly strategic British territory, which has been used as a staging point for U.S. strikes in the Middle East on multiple occasions in the past.

The build-up comes amid a new surge in U.S. strikes targeting the Houthis and growing warnings to Iran from the Trump administration over support for the Yemeni militants and Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

The crews of two B-2 bombers, callsigns Pitch 11 and Pitch 14, could be heard communicating with air traffic controllers in Australia earlier today in publicly available audio. The crew of Pitch 11 confirms the presence of a third bomber, as well. The trio of bombers appears to have refueled in flight over Australia while heading westward.

A fourth B-2, callsign Pitch 13, landed at Hickam Air Force Base in Hawaii yesterday after declaring an emergency in flight. Video subsequently emerged showing that aircraft being met on the ground by a crash truck, but the nature of the emergency remains unknown.

Additional air traffic control recordings indicate that additional B-2s, using the callsign Abba, departed Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri earlier today also bound for Diego Garcia. The Air Force’s entire force of 20 B-2 bombers is based at Whiteman.…..

[ORAC]

https://x.com/breakingne66541/status...152173933?s=61

BREAKING: U.S. Shuts Down Diego Garcia Airbase Until May 2025, Signaling Major Iran Operation

The United States has issued a NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) for its Diego Garcia airbase in the Indian Ocean, closing it to regular operations until May 1, 2025.

The extended closure points to a prolonged deployment of substantial air forces over the next two months.

Analysts suggest the U.S. is gearing up for a significant move, with preparations clearly aimed at confronting Iran.


​​​​​​​

[Asturias56]

"Trump's letter to Iran included 2-month deadline for new nuclear deal"

Hmmm - they can probably breakout their new A bomb in that time..................

[West Coast]

Perhaps but can it be mated to a delivery vehicle? I know they have/had lots of missiles, but are they capable of lofting a first gen nuclear weapon towards what they perceive to be a threat? Only they know for sure.

[Strucky]

Everyone assumes that they don't have a nuclear at the moment - an unwise assumption. They could have a dirty bomb or have acquired a low yield tactical weapon from a state that wants money, oil or another trade. If the IRGC are cornered or might lose their power and control over the populace, they are capable of anything. Most likely target would be a US carrier group but then hell would be let lose upon them and the middle east.

[Ninthace]

Has this been thought through?
If the US unleashes a wave of strikes on Iran, what then? It will only strengthen Iranian resolve and I suspect you will see major retaliation on those states in the Middle East that are seen as friends of the US and the closure of the Gulf to shipping. Does POTUS have a plan that goes beyond stage 1?

[MarcK]

Why would Iran target a US carrier group? My guess is that they would target Israel. Who would retaliate. Who else joins the fray?

[42go]

Does POTUS have a plan ......?

Never mind stage 1.

[beardy]

Originally Posted by MarcK

Why would Iran target a US carrier group? My guess is that they would target Israel. Who would retaliate. Who else joins the fray?

You are joking aren't you?

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

Has this been thought through?
If the US unleashes a wave of strikes on Iran, what then? It will only strengthen Iranian resolve and I suspect you will see major retaliation on those states in the Middle East that are seen as friends of the US and the closure of the Gulf to shipping. Does POTUS have a plan that goes beyond stage 1?

I would suspect a strike should it occur would be due to Iran approaching some threshold on the development of a nuke.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by beardy

You are joking aren't you?

I would think Israel would be a logical target as well. Not sure hitting a CBG is that easy. The USN has put a lot of thought towards countering carrier killer missiles of late.

[Recc]

Originally Posted by West Coast

I would think Israel would be a logical target as well. Not sure hitting a CBG is that easy. The USN has put a lot of thought towards countering carrier killer missiles of late.

They would not strike Israel. Shipping (particularly tankers) in Hormuz would be the logical response. Saudi oil fields would also be on the escalation ladder, though this would likely be held in reserve.

[Ninthace]

Originally Posted by West Coast

I would suspect a strike should it occur would be due to Iran approaching some threshold on the development of a nuke.

No doubt a pretext will be found, but that is not the point. As folk are fond of pointing out, decisions have consequences. Has the US considered the consequences?

On a separate tack, there are many countries now that have a nuclear capability that are hostile to the US and with a more developed capability, so why Iran but not DPRNK for example. The US says it does not want to be world policeman but this smacks of that.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Ninthace

No doubt a pretext will be found, but that is not the point. As folk are fond of pointing out, decisions have consequences. Has the US considered the consequences?

On a separate tack, there are many countries now that have a nuclear capability that are hostile to the US and with a more developed capability, so why Iran but not DPRNK for example. The US says it does not want to be world policeman but this smacks of that.

You know the answer to that.

[tartare]

With absolutely no expertise in the field, my understanding is that developing a basic bomb is actually relatively easy - and comparatively cheap.
The really hard part is miniaturising it into a reliable and robust vehicle that can survive re-entry and detonate - in the case of an ICBM.
Cruise missiles, SRBMs, hypersonic glide vehicles and gravity bombs also require miniaturisation.

[Ninthace]

Originally Posted by West Coast

You know the answer to that.

Do as we say, not as we do.
In the past Iran has proposed a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone in the Middle East but developments elsewhere in the area pushed them down the path of deterrence instead.