- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Update: Situation in Iran thread
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:37 pm to METAL
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:37 pm to METAL
quote:
So the claim that Iran has not violated any agreements is simply false unless you redefine agreement to mean something narrower than what the IAEA, the Board, and the E3 are actually referring to.
After we withdrew, yes the violations started.
2
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:38 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Admittedly, I am very interested to see a potential paradigm shift in real time in the region, but I'm not so callous that I want war just for sport.
Agreed. The new regime doesn’t even have to be a great friend of the US. It just has to better than this one. One that doesn’t fund proxies all over the region to create instability. I don’t really give a shite if they want to oppress their own people. I honestly don’t really care if they have nuke either. The main thing is they need to stop funding the proxies around the region and threatening war against the US and Israel. I don’t say that out of any particular love for Israel but having Iran and Israel as mortal enemies is bad for everyone.
The trick is to effect regime change without getting drawn into long and bloody war.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:39 pm to VolInBavaria
quote:
If anything happens tonight it won't be for another 3-4 hours probably
I bet nothing happens or starts serious until or unless the US financial markets are closed. So nothing (US military) until about 4:00 pm eastern time Friday.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:39 pm to BOHICAMAN
I want what yall are smoking.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:41 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
I just struggle to see what Trump can get that is a win for him (without war).
A quick 12 Day type War probably doesn't hurt Trump politically.
Something that results into a lot of civilian deaths, slightly protracted and no regime change will be politically hurtful.
A quick strike and regime change is likely politically equivalent to a new rebranded Trumpian JCPOA. Both could be sold as positive outcomes.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:44 pm to Decatur
Withdrawal by the United States does not erase Iran’s obligations under the JCPOA framework it remained in with the E3, Russia, China, and the EU, nor does it affect Iran’s legally binding Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement under the NPT.
Even if someone argues the deal politically unraveled after 2018, that does not change the facts. Iran enriched to 60 percent, accumulated over 8,000 kg of enriched uranium, installed advanced centrifuges prohibited under the deal, restricted IAEA monitoring, and in June 2025 was formally found non compliant with its safeguards obligations by the IAEA Board. Those safeguards obligations are not a US agreement. They are legal commitments between Iran and the IAEA under the NPT.
So saying “violations started after the US withdrew” is not a defense. It is an admission that violations occurred. The debate is about justification, not whether breaches happened.
Even if someone argues the deal politically unraveled after 2018, that does not change the facts. Iran enriched to 60 percent, accumulated over 8,000 kg of enriched uranium, installed advanced centrifuges prohibited under the deal, restricted IAEA monitoring, and in June 2025 was formally found non compliant with its safeguards obligations by the IAEA Board. Those safeguards obligations are not a US agreement. They are legal commitments between Iran and the IAEA under the NPT.
So saying “violations started after the US withdrew” is not a defense. It is an admission that violations occurred. The debate is about justification, not whether breaches happened.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:45 pm to Decatur
quote:
Like this?
quote:
Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons.
No because it is impossible to trust religious zealots who wish death upon America. If Obama had balls he would have taken care of this situation a decade ago. Unfortunately the only balls in the Obama White House were in the East Wing (first lady's office) and not the West Wing.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:45 pm to METAL
OK, so what is the bigger prize?
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:46 pm to Captain Rumbeard
quote:
You kill the Ayatollah and his brother and the top generals and those mullahs will be hanging from lightposts the next day.
Easier said than done, but I agree.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:48 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
So we're kicking the can again to next week, is that the sense?
Maybe we're waiting until Ramadan ends, which is supposed to be March 19th? Who knows?
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:49 pm to WeeWee
Obama and Biden inflated the nads of the Persians
Another stain by the Democratic Party
Another stain by the Democratic Party
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:50 pm to METAL
Sure you can still argue they have legal obligations under the agreement but that doesn’t change the reality of the US withdrawal coupled with maximum pressure sanctions and the subsequent effect on Iran’s actions. Israel shares some of the blame with the U.S. here too.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:51 pm to Victor R Franko
quote:
OK, so what is the bigger prize?
I think the point is that, at the end of the day, everything's about energy. Some people keep insisting that global oil reserves are plentiful, others say there are sufficient affordable alternatives, but when it comes to geopolitics nobody acts that way.
This post was edited on 2/26/26 at 2:59 pm
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:52 pm to RelicBatches86
quote:
Whats it about then?
1 - Getting rid of the mullahs, which allows us to
2 - laugh once more at the incompetence of Chinese and Russian technology, and
3 - gaining control over more oil and the Straight of Hormuz, and
4 - satisfying the #1 benefactor of our elected officials, Israel.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:53 pm to WeeWee
quote:
If Obama had balls he would have taken care of this situation a decade ago.
HaHaHa, Obama sent Iran pallets of cash.
But the cash was really for hostages and misunderstandings, wink wink.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:56 pm to Victor R Franko
quote:
If Obama had balls he would have taken care of this situation a decade ago.
HaHaHa, Obama sent Iran pallets of cash.
But the cash was really for hostages and misunderstandings, wink wink.
You are right I should have said if Obama had balls and brains.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 2:57 pm to WeeWee
I know everybody on here hates watching videos but Dr Steve is ALWAYS 100% correct on everything he reports
Posted on 2/26/26 at 3:00 pm to Stat M Repairman
quote:
Where's ol Hans Blix?
We might need to roust him up and dust his arse off.
Still kicking. He'll be 98 in June.
He is currently the chair of the UAE's nuclear advisory board.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 3:04 pm to FLTech
quote:
I know everybody on here hates watching videos but Dr Steve is ALWAYS 100% correct on everything he reports
So it's over already? Whew! Our military can now stand down.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 3:12 pm to Decatur
You’re shifting from whether violations occurred to why they occurred. Those are two different questions. Yes, the US withdrawal and maximum pressure sanctions changed the political environment. But sanctions do not nullify safeguards obligations under the NPT, and they do not legally authorize enrichment to 60 percent, stockpiling thousands of kilograms beyond limits, or restricting IAEA monitoring. The June 2025 non compliance finding was about safeguards, not about American politics.
Blame sharing is a separate moral or geopolitical argument. If we want to talk about historical causation, then yes, the US bears real responsibility for the 1953 coup and for backing the Shah. That intervention helped destabilize Iranian politics long before 1979 and contributed to the revolutionary backlash. That is a fair historical criticism.
But even if we grant that, it still does not erase present legal obligations. Past US mistakes do not void Iran’s commitments under the NPT safeguards system. You can argue Iran feels justified. You cannot argue that no violations occurred. The IAEA Board’s formal finding makes that distinction very clear.
So the debate is not whether violations happened. They did. The debate is whether Iran’s actions were a proportional response to US policy. Those are two completely different claims.
Blame sharing is a separate moral or geopolitical argument. If we want to talk about historical causation, then yes, the US bears real responsibility for the 1953 coup and for backing the Shah. That intervention helped destabilize Iranian politics long before 1979 and contributed to the revolutionary backlash. That is a fair historical criticism.
But even if we grant that, it still does not erase present legal obligations. Past US mistakes do not void Iran’s commitments under the NPT safeguards system. You can argue Iran feels justified. You cannot argue that no violations occurred. The IAEA Board’s formal finding makes that distinction very clear.
So the debate is not whether violations happened. They did. The debate is whether Iran’s actions were a proportional response to US policy. Those are two completely different claims.
Page 201 of 209
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News