Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

BIG | 🇮🇷🇺🇸‼️‼️ Iran’s leadership is reportedly locked in a major internal struggle over how to break the increasingly costly deadlock with the United States, with one camp pushing for renewed negotiations while hard-line military figures advocate a much broader escalation of the war. According to The New York...

35,983 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

4 Kommentare

Profilbild von Bottleneck Daily
Bottleneck Dailyvor 11 Tagen

Unofficial Klingon (tlhIngan Hol) rendering of the Islamabad MoU — hoping a shared reading of the text helps both sides find mutual understanding. Qapla'.

Profilbild von СБУ Secret Bot
СБУ Secret Botvor 11 Tagen

There’s no out for Iran if US attacks them during negotiations or Trump disregards negotiated is the problem.

Profilbild von Michel Lars Marksø
Michel Lars Marksøvor 11 Tagen

Only communist morons reads NYT

Profilbild von Josef Dufek
Josef Dufekvor 11 Tagen

And how long can the US Navy logistically maintain a blockade of Iran?

Ähnliche Videos

🇺🇸🇮🇷⚠️ Trump hoped reopening the Strait of Hormuz would give him an opportunity to declare victory and wind down the war with Iran, even without securing a nuclear agreement. Tehran, however, has dramatically raised the price of a deal. According to The Wall Street Journal, Iran is demanding the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the region, an end to the naval blockade, the lifting of sanctions, the release of frozen Iranian assets, and billions of dollars in war reparations before fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Those demands have significantly narrowed the Trump administration’s room for maneuver. Tehran reportedly believes Washington is increasingly eager to find an exit from the conflict and is therefore using its ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, and consequently a crucial portion of global oil flows, as leverage at the negotiating table. The pressure is also growing inside the United States. Gasoline prices are hovering around $4 per gallon, while the approaching midterm elections give the Trump administration a strong political incentive to stabilize energy markets and reach an agreement with Iran. The situation leaves Washington facing an increasingly difficult calculation. Accepting Tehran’s sweeping demands would represent a major concession, while renewed military escalation risks further disruption of Hormuz and another surge in global energy prices. Iran appears to understand that pressure on the Strait directly translates into economic and political pressure on Washington, and Tehran is attempting to exploit that leverage to extract concessions it could never obtain under normal circumstances.

NSTRIKE

19,620 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran's latest attack struck U.S military facilities in Kuwait and the UAE, but the timing may be more important than the attack itself. The previous U.S-Iran exchange had effectively stopped. Washington decided not to retaliate against Iran's last barrage and reports suggest Trump’s team is actively trying to avoid another major escalation before the midterms. Iran attacked again anyway. And to understand why, look at what Washington is doing behind the scenes. The U.S is intensifying its economic campaign against Tehran, reportedly instructing embassies around the world to pressure governments to cut Iranian trade, with countries, companies and individuals potentially threatened with sanctions or a loss of access to the dollar system. Meanwhile, the UAE has become an important partner in Washington's attempt to keep oil moving through Hormuz and tighten the economic screws on Iran. Then Iran hits U.S-linked military infrastructure in the UAE and Kuwait. That makes these strikes look less like retaliation for something America already did and more like a warning about what comes next: If Washington turns the Gulf into the infrastructure for an economic war against Iran, Tehran may turn that same infrastructure into the battlefield. And that creates a serious problem for Trump's apparent pivot from military war to economic war. Sanctions were supposed to provide a way of squeezing Iran without another major exchange of missiles. Iran may be signalling that it doesn't intend to let America separate the two. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

340,144 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

There’s been a rush to interpret recent comments by Iranian officials as an admission that Tehran is nearing its breaking point and urgently needs a deal. I think that reading misses what they are actually saying. The economic strain is clearly severe. Central Bank chief Abdolnaser Hemmati says oil exports have fallen to nearly zero amid the US naval blockade and conditions are harder than during the initial 2018–21 maximum-pressure period. President Pezeshkian says Iran should end the war while it remains in a position of “power and dignity.” Ghalibaf has warned that military strength cannot compensate indefinitely for economic weakness. But acknowledging these vulnerabilities is not the same as signaling a change in Iran’s negotiating bottom lines. One point that is often missed outside Iran is that Iranian political and state-media debates can be surprisingly candid about the country’s vulnerabilities, internal disagreements, and strategic constraints. It's important look at what these same officials are saying alongside those warnings. Ghalibaf says Iran will endure substantial costs rather than sacrifice its “dignity and honor,” and is calling for new regional economic and security arrangements to offset US pressure. FM Araghchi says Iran’s foreign policy going forward will be fundamentally different and more assertive. Deputy FM Gharibabadi portrays Washington’s economic campaign as the next phase of a war the US failed to win militarily. Rezaei is threatening US economic interests and Gulf oil exports if regional states join Washington’s economic war. So yes, Iran wants a deal. It needs one too. But neither is new. The real question is what deal Tehran is prepared to accept. There is little here suggesting Iran is ready to reopen Hormuz on the prewar terms, relinquish the leverage it gained during the war, or accept a settlement it views as reflecting maximalist US demands. Tehran instead appears determined to demonstrate that it can withstand enough pressure to negotiate without surrendering those gains. That creates a dangerous paradox for Washington: greater economic pressure can simultaneously increase Iran’s need for a deal while hardening the terms on which it believes a deal is acceptable. That does not mean US pressure is ineffective. Iran is clearly hurting. It means pain and capitulation are not the same thing, and assuming the former will inevitably produce the latter risks repeating one of the central miscalculations that produced this war in the first place.

Sina Toossi

27,856 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat