Israel strikes Iran (Update: US Bombs Iran at #848)

The assessment was based on very little information. That’s why is said “low confidence”.

 

Unless there is regime change, Iran will most likely start to restart their nuclear program within a year. It’s just a matter of how far back these strikes have impacted them.

 

The JCPOA had its limits, and Trump exited because he had specific concerns. So, if President Trump has forced Iran to the table again, what terms are acceptable now?

IMO, Trump has to hammer Iran with sanctions that hurt the regime. The only answer is take their oil off the market. This will cut off Hezbollah terror funds. This will also cause a major negotiation conflict with China. Trump has to give something to China to gain this advantage. Oil prices will go up, which will help US domestic oil and gas producers. Americans will pay more at the pump.

There has to be a regime change and an oil fund set up for the benefit of the Iranian people to help them update and modernize their economy.

A summary of the JCPOA included the following:

Restrictions on Uranium Enrichment:
* Iran “agreed” to reduce its stockpile of low-enriched uranium by 98% to 300 kg for 15 years.
* Iran “committed” to limiting uranium enrichment to 3.67% purity, suitable for civilian power and research but far below weapons-grade levels (around 90%).
* Iran would retain “only” 6,104 centrifuges (out of nearly 20,000 previously), with only 5,060 allowed to enrich uranium, and these were limited to its oldest and least efficient IR-1 centrifuges for 10 years.
* No enrichment was allowed at the Fordow facility, which was repurposed for nuclear science and physics research. How did this work out?
* Iran was “prohibited” from building any new enrichment facilities for 15 years.

Plutonium Pathway:
* The Arak heavy-water research reactor was to be redesigned and converted so it could not produce weapons-grade plutonium. Its spent fuel, was to be shipped out of the country for the lifetime of the reactor.
* Iran was “prohibited” from building new heavy-water reactors or reprocessing facilities to separate plutonium from spent fuel for 15 years.

Inspections and Transparency:
* The deal provided the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with enhanced access to Iran's nuclear facilities, including continuous surveillance at uranium mills, centrifuge production sites, and other parts of the nuclear supply chain.
* Iran “agreed” to provisionally apply the Additional Protocol, allowing inspectors greater access to declared and undeclared sites.

Sanctions Relief:
* In exchange for these nuclear restrictions, the UN, US, and EU lifted nuclear-related economic and financial sanctions, providing Iran access to billions of dollars in frozen assets and increased oil revenue.

"Breakout Time" Extension:
* The deal extended Iran's "breakout time" from a few months to at least a year for a decade.

 

Can you also post the sunset clauses so everyone gets a true picture of what the deal was ?

 

Well a good start would be to NOT allow their oil revenue to increase by $100 Billion, oh and maybe let’s not fly $400 million directly to them. I still don’t understand this one. Why cash? Why deliver it in a plane? Seems super shady


US sent plane with $400 million in cash to Iran | CNN Politics


https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2024/1...exports-have-grown-exponentially-in-value-and

Earlier this month, the Energy Information Agency (EIA) published its first report about Iran’s petroleum exports as mandated by the Stop Harboring Iranian Petroleum(SHIP) Act enacted earlier this year. The EIA reported that Iran sold $144 billion in the first three years of the Biden administration, $100 billion more than what Tehran exported in the last two years of the Trump administration when the oil sanctions were in effect

 

Good call out. China buys roughly 85%-90% of Iranian oil. So, Trump needs to deal with China. What is the deal with China that is acceptable? I think Trump has to give and take here with China or no one gets a lasting deal with Iran.

 

hey we agree. First step is putting the sanctions back on that were in effect under Trump that Biden inexplicably removed

in the first three years of the Biden administration, $100 billion more than what Tehran exported in the last two years of the Trump administration when the oil sanctions were in effect

thankfully china’s ‘all the above’ energy policy has them constructing coal plants so they can purchase less Iranian oil

https://www.reuters.com/business/en...hits-10-year-high-researchers-say-2025-02-13/

 

He is not “my hero”. What I have been consistently saying on this board for at least the past 8 years is the US IC needs to stay out of politics. Whoever the leaker is, just drag them into it.

 

Good explanation of the BDA process in this clip:

 

Just went back and read that CNN report again. I'm starting to wonder if CNN fabricated the entire story in an effort to be the first to (1) publish a report on the bombings and (2) report something less than positive re the current administration. What's the risk for CNN in fabricating this "preliminary report" story? Worst thing the network would have to do is acknowledge the report was preliminary and inaccurate and/or the unnamed sources were mistaken in repeating what they heard/read in the briefing.

Remember .... this is just CNN which has been proven itself to be < reliable source.

 

The administration has indirectly acknowledged its existence and less than favorable findings. Now, it could be completely wrong, but you don’t down play it and then say you’re launching an investigation into the leaker unless it existed in the form CNN reported.

 

100%. These news outfits across the board are hell bent on being first and getting clicks. They keep failing the consumer. At some point, we’re going to have Agentic AI just flush the unsubstantiated reports so we don’t have to see the garbage writing.

 

They probably got snippets of information and then spun it to make click bait not bothering to validate anything.

 

CNN:

 

Interesting. So the "journalist" (Natasha Bertrand) with the "preliminary damage report" story also wrote the article for Politico stating the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation. Yep, she's a "journalist".

>>"Natasha Bertrand should be FIRED from CNN! I watched her for three days doing Fake News. She should be IMMEDIATELY reprimanded, and then thrown out ‘like a dog,'" the president wrote on Truth Social, the platform operated by Trump Media & Technology Group.

Trump referred to a story Bertrand had written for Politico in 2020. That article said, "More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Biden's son ‘has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.'" Following the New York Post's initial report on Hunter Biden's laptop in October of that year, other news outlets including the New York Times have reported that the laptop did belong to Hunter Biden and the documents on it were authentic.<<

Trump Angrily Calls for CNN to Fire Reporter Over Story on Iran Nuclear Strikes: She Should Be ‘Thrown Out Like a Dog'