US and Iran announce deal to end military operations

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cj0grpyg4v1t

by vermilingua • 1 month ago

101 249 1 month ago

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/iran-says-draft-us-d...

jeffbee3• 1 month ago

Total capitulation by America, Israel might not even be on-board with this deal, and Trump still has 5 days to chicken out or forget.

energy123• 1 month ago

He did say unconditional surrender

esseph• 1 month ago

Trump said they would sign something today.

An hour later, now they're not signing anything until Friday.

breatheoften• 1 month ago

"For purposes of mine removal" -- what the hell is that line about ...

irishcoffee2• 1 month ago

I have it on good authority that Iran doesn’t know where all the mines are buried.

ggm• 1 month ago

I have it on good authority there are still ww1 mines in the North Sea. Mines drift. At best you know the co-ordinates of where you released them from a ship.

comrade12347• 1 month ago

Surely trump deserves the Nobel prize for this deal!

jleyank• 1 month ago

I think they prefer their winners to not have started the action that they're claiming credit for ending...

comrade12347• 1 month ago

Someone will nominate him. Qatar? UAE?

zahlman7• 1 month ago

This is not any better than the reply about Obama. The intention of the snark is clear, and does not contribute to useful discourse. Please don't.

comrade12347• 1 month ago

It's a ridiculous situation that requires ridicule. And further I will bet you (or polymarket) that someone will nominate trump for the Nobel prize for this deal.

mcphage3• 1 month ago

When you fuck up this badly, people are allowed to make fun of you.

defrost5• 1 month ago

If not for this one, then surely for the 21 prior ‘imminent’ ceasefire deals or perhaps for one of the upcoming ceasefire deals.

So many deals.

rsynnott2• 1 month ago

Another FIFA prize at the very least.

calmbonsai• 1 month ago

5 days is forever in the history of these negotiations.

I would be shocked if it actually happens.

epolanski3• 1 month ago

The Israeli will drag Trump again.

woodruffw3• 1 month ago

Are the terms of the deal public yet? If they're essentially a return to the status quo ante bellum, that would be a pretty embarrassing conclusion for the US (and would presumably further harden any belief within Iran that the only permanent regime-preserving solution involves accelerating the process of obtaining nuclear weapons).

jeffbee3• 1 month ago

It's much worse than that. This gives Iran de jure control of traffic in the strait.

toomuchtodo• 1 month ago

“Art of the deal.” Thousands of deaths and tens to hundreds of billions of dollars borrowed and spent to be in a worse position than before this started.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2026_Iran_wa...

https://iran-cost-ticker.com/

petilon5• 1 month ago

How so? Trump Claims Strait Will be ‘Permanently Toll Free’ Under Agreement With Iran (NYT headline).

8note• 1 month ago

iran has defacto control over traffic in the strait. what changes?

dools3• 1 month ago

The commencement, duration and conclusion are all embarrassing for the US because the entire country is run by b list right wing media bros

epolanski3• 1 month ago

The conclusion has long been embarassing unless we live under a rock.

The US president has been played like a fool by the Israelis and Iran has inflicted a humiliating defeat to the US and its allies by leveraging cheap asymmetric warfare.

woodruffw3• 1 month ago

I think this war's first phase was clearly in Israel's favor, insofar as Israel's strategic goal is neutralizing Iran as a peer adversary. But the latter phases have not really gone how they (= Netanyahu) want/s; the ideal end state for Israel is an enormous civilian infrastructure cost to Iran that would subtract from military budgeting, but that isn't what the deal suggests.

(Intentionally targeting civilian infrastructure is, of course, a war crime.)

benterix• 1 month ago

the US and its allies

Which allies?

compass_copium2• 1 month ago

From Al Jazeera:

According to remarks carried by the Tasnim news agency, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said negotiations for a final deal will be held during a 60-day period, after verifying that the US implemented its commitments under the deal, including ending hostilities, lifting the blockade, and releasing frozen assets.

So, it's an even worse position for the US than before launching the war.

theturtletalks• 1 month ago

Didn’t Iran consider their previous US negotiations a sham? Why would they believe them this time? Feels like the US wants to approach them with these deals, reneg, and once Iran is like we don’t want anymore deals, then the US can point to them and be like, see they don’t want peace.

bhouston7• 1 month ago

So, it's an even worse position for the US than before launching the war.

True but continuing the war is worse for Trump. There was no real way to win.

thrwaway55• 1 month ago

There is no way Iran didn't gain on this, US would be lucky to hit status quo. The clown in chief is a moron and they know it and will exploit it.

Amezarak3• 1 month ago

Iran had already passed the IAEA red-line of enriching uranium to 60%. They had already accomplished virtually all the hard parts of building a bomb.

https://fordow.net/blog/posts/enriched-uranium-proliferation...

Is a good explainer about uranium enrichment.

The most alarming aspect of 60% enrichment is how close it brings a country to weapons-grade material 4344. The enrichment work required to move from 60% to 90% is substantially less than the work needed to reach 60% from natural uranium 4546. This means a country with 60% enriched uranium stockpiles could potentially produce weapons-grade material in a matter of weeks or even days.

recroad3• 1 month ago

You left out the part that they went past the 3.5% after Trump pulled out of the deal. While they were in it, they were complying fully as per IAEA and the US State department themselves.

hnbad• 1 month ago

This would be a lot more concerning if it wasn't widely known that Israel also illegally holds nuclear weapons of its own and therefore should have been sanctioned by the US for decades. Not having nukes is how Iran got here in the first place - the POTUS unilaterally withdrawing from their agreement and bombing them in the middle of negotiations. For all the portrayals of the Iranian government as "lunatics" over the years, getting to nuclear ASAP is the only logical move for a country in Iran's position - just look at how the US went back on its sabre rattling against North Korea once they demonstrated nuclear capabilities.

You don't have to think the Iranian government is in any way "good" but there's literally no logical reason for them not to desperately try to get their hands on nuclear weapons at this point. They have no reason to trust the West to ever follow through on any promises again.

dofm4• 1 month ago

Depends who you ask, I think.

It looks like it is more an MoU than a deal, and I think that allows Trump the cover to drip feed out how humiliating it is, because this isn't the kind of band-aid you rip off all at once.

If I were a betting man I would bet that between now and Friday there will be too much news coverage of just how humiliating this is for the USA, how bad a deal it is, and how much of failure it is, and Trump himself will pull out of the deal. This has, allegedly, happened at least once.

But Iran now seem to be a bit better schooled in how to actually get him to agree, so perhaps they will be persuaded to smile a shit-eating grin while he takes a victory lap, and simply keep the most humiliating details of it under wraps until he signs.

How long it is before Trump claims to renegotiate it, who knows. Just the other day Trump said he might not renew USMCA — his own prior great achievement of loudly renegotiating NAFTA to be not significantly worse.

no-name-here2• 1 month ago

I can see the logic in what you’re saying, but Iran state media is reporting the deal includes “The US and its allies delivering reconstruction plans for Iran worth at least $300bn” (in addition to the $25B) but I don’t understand their use of the word “plan”? https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cj0grpyg4v1t?post=asset%3A1793...

3eb7988a16632• 1 month ago

With nuclear questions to be resolved at a later time. Wasn't total disarmament the core, non-negoitable for this entire conflict?

dools3• 1 month ago

The core non negotiable for the conflict was meeting a handful of Israel’s military objectives at the expense of virtually everyone else globally.

3eb7988a16632• 1 month ago

For sure, but the eventually-settled-upon rationale was some kind of nuclear deterrence. To walk away with Iran (likely) to maintain its uranium stockpile + possible toll control of the strait is such a complete and utter self-own.

corvad• 1 month ago

At the very least it should quell the markets for this week.

zahlman7• 1 month ago

Markets reached ATH this month and are only a couple percent off that mark. What is there to "quell"?

petilon5• 1 month ago

Trump says "The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete." The deal opens the Strait of Hormuz to all, while leaving the thorniest nuclear issues for another day.

So basically the same as when the war started.

dools3• 1 month ago

Slightly worse by the sounds of it

rwmj• 1 month ago

Same, minus the people who died.

mandeepj2• 1 month ago

More cash with Iran now

colonCapitalDee• 1 month ago

We'll see if it happens. Quote: "mediators will facilitate a series of meetings this week. These pre-implementation discussions will lay the foundation for the technical talks and the official signing ceremony." It's concepts of a plan all over again

sillysaurusx• 1 month ago

I wonder how the stock markets will react tomorrow. I know someone who turned $6k into $150k by buying options on war related news. The logic is that the markets will almost certainly go up, so bet big at a time like this.

It sounded like an easy way to lose $6k, but maybe the upside is worth the risk. I don’t have any experience to know whether this is a sufficiently good bet though.

zahlman7• 1 month ago

Institutional investors get to trade outside of hours that most ordinary people can't; presuming that this is net positive for markets, they will already be up when the bell rings.

kelnos11• 1 month ago

maybe the upside is worth the risk

The upside is worth the risk if you can stand to lose $6k without it hurting too much. If you can't, then it isn't.

dingaling• 1 month ago

The logic is that the markets will almost certainly go up

The markets go up because people buy expecting that the markets will go up, which causes sellers to increase their price because they expect people will pay more because of FOMO, which people still buy because they expect the market to go up further.

The snake somehow keeps eating its tail.

an_guy• 1 month ago

Well Obama gave $3 billion dollars in cash to Iran. Atleast he didn't do that, right? RIGHT???

LPisGood2• 1 month ago

Looks like 25 billion this time around.

kennywinker4• 1 month ago

The US and its allies delivering reconstruction plans for Iran worth at least $300bn

throw03172019• 1 month ago

It will be more.

ergocoder6• 1 month ago

It's the last bump before I liquidate all my stocks. I predict that the crash will come at the end or the beginning of the next president which is likely democrat.

Not that it's democrat's fault but democrat is more disciplined

LPisGood2• 1 month ago

I have some thoughts on that. It’s possible that the current administration’s lack of oversight has artificially propped up the stock market. If the next president decides to return to a more traditional rules based structure, the market will probably react very poorly. US debt is also getting more expensive and interest is ballooning.

Making the country less desirable to the most skilled immigrants and eroding the capabilities of the strongest research universities will also mean there is probably hell to pay in the medium term.

ergocoder6• 1 month ago

The swing of the market based on the president's crazy tweets is just insane. This cannot go on for much longer. I will be parking my money at a safer place

Sabinus2• 1 month ago

My fear is that Trump will keep the show going until the end of his term but generally destroy the market's fundamental health and stability. Then a Dem president tries to re-rationalise the markets, they can't handle the correction, there's a crash, and with the backlash the USA is set up for a real spicy government.

newaccountman22• 1 month ago

That's like 2.5 years from now--you don't think crash will happen before then?

ergocoder6• 1 month ago

I think it may happen before then. That's why I'm thinking of liquidating it soon-ish. Trump is doing too much crazy things. He cannot prop up the market for that long.

I plan to put most of the money in US t-bill (4 week) to earn 3% for now.

mhb• 1 month ago

And what are you going to do with that money?

ergocoder6• 1 month ago

US t-bill (4w) until the market crashes. For 401K, I'll just move it to money market/bond.

We don't really need to maximize the profits all the time. Not losing the money is good too.

zahlman7• 1 month ago

Time in the market beats timing the market, bears have predicted (large number) out of the last (smaller number) recessions, etc. None of this is novel. "Predicting" a stock crash due to political reasons is effectively just a fancy restatement of anti-those-politics views; and it isn't substantive, especially when the prediction comes with a years-long window.

cosmicgadget12• 1 month ago

You need to caveat this with "... if you want to be lazy and ignorant of your port." Otherwise there is so, so much evidence that it is flat wrong.

bhouston7• 1 month ago

Is this going to end Israel’s offensive into Lebanon? It isn’t clear. It may be that Israel has permanently expanded its borders into the ethnically cleansed southern Lebanon just like it has into Syria recently. This is what Katz is saying:

https://www.ynetnews.com/article/qeko153ri

ep1032• 1 month ago

According to the NY times, its a 60 day ceasefire on all fronts, and a return to pre-war status on issues like the (blockade, tolls, nuclear program, sanctions) starting this coming Friday. Also on Friday, a new round of negotiations will begin to discuss these issues.

So basically, both sides agreed to go back to the pre-war status quo for 60 days while negotiations continue.

Except one thing so far, apparently Trump has agreed to unfreeze Iranian financial assets.

Remember: the reason Trump said Obama's nuclear agreement was terrible was because Obama was "paying the Iranians to not develop nuclear weapons". What Obama did, was pay them out of these frozen assets. Which trump just gave them back for free, and without a nuclear deal.

firesteelrain5• 1 month ago

I don’t know how this is worse for the US or the World. Iran’s leadership and military was decapitated. It’s in the best interest of US, Europe and Israel and the Middle East. The nuclear program had a huge setback.

What are the counter arguments to these facts if we really end up in peace with Iran along with the bad actors gone too?

ls612• 1 month ago

if the strait actually reopens and Iran actually ships the enriched uranium out of the country this is a reasonable outcome imo. My concern centers on the fact that neither of these two outcomes are guaranteed by a long shot at this point.

firesteelrain5• 1 month ago

Iran just confirmed the MOU.

cosmicgadget12• 1 month ago

Are the bad actors gone?

fatbird2• 1 month ago

The bad actors were killed, and the children of the bad actors took over. Same regime, now more firmly in control.

While before, Iran's assets worldwide were frozen, they're now receiving back $25 billion of it. Also, the sanctions preventing them from selling their oil are lifted, so they now have oil revenue to expect.

Additionally, the US will pay $300 billion to "reconstruct" Iran.

Lastly, Iran has proved that it has de facto control of the Strait of Hormuz and the mightiest military in the world cannot prevent or stop it. Going forward, Iran will receives fees to allow transit of the strait.

How can you possibly think this isn't worse for the US and the world than the previous status quo?

firesteelrain5• 1 month ago

If the status quo was so great, why was Iran sitting on near-weapons-grade uranium and months from breakout? “Do nothing and hope” wasn’t a strategy. The only meaningful question is whether Iran ends up weaker and farther from a bomb than before. If yes, it’s an improvement

kelnos11• 1 month ago

Very little has changed with the regime. The next in line stepped up, and it seems like the future will be business as usual.

The nuclear bogeyman is the wrong thing to focus on. Sure, we don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons, but they have a lot of other power in the region, and we've only confirmed and entrenched that power.

firesteelrain5• 1 month ago

Its proxies are weaker, its allies are fewer, and its economy is still dependent on sanctions relief. Preventing a nuclear weapon while dealing with a diminished regional adversary is a better position than preventing neither.

drbojingle2• 1 month ago

Yes, removing leadership is very important. It's why the US does it every 4 to 8 years. The Iranians aren't gone just because they lost a leader. If anything they proved resilient.

The biggest problems with all of this seem to be the knock-on effects, as well as the lead-up. Does this new deal actually do more than Obama's? Doubtful. Obama's didn't come with a girls' school blown to bits or a world leader assassinated.

Everything around the politics of the attack looks amateurish. Calling on Europe to attack Iran even though no deal is in place with them to do so. Not stopping Iranian strikes throughout the middle east. Not keeping Israel in line. The war has been dragging on for months, but "it'll end this week." No, this week. "Very close this week." "Very close this week."

Then there's the issue of shooting down cheap drones with expensive equipment. Why in the name of the Lord is it that Ukraine has been bombed by Shaheds for years and defended against them using NATO and US weapons, but operators of US equipment in the Middle East had nothing to show for it? Did the US not have direct access to how the Ukrainians were using their equipment in a war characterized by the use of drones and AI to an extent never before seen? Did the US decide to not look into that for years, or simply let it slide knowing Iran would bomb its neighbors? Why was it that Zelenskyy had to go to the Middle East to make sure they used American weapons correctly? It seems to me lately that every country that can produce a meaningful amount of oil has been directly or indirectly affected by American aggression, and one has to wonder why you'd do something so blatant in slow motion.

orwin2• 1 month ago

The president/head of the civilian government in Iran was ousted, probably by the IRGC. The IRGC took control of the mullahs a week after the war started. They already had power over them, but the fact us that without the war, the supreme guide election would have been a difficult power struggle with political concessions. It wasn't thanks to Trump, reinforcing the IRGC control of Iran's religious life.

The Iranian regime will be more repressive and more extreme.

The only good point about that is that it makes the regime weaker to domestic insurrections.

firesteelrain5• 1 month ago

You’re assuming internal consolidation equals increased strength. History is full of regimes that became more authoritarian precisely because they were weaker and under pressure, not because they were winning.

petilon5• 1 month ago

Details here: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/iran-says-draft-us-d...

Key bullets:

What Iran gets:

* The U.S. agrees to release $25 billion of Iran’s frozen assets, including via direct cash transfers, cooperation among regional countries, and financial credit lines.

* Washington, in coordination with its regional allies, would prepare a reconstruction and development plan for Iran, to be negotiated and agreed with Tehran within 60 days.

What the US gets:

* Tehran agrees that it will neither produce nor acquire nuclear weapons.

* Pending a final agreement, Iran would maintain the current status of its nuclear programme, refraining from further uranium enrichment and expansion of nuclear facilities.

* The United States agrees to allow Iran to dilute its stockpile of highly enriched uranium on Iranian soil under a future comprehensive agreement.

* Iran’s nuclear programme, uranium enrichment activities and mechanisms for handling its stockpile of highly enriched uranium would be negotiated within 60 days of the memorandum and addressed in a final agreement.

comrade12347• 1 month ago

Also, the u.s. makes Israel stop destroying Lebanon. Trump is already pressing Israel on this. Iran will come across as Lebanon's saviors.

smt882• 1 month ago

Trump hasn’t (so far) demonstrated the ability to stop Israel from bombing and invading Lebanon, so I’m not sure what we can hope will change before Netanyahu leaves office.

seszett• 1 month ago

Iran will come across as Lebanon's saviors.

"Come across as", as much as I despise Iran's regime, it seems like it is de facto the only country actually doing anything other than strong words for Lebanon.

Too bad the US blunder happened too late for Gaza and Palestine.

red-iron-pine2• 1 month ago

arguably, Israel won't stop, and it will tank the deal. It already has set it back a few times.

Animats2• 1 month ago

Haaretz reports that Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon is not part of the deal.[1]

Hezbollah reports they're currently fighting an Israeli attack.[2]

So, for now, Israel vs. Lebanon is still on.

Israel's internal politics are confused right now. Times of Israel: "With Trump’s Iran deal, the October 7 wars are over. Israel really has no idea what to do next" [3] The haredim are rioting because some draft dodgers were arrested. Elections are coming up. Netanyahu is struggling to stay in power. (Like Trump, he faces trials once out of power.)

[1] https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/lebanonnews/2026-06...

[2] https://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/320711-hezbollah-attacks...

[3] https://www.timesofisrael.com/

bhouston7• 1 month ago

This is nothing significantly different from the Obama P5+1:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal

rasz• 1 month ago

other than $300B war reparations

insane_dreamer2• 1 month ago

So basically, what we had before Trump started this stupid war at Bibi's behest.

mcphage3• 1 month ago

Well, except for the tens of billions we spent, and the $324 billion we’re giving Iran, and also our ability to exert any force on the world.

kelnos11• 1 month ago

So basically the US is in a worse position than before the war. Expected, but still dumb and disappointing. (Par for the course for Trump.)

And of course all that sweet, sweet reconstruction/redevelopment money is going to go to Trump's buddies.

enaaem2• 1 month ago

It looks like Iran and Trump has made a deal to rob the American tax payer together.

frm88• 1 month ago

What they also get: lifting of international sanctions: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk-france-germany-italy...

enaaem2• 1 month ago

Looks like a total strategic victory for Iran. They are the regional power now that has to be taken serious by the international community. Their international standing has improved compared to before the war. This is also bad news for Israel.

bulbar2• 1 month ago

US just gonna trust Iran regarding their nuclear program?

No trust or guessing need in that case, Iran will only pause their nuclear program, maybe not even that.

ursuscamp2• 1 month ago

Iran gained international credibility by adhering strictly to the JCPOA, even long after the Trump admin broke it. I doubt they will squander that by not adhering to whatever deal they negotiate next.

tharmas5• 1 month ago

Its not about nukes. Its about controlling the oil supply to squeeze China. China controls rare earths so they can put the squeeze on the USA. To counter that USA wants to control the world's oil supply.

Nordstream (Russia), Venezuela, Iran.

OutOfHere6• 1 month ago

Isn't the article failing to document the $300B that the US has to give Iran? I cannot fathom how this will be acceptable to any American. The US doesn't have money to give food and healthcare benefits to its own deserving people but it has money for Iran. Also, for the longest time, Trump criticized Obama for giving $1.7B to Iran, and now he wants to give 170x more.

Hikikomori7• 1 month ago

Obama did t pay Iran, they returned the $400m they stole with interest.

Sabinus2• 1 month ago

I remember very well Republican figures attacking Obama for sending "pallets of cash" to Iran. It was giving Iran's own money back to them, so will they react similarly to Trump making the same deal?

zombot• 1 month ago

Tehran agrees that it will neither produce nor acquire nuclear weapons.

I wouldn't do that if I were Iran. Having nukes is the only thing that somewhat protects you from being trampled on by the US whenever the weather is right.

peterbecich• 1 month ago

What are the odds of the optimal deal being reached on Trump's birthday (Eastern Time)? Who knows, maybe US stalled before, and/or gave a little extra concession to conclude today.

dav_Oz• 1 month ago

You are probably right it was timed deliberately this way, this is why the Iranians also didn't rush it ...

Iran waited until the clock passed midnight local time to finalize the agreement, because it did not want the momentous occasion to coincide with President Trump’s birthday on Sunday, according to two Iranian officials who could not be identified because of the matter’s sensitivity. The seven-and-half-hour time difference allowed both Tehran and Washington to claim their preferred version of when the deal was finalized. President Trump had said it would be on Sunday, and Iran had said it would be on a later day.[0]

[0]https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/06/14/world/iran-war-trump...

wolvoleo5• 1 month ago

So basically the Obama agreement that Trump trashed. Only now people had to die to get to this point.

kennywinker4• 1 month ago

…plus iran gets $300bn in reconstruction money

bhouston7• 1 month ago

From who? Trump can not even get the $10B he said would go to Gaza?

bilalq• 1 month ago

This completely ignores the shareholder value to the military industrial complex and the truth machine value of prediction markets from the not-insider traders.

tejohnso• 1 month ago

Also...

The US' limitations in its ability to project power have been exposed. Having American bases in the middle east has been shown to be nothing but a liability for host countries. And Iran has proven that it can withstand anything the US is willing to throw at it, and hit back hard, over a relatively prolonged period.

And Iran has shown that its constitution is strong and power succession is effective even after a massive decapitation strike. There was seemingly zero turmoil, control appears to have been maintained without issue.

And Iran's non nuclear option of controlling the strait has been tested andd shown to be highly effective.

And Iran has gained significant operational experience with its massive stores of drones and missles.

And the US has lost multiple billion dollar intelligence installations in the region.

And Americans have been made aware of the Israel lobby like never before, and Trump is in a very difficult position heading into the midterms.

wolvoleo5• 1 month ago

Unfreezing assets was also a thing in Obama's deal

glimshe• 1 month ago

Obama's agreement didn't stop enrichment, leading to the current crisis.

wolvoleo5• 1 month ago

It did to weapons grade. It only permitted enrichment for energy purposes. And was validated by inspections.

The current crisis is entirely because Trump trashed that agreement in the first place.

comrade12347• 1 month ago

It did though? Trump pulled out of the deal in his first term and then Iran enriched from 3%.

kelnos11• 1 month ago

You mean the crisis that was entirely manufactured, after our own intelligence agencies said Iran was not building a nuclear weapon?

mostafah3• 1 month ago

I’m an Iranian in my 40s, and the regime and Western countries have been negotiating for most of my life. I remember being in high school when the first nuclear talks began, and ever since, it has been a never-ending series of talks, understandings, and plans without any real conclusion. I remember there were cases when they talked for weeks, and their main achievement was agreement on the time and place of the next negotiations. Today’s “deal” is no different. No party is releasing an official text; apparently, it’s not a real deal but a memorandum of understanding outlining a plan for further talks over the next 60 days. Another 60 days on top of the last two decades.

And all of these have only bought time and money for the regime to continue its nuclear ambitions, terrorism plans, and oppress the people of Iran, including almost daily executions of innocent protestors during the last few months as these negotiations went on.

The truth is, it won’t be possible to solve this issue with this approach. You can’t get a snake to sign a document to agree not to be poisonous anymore.

comrade12347• 1 month ago

The original Obama deal kept Iran isolated and their nuclear stockpile limited. It didn't do anything for the Iranian people and that's tragic but until trump it wasn't the west's problem. The decades of negotiations was to everyone's benefit (except the Iranian people)

Now it is the wests problem (with the strait) but even now no one is going to send an army to Iran.

I know my views are probably overly simplistic.

khuey2• 1 month ago

I would bet considerable sums of money that this deal is also not going to do anything for the Iranian people.

swat535• 1 month ago

Iranian here as well. This war was a complete disaster, US bombed our kids, our homes and killed more than 3000 people.

I’ll be the first one in line to spit on IRGC. I had my cousin sent to Evin for six months after the Mahsa uprising. She was tortured and will never live a normal life again. But I’m glad IRGC defended the land and didn’t let US and Israel turn it into another Syria.

I think that internal Iranian issues should only be dealt with from within. I’m not going to celebrate the West attempting to interfere in our affairs.

Right now half the country supports the IRGC and this war increased the number of hardliners in the “Majles”. Just look at the new IRGC commanders in charge.

If the West genuinely was interested in helping the Iranian people, they would start by taking away the sanctions that our suffocating our people.

In short, I agree with your central argument, which ironically coincides with the regime’s talking points: “dialogue with the West is useless.”

mostafah3• 1 month ago

Right now half the country supports the IRGC

Where the hell did you get that number from?

DrProtic• 1 month ago

Dictators are established when someone is attacking or meddling in a country, which UK and US were genuinely doing from 1950s till now in Iran.

Current government is a product of western actions in Iran.

It’s short sighted. If in 1950s they left Iran alone, the IRGC would disappear a long time ago because their strong grip would not be needed nor justified.

But every western leader wants to record a win, and constant attacks further increases the required grip of the IRGC.

drnick16• 1 month ago

We had a once in a lifetime opportunity to completely destroy the theocratic regime and we did not finish the job. This "deal" (or what transpired of it) is pathetic and will only allow the mullahs to rearm and come back stronger in the future. We will live to regret not resuming combat operations and weakening the regime until it isn't a threat to anyone.

kennywinker4• 1 month ago

Being attacked strengthens a nations unity, strengthens regimes, and eliminates room for dissent - did you miss 9/11? Oct 7th? Pearl harbour? The blitz?

comrade12347• 1 month ago

That would require an invading force. Not worth it when we could keep Iran isolated and under sanctions and under nuclear inspections by doing nothing.

cosmicgadget12• 1 month ago

They're pretty good at projecting power in the region though.

PaulHoule• 1 month ago

It is one thing to destroy the regime, it is another thing to build something stable which isn’t going to spread terrorism.

mostafah3• 1 month ago

Tehran agrees that it will neither produce nor acquire nuclear weapons.

Of course they do. They have always said they don’t want nuclear weapons while pursuing them relentlessly.

Iran’s nuclear programme, uranium enrichment activities and mechanisms for handling its stockpile of highly enriched uranium would be negotiated within 60 days of the memorandum and addressed in a final agreement.

If that is still to be discussed, then what have they been discussing so far? That has always been the main issue.

spwa43• 1 month ago

If that is still to be discussed, then what have they been discussing so far? That has always been the main issue.

If the agreement means Iran seriously agrees to dilute (which boils down to destroying) it's nuclear stockpile, with UN or US or ... witnesses, that's pretty damn new.

petilon5• 1 month ago

Iran hasn't agreed to that. United States agrees to allow Iran to dilute its stockpile of highly enriched uranium on Iranian soil under a future comprehensive agreement.

ep1032• 1 month ago

Trump released Iran's frozen assets, in return for them opening the straight and thereby dropping oil prices before the midterm elections.

Reminder, the reason Trump hated the Obama deal was because he construed it as paying Iran not to develop nuclear weapons. Obama was paying Iran with the money from Iran's frozen assets. Trump's deal gives them that money, and has no nuclear agreement.

petilon5• 1 month ago

Rising inflation at home forced Trump's hand.

cosmicgadget12• 1 month ago

He didn't hate the Obama deal, he hated Obama therefore everything he does has to be criticized and torn down. If that deal had Iran paying the US, Trump would have said the color of the money was no good. And his supporters would eat it up.

analognoise• 1 month ago

Our own intelligence agencies said they were not making nuclear weapons.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/americas-spies-say-ira... https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-intel-community-agreed-b...

pkulak• 1 month ago

Reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days "under Iranian arrangements"

Oh my goodness. So it stays closed for the better part of a month (or more, who knows), then opens up with each ship paying Iran for passage. I very much look forward to how this will be spun as some kind of a "win" for the United States.

cosmicgadget12• 1 month ago

I imagine: "Under Biden we would have surrendered to Iran and then the world would be destroyed by an alien probe looking for humpback whale sounds."

Animats2• 1 month ago

Confirmation from Iran's Security Council.[1]

It's just a 60-day cease fire extension, according to the New York Times.

Trump posted something on Truth Social. There's no announcement on the U.S. Department of State site. That's full of a deal between the US Government and the Ultimate Fighting Championship people.

Compare with the April 8th ceasefire.[2]

Al Jazeera, which reports on this in detail because their readership is in the target area, is trying to figure it out.[3]

[1] https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202606139149

[2] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/us-iran-ceasefire-de...

[3] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/14/will-the-us-iran-de...

throaway236633• 1 month ago

Peace - in whatever form is something the world desperately needs at this point. Having said that, I'll give it three days until Israel does some shit and undos all of this.

parrellel• 1 month ago

Reading through the proposal Iran put out, it sounds like Trump's surrendered?

1- Permanent and immediate cessation of war on all fronts, including Lebanon

- You know Israel won't let that happen

2- America's commitment not to interfere in Iran's internal affairs and to respect the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

- No regime change

3- Complete removal of the naval blockade within 30 days

- Iran gets its oil money back.

4- America's commitment to the withdrawal of its forces from around Iran

- We leave altogether

5- Reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days with Iranian arrangements

- Iran gets to charge its "service" fees

6- Suspension of sanctions on the sale of oil, petrochemical products and derivatives and Iran's full access to its financial resources.

- Oil money again

7- Necessity of presenting plans for the reconstruction of Iran in the amount of at least 300 billion dollars by the US and its allies

- We rebuild freakin Iran.

FFS. I think I'm done reading before we give them American Samoa and a puppy.

kelnos11• 1 month ago

We rebuild freakin Iran.

Honestly I think that's "Trump's win", and is probably all he cares about. Now he gets to funnel all these reconstruction contracts to his buddies, prioritizing anyone who gives him a "donation".

OutOfHere6• 1 month ago

As an American citizen, I find it completely unacceptable that the US will pay $300B to rebuild a foreign country when it doesn't have funds for food and healthcare benefits for its deserving citizens. Moreover, for the longest time, Trump criticized Obama for giving $1.7B to Iran, and now he wants to give so much more.

Hikikomori7• 1 month ago

How about being outraged spending even more bombing it in the first place?

rsynnott2• 1 month ago

This the trouble with randomly starting wars; the other side isn't necessarily willing to just go back to the status quo without compensation.

spwa43• 1 month ago

Well, Iran is angry: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/14/iranian-hardli...

Israel is angry: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/14/world/middleeast/israel-u...

Let's hope that means the deal will last.

tim333• 1 month ago

Babylon Bee:

Trump Sets New World Record By Winning War With Iran 27 Times In One Year https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-sets-new-world-record-by-w...

It's been a bit of a mess really.

US and Iran announce deal to end military operations

Related Stories