“President Trump has announced that the United States and Iran have reached a deal to end their war. ‘Congratulations to all!’ he said in a posting on his Truth Social site this evening. He then headed off to oversee the garish public spectacle he’d arranged for his birthday on the South Lawn of the White House. The United States, however, has little to celebrate: Trump and his team, in record time, just lost a war to a militarily mediocre—but nonetheless extremely dangerous—adversary,” Tom Nichols argues.
Headline’s making a lot of assumptions from a portrait shot. Need actual reporting on what happened and when before buying into „surrender“ framing.
No_Specialist6036 on
news channels were reporting on the proposed deal following points stick out, dont know if they have been confirmed
– Iran to stop producing nuclear armaments
– US to pay $300 bn
– Hormuz under joint mgmt of Iran-Oman allowing them to charge fees in some form
– All Iranian frozen assets to be released
– All Iranian sanctions to be lifted
– US to give up their right to apply more sanctions on Iran in future
Deal to be signed Friday. 30 days to lift Hormuz blockade post agreement execution.. Are these pretty much verified terms for now?
ex0e on
> But even before we have the details, it is clear that Trump has failed to achieve every one of the goals he put forward for this war of choice, and now he is determined to sign, seal, and deliver America’s capitulation as quickly as possible.
Details are irrelevant as long as an article can be written
> If defeat seems a strong word, consider what we do know about how this war will end.
There are no details so how will the war end?
> Indeed, the United States has perhaps done worse than gaining nothing. Iran is now an even more powerful political actor: The regime in Tehran stood up to a massive U.S. onslaught, survived, and then inflicted incalculable pain on various states in the Gulf as punishment for going along with Trump’s war.
Ok
This is the equivalent of a reddit opinion, published and widely disseminated by news outlets. Literally no details, all vibes.
Far-Maintenance-1947 on
Now these news outlets want us to drag the war on even longer? I’m no Trump fan but this catastrophe ending is not a „surrender“.
CheckMateFluff on
Basically, this is really just an opinion piece with decent factual bones, but it treats unconfirmed Iranian claims as settled and downplays some of Iran’s actions, calling it an American “capitulation” might eventually be fair like… I can see the writing on the wall, but until the actual deal is signed and published, that’s just a basic conclusion still, not a set fact.
Zubba776 on
It’s a provocative headline for a piece more about how horrible Trump is than the reality of the geopolitical situation. The idea that success would only be achieved if the regime fell is moronic; the U.S. literally came out stating regime change wasn’t the goal, but would be welcomed. Say what you will about Trump’s intelligence, but the foreign policy elites in Washington know full well how unlikely regime change would come about from an air campaign.
From a U.S. perspective the conflict was about 2 things… 1) eliminating Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium, and 2) degrading Iranian traditional military systems. Number 2 is done. Iran’s traditional forces have been decimated. Number 1 is up in the air, and dependent on the conditions of the agreement.
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
7 Kommentare
“President Trump has announced that the United States and Iran have reached a deal to end their war. ‘Congratulations to all!’ he said in a posting on his Truth Social site this evening. He then headed off to oversee the garish public spectacle he’d arranged for his birthday on the South Lawn of the White House. The United States, however, has little to celebrate: Trump and his team, in record time, just lost a war to a militarily mediocre—but nonetheless extremely dangerous—adversary,” Tom Nichols argues.
Read more: [https://theatln.tc/w94BAsk0](https://theatln.tc/w94BAsk0)
Headline’s making a lot of assumptions from a portrait shot. Need actual reporting on what happened and when before buying into „surrender“ framing.
news channels were reporting on the proposed deal following points stick out, dont know if they have been confirmed
– Iran to stop producing nuclear armaments
– US to pay $300 bn
– Hormuz under joint mgmt of Iran-Oman allowing them to charge fees in some form
– All Iranian frozen assets to be released
– All Iranian sanctions to be lifted
– US to give up their right to apply more sanctions on Iran in future
Deal to be signed Friday. 30 days to lift Hormuz blockade post agreement execution.. Are these pretty much verified terms for now?
> But even before we have the details, it is clear that Trump has failed to achieve every one of the goals he put forward for this war of choice, and now he is determined to sign, seal, and deliver America’s capitulation as quickly as possible.
Details are irrelevant as long as an article can be written
> If defeat seems a strong word, consider what we do know about how this war will end.
There are no details so how will the war end?
> Indeed, the United States has perhaps done worse than gaining nothing. Iran is now an even more powerful political actor: The regime in Tehran stood up to a massive U.S. onslaught, survived, and then inflicted incalculable pain on various states in the Gulf as punishment for going along with Trump’s war.
Ok
This is the equivalent of a reddit opinion, published and widely disseminated by news outlets. Literally no details, all vibes.
Now these news outlets want us to drag the war on even longer? I’m no Trump fan but this catastrophe ending is not a „surrender“.
Basically, this is really just an opinion piece with decent factual bones, but it treats unconfirmed Iranian claims as settled and downplays some of Iran’s actions, calling it an American “capitulation” might eventually be fair like… I can see the writing on the wall, but until the actual deal is signed and published, that’s just a basic conclusion still, not a set fact.
It’s a provocative headline for a piece more about how horrible Trump is than the reality of the geopolitical situation. The idea that success would only be achieved if the regime fell is moronic; the U.S. literally came out stating regime change wasn’t the goal, but would be welcomed. Say what you will about Trump’s intelligence, but the foreign policy elites in Washington know full well how unlikely regime change would come about from an air campaign.
From a U.S. perspective the conflict was about 2 things… 1) eliminating Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium, and 2) degrading Iranian traditional military systems. Number 2 is done. Iran’s traditional forces have been decimated. Number 1 is up in the air, and dependent on the conditions of the agreement.