Trump throwing a lot of people under the bus because of stock markets?

[mids2019]

When you start a war you finish it in my opinion. There has been no other war that has been stopped because of a slide on the Dow Jones or an oil price spike. For Trump to now prematurely call an end to the war simply because of economics will simply mean IIrans drone terrorism has worked.

The people of Iran will be left with a job half done without the space needed for an uprising.

A new leader with good reason to ideological hate Israel and the US will realise the only method of future deterrence of Iran is through acquiring a nuclear weapon as their conventional weapons were obliterated. Iran will now do everything possible to acquire such a weapon.

This is a time for resolve Mr. President. There is still a chance to destroy this regime maybe with limited target ground troop assaults. The world actually will be safer if you continue.

I thought that would be obvious,

No ofcourse not

I think Iran should attend the negotiations.

1. It may end the armed conflict. And that is in everyone's interest.
2. It offers Trump an exit from the conflict. Even if Israel will not stop fire too. At least is one less adversary to fight. I cannot get why Israel is not invited.... at least Trump is assuming Netanyahu will just do what he tells him to do, which we know by experience will not be the case.
3. If the Strait does not open, safely, another war will start. Not a war that US or Israel or Iran stand a chance of winning. Oil is running out in quite a few places in the world. These three countries will face the wrath of the whole world: freezing and even seizing of their assets, sanctions, refusal to trade... Stretch it a bit further into the following month and they will consider military action. Trump is trying to offload blame onto Iran. He will say he offered them a great deal and they still decided to cut the supply through Hormuz.

It is better for them to send someone and try for peace. Better for the 3 of them. And better for us all.

1. Iran can request reparations at this stage, as they did not start this war. But if the lack of free shipping through the Strait enters a stage where people starve and die due to this, in mass, they may find themselves paying reparations instead.

8 billion people is much much much more important that this useless, crazy, dangerous and improvised war. And we better stop here.

I agree with you @MushMonster

Iran should attend the negotiations (I think they will, despite all the posturing as they are engaging to some extent already by giving their counter proposals).

On the subject of Netanyahu, Trump knows that he can achieve a ceasefire without him, as he did in Gaza.

Netanyahu won’t want a ceasefire (I don’t think) as he has more to gain than Trump by continuing to attack & weaken the Iranian proxy Hezbollah. Nevertheless, if Trump wants an exit from the war now, and if Iran agree, then Netanyahu will have to accept the terms too, as he did in Gaza.

Prople trying to make out he controls Trump is something I’ve never understood. Trump is way more powerful & bulldozers his way through life doing what he wants to do. Netanyahu would have continued fighting Hamas for longer if it were up to him and now he will probably have to stop fighting Hezbollah before he would like to as well. Trump & the Iranian leader negotiating the deal ( whoever he is!) will decide when it ends.

On reparations those attacked by Iran are also demanding them.

I thought this a while back but this should be looked at too

In a rare breach of convention, retired directors from MI6, MI5 and GCHQ have come forward to express their alarm about the “Government’s continued reluctance” to ban the IRGC.

Pressure to proscribe building.

The UK government has no excuse not to proscribe the IRGC now and they have taken too long to do so.

Reparations is an interesting one ... Iran is demanding them but presumably they would also be expected to pay them to the countries where they have damaged infrastructure.

And also to Israel for their constant attacks over the years via Hamas and Hezbollah and the Gaza war which they started with their attack on 7/10/23.

Fair enough. They are entitled to reparations indeed.
US should face a considerable consequence here too, alongside Israel.
Trump stopped intelligence sharing with Ukraine for two days or so (nevermind the treatment of Zelensky during negotiations...), then got away with Venezuela unscathed. Now this horror, with no plan and zero positive effect. He has a long list of other countries to bomb. He needs to be told, in practical terms, because he does not understand diplomacy... He cannot get away unscathed, yet again.

I guess the reason the IRGC isn't banned is its better to have ones enemy in the open, rather than hidden?

It might also mean retaliation against UK citizens in Iranian jails.

Similar to why we don't expel the Russian Ambassador, even when they have murdered UK citizens here.

"Former" security chiefs calling for IRGC to be proscribed.. why now? were they advising for this when in office? are current security services doing so...

No they weren't or previous Govts would have banned.

No there’s no excuse left. The EU has proscribed them, Canada, Australia, US and Sweden. We’re dragging on this. Starmer was for it in opposition.

One of the better ways we have to legally limit SM support for them too.

And those million £ assets they own here, not sure what happens with that.

Sunak (and presumably previous PMs) were put under pressure to proscribe IRGC - they preferred to maintain diplomatic ties better to serve British people.
instrad Sunak chose asset freezes and sanctions which I suppose are better targeted.

I agree that the US & Israel should pay reparations for infrastructure they have damaged in the Iran war since they started it.

Maybe that is something that will be agreed in the eventual ceasefire terms - but they would expect in turn for Iran to pay reparations where appropriate.

@Alexandra2001 the IRGC has been designated as a terrorist organisation by so many other countries - there can be no excuse really for the UK.

Currently, the IRGC is designated as a terrorist organization by Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Ecuador, the European Union, Israel, Paraguay, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, Ukraine, and the United States, while its Quds Force is additionally proscribed by Argentina.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Revolutionary_Guard_Corps#:~:text=It%20operates%20a%20media%20arm,is%20additionally%20proscribed%20by%20Argentina.

Sunak sanctioned the IRGC in its entirety. I believe that continues today.

Yes, its not as if the previous Govt did anything about the IRGC either.

It does seem odd that no Govt has, so i assume there are valid reasons for not doing so.

We need diplomatic ties now more than ever, talking is the only way out of this war and Tories calling for IRGC banning, are hilarious, if they'd had their way, UK jets would be bombing Iran right now.

Thinking about it now, maybe as a result of Iran's actions in this war towards their neighbours in the Middle East, maybe more of them will be designating the IRGC as a terrorist organisation... it's possible.

They are actually redrafting legislation to proscribe - the current legislation would have the effect of making any association with Iran generally an offence. Obviously we have citizens there which wouldn’t be helpful to them. There was a report by Jonathan Hall.

..but to what aim?

What material difference would proscribing the IRGC make to this conflict... or to Iran's behaviour

As pp pointed out, its already heavily sanctioned & we could see a situation where countries are going to have to reach agreements with Iran over Hormuz that do not involve the USA.

We also have UK nationals in Iranian jails, they shouldn't be forgotten.

On why the former chiefs put it clearly

the former intelligence chiefs said proscription was a “necessary step” to curb the organisation’s activity in the UK and signal that Britain was “prepared to defend its own security and democratic institutions”.

They warned that the Government’s “continued hesitancy” on the issue “risks leaving us strategically exposed”

The IRGC is considered the primary exporter of Iranian-linked terrorism abroad, acting as a “praetorian guard” military force in Iran, swearing loyalty to the supreme leader personally and acting independently of the army.

There are likely many reasons nearly all comparable countries have done it but one good one is making support for the IRGC online illegal.

I’m not saying they would do it during the current war but maybe as a result of it.

I agree with @EasternStandard post about why it’s important.

They should join Hamas who they fund as being a designated terrorist organisation in the UK.

Edited to add - and maybe other countries will do it too!

i think you overlooked my post explaining that they are redrafting legislation in order to proscribe. They effect now to proscribe an arm of a state would be to make any association with Iran unlawful. Sunak explained the same problem whilst he was in government.

I did miss that post - but if it’s so problematic how do the whole of the EU & other countries get around the problem?

Edited as didn’t realise your comment was aimed at someone else - sorry.

Well, yes i can agree on that, though hopefully, if any good is to come out of this conflict, it'll be Iran stops its terrorist activities.

But atm i think further antagonism & limiting diplomatic opportunities is "probably" a bad idea.

Hopefully Starmer is acting on current security chiefs advice, not that of retirees from the security services.

Well our terror related definitions and interconnected legislation are our own.

Sunak explained all of this a number of times - I’m surprised the previous security experts don’t remember that.

Cannot really imagine a world in which Iran stop their terrorist activities but that would certainly be most helpful in terms of peace in the middle east.

The resistance to it is addressed in the former chiefs open letter

“If the obstacle is legal, then the law must be changed,” they wrote.

“The diplomatic argument – that proscription would reduce Britain’s influence in Tehran – is equally unconvincing.

“In reality, Britain today exercises negligible influence over Iran. If anything, the dynamic increasingly operates in the opposite direction.”

When is Starmer going to prescribe the Al Saud family then? They are causing death and destruction in Yemen . Why not proscribe the Emirates which are funding a terrible war in Sudan , causing famine. While he is about it he might proscribe the current leader of Syria , former (?) head of Al Qaeda. He was meant to hold elections after his victory in the civil war
Although , in fairness , he has a lot on - slaughtering Christians and Alawites. That is very time consuming.

There has been regime change, but not the sort the United States wanted.

https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2026/03/25/the-revolutionary-guards-are-taking-over-iran

archived version
https://archive.ph/e8fUt