US - Iran Peace agreement Part 3

[TopPocketFind]

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/5535141-us-iran-peace-agreement-part-2https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/5535141-us-iran-peace-agreement-part-2

I am for nuclear power generation. All in the name of carbon reduction of course. Nuke waste is a problem, but personally I see that as a much smaller problem than climate change. And if this deal contributes to lowering carbon, go for it. So long as it is all done above board and the world can see any deals signed.

Oh. Does anyone know what is in this deal?

Israel are not happy of course, and I daresay Netanyahu will be saying so on his visit to the USA.

Yes @BelleHathor , I remember the Khashoggi murder. But then again, Saudi Arabia is an Absolute Authoritarian Monarchy, so these sorts of things are to be expected I suppose.

In fact. we can probably even go so far as saying that Saudi Arabia is a Theocratic Absolute Authoritarian Monarchy. They are well known for their oppressive treatment of women in the name of religion. No need to post any links to prove that point, I think. And stuff such as blasphemy and apostasy are illegal and have heavy punishments. But that is because they have a legal system based on Islamic Sharia law

They also execute protestors. Remember the Arab Spring. They even executed someone who was a child at the time for alleged involvement in that.

Saudi Arabia executes man said to have joined protests as minor (newarab.com)

Personally, I think any nuclear deal should include a commitment to reforms on these things, but that is maybe just me.

With all that said, no doubt there will be posters who vehemently oppose any sort of deals being made with such a theocratic authoritarian state.

@JadeHare you do realise that the above is an opinion piece from one journalist? Time will tell of course what the deal includes/does not include. The writer of the article you link to will not know the details.

The facts we do know are that the agreement has been signed by both sides and is currently with Congress. Also that Trump insists that it... "will be approved, but is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords."

This has not been confirmed - or denied - by Saudi Arabia.

Yeah, that bastion of truth, Donald.

Convicted fraudster.

No, although that is, of course, how it is spun by the EU.
Even if he was fully paid up by the Kremlin and was spreading 'pro Kremlin propoganda' on some alternative news sources (not even MSM), is that a good reason for a democratic group of countries who apparently promote free speech to freeze all his bank accounts and make his life unlivable? It sounds like ex communist Russia or a number of other very authoritarian regimes. Yet another example of the EU/UK/US not promoting what they pretend to!

They won't be on Mumsnet presumably so my comment was hardly made with them in mind.

I looked him up last week and I saw what he was accused of. I have no issue with the accusations, or that he was doing that. I agree with you re freedom of speech. The EU are in the wrong here.

I do think it should be on social media platforms however to insist on disclosure and to add the "state sponsored content" label. People should be allowed to make their own mind up, but at the same time they should be made aware, so far as possible, of where the content is from. Is that the case with this fella ?

I have no idea about Putin propaganda, but I did follow the issue of CPC shills for a long time. So I am familiar with the tricks and ploys used by States to get propaganda out there.

He is a known liar but what is there to question in my post?

It's a fact that a deal has been signed by both sides and is currently with Congress. We have photographic evidence and both sides are saying so.

It is fact that Trump said what he said re it... "will be approved, but is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords."

It is also fact that as I stated, the part about the Abraham Accords has not to date been either confirmed or denied by Saudi Arabia.

If they subsequently deny it then he probably was lying about that part but at the moment, we wait to see the details of the agreement.

I don't think freedom of speech means what some seem to think it does.

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

There are lots of things it doesn't include and "freedom of speech" is definitely no excuse for spreading propaganda or attacking individuals online.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/9#:~:text=Article%2010%20Freedom%20of%20expression,authority%20and%20regardless%20of%20frontiers.

Strangely enough, I'm also in favour of nuclear power (as in France). Can we trust Saudi to not acquire nuclear capability? The Kingdom is hypocritical as well being authoritarian, all wrapped up with the expediency of religion, when and as it suits them.

Your imagination is running away with you Twigs. I couldn’t give a hoot about your post.

Meanwhile, back to the subject of the thread. From the Telegraph:
“Donald Trump has paused plans to escalate the war on Iran after being warned that the US is running low on missiles.
For the first time in nearly two weeks, the US president called off strikes on the Islamic Republic over the weekend and has set aside plans to return to major combat operations.
The decision also allows time and space for negotiations with Iran.
Concerns were raised during a White House meeting on Friday night, according to reports.”

Excerpt From
“Trump pauses Iran strikes over missile shortages”
Melanie Swan
The Telegraph
https://apple.news/A4TjPH3j9T7yFCvkJEhkaIw
This material may be protected by copyright.

Re the US running low on stocks.

Does the US now regret the $1.94B worth of missiles it sold to Kuwait or will the WH now apply pressure to GCC buyers to use their missiles against Iran?

Even stranger, I was thinking of France too. Because they do full turnkey nuke power plants. And if a deal was announced between SA and France to build a nuke power station, I think most folk would not even flinch. I certainly would not.

But here we are talking about Trump's USA and SA. And that sets off alarm bells everywhere.

👊
Great minds and all that ...😂

OK it’s just that you said “yes that bastion of truth Donald” immediately after I posted what he said about the SA/US deal but never mind if you were just making a general comment.

Baud’s listing is based on Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/2643 of 8 October 2024 and the Regulation (EU) 2024/2642 adopted to implement it. The framework permits restrictive measures against individuals involved in actions or policies of the Russian government which undermine or threaten the fundamental values of the EU and its Member States, their security, independence and integrity, as well as those of international organisations and third countries. Individual listing is effected by a Council implementing regulation on a proposal from the High Representative or a Member State, unanimously, with the public excluded and without any prior hearing of the person concerned. The measures consist in the freezing of all funds and economic resources, the prohibition of economic support by third parties (Art. 2 of Regulation 2024/2642) and, for natural persons, a complete ban on entry and transit (Art. 1(1) of CFSP 2024/2643 as amended by Decision CFSP 2025/963)

The U.S. military said Saturday that its naval blockade against Iran “remains in full effect” but did not explain why it halted a streak of 13 nights of escalating strikes.

There were also no weekend reports of attacks by Iran on neighbors, similar to its daily rejoinders to the U.S. attacks.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” that a pause in strikes was due to ongoing talks between the two countries.

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/us-forgoes-strikes-iran-conflict-escalates-red-sea-rcna589285

Separately, Iran’s Foreign Ministry accused Ukraine of attacking an Iranian commercial vessel in the Caspian Sea, saying one sailor was killed and another injured.

Seems like the two idiots who started this can’t seem to quite agree. Whilst the rest of the world suffers. From The Times:

“Analysts said that the US and Israel had increasingly divergent aims, as Netanyahu seeks greater damage to the Iranian regime with one eye on his re-election chances in the Israeli general election in October, and Trump seeks an exit strategy as November’s midterm elections loom.
Asked by Fox News what it would take to end the war, Netanyahu mentioned Iranian regime change several times despite Trump’s repeated insistence that this is not a war goal.”

Excerpt From
“Netanyahu heads to Washington as relations with Trump deteriorate”
The Times and The Sunday Times
https://apple.news/AbEp1FW3bR2apLHChKYj5bQ
This material may be protected by copyright.

Separately, Iran’s Foreign Ministry accused Ukraine of attacking an Iranian commercial vessel in the Caspian Sea, saying one sailor was killed and another injured.

This is worrying but possibly just wrong place, wrong time and not particularly based on US-Iran war, and wanting more US help against Russia.

The Ayatollah has spoken! (or at least a representative of him has, on X)

He says that the primary Iranian condition for an agreement to end the war is Israel stopping its attacks on Lebanon.

[The Islamic Republic of Iran] has designated the preservation of Lebanon’s territorial integrity, and the absolute, unconditional termination of the Zionist regime’s aggression as the primary condition for any agreement to ending the imposed war against the aggressive US.

Al Jazeera note that Khamenei’s intervention comes amid reports of a halt to attacks and renewed diplomacy between Iran and the United States.

www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/7/26/us-iran-peace-deal-depends-on-israel-leaving-lebanon-says-khamenei

Their aims don't sound too divergent?

Ahead of his meeting with Trump at the White House tomorrow Netanyau told Fox News, “I think it’s a good thing to have the opportunity to sit with our good friend President Trump and to hear what he has in mind, because I think in many ways it’s his decision.”

Netanyahu said Iran’s nuclear ambitions must be stopped “with a deal or without a deal,” signalling that military options remain on the table if diplomacy fails.

Netanyahu said he supports Trump’s efforts to pressure Tehran through diplomacy if it can prevent a return to intense fighting.

“I fully support Trump’s efforts to weaken Iran and press it to end its nuclear program,” Netanyahu said.

“If he can do so without returning to intense military fighting, that’s fine. Why not?” he added.

However, Netanyahu warned that any future Iranian attack on Israel would trigger a strong response.

“If Iran attacks Israel, either directly or through proxies, either with ballistic missiles or UAVs or killer drones, it will make a terrible mistake,” he said.
“Israel’s response will be very, very forceful.”

www.livemint.com/news/us-news/trumpnetanyahu-talks-4-key-issues-to-watch-from-iran-nukes-to-middle-east-security-11785087470011.html

I don't think there is any truth at all to these accusations. The EU just want to block someone whose views do not fit with their own aims imo. It's so easy to run around accusing someone of being a Russian shill or whatever other insult you want to make up to encourage others not to listen to an opposing view. I'm sure many of us have been called trolls, etc, etc simply because people online didn't like our opinions.
The same smear has also been attempted with John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs and no doubt others but at least they haven't been sanctioned by their native US.
If you listened to JB, I think you would reach the conclusion that the chances of him being paid by the Kremlin are very low and that he just an very intelligent, highly knowledgable and calmly spoken man.
Even if I am 100% wrong on this, which is always possible, I still do not think it justifies the EU actions. I see that you agree with me here.

It doesn't really matter what the ruling is based on. The EU can create whatever rules suit them can't they.
As I said, even if he is fully paid by the Kremlin, I think it is absolutely wrong of them to sanction him in this way. As I said, see also the brave Francesca Albanese.

A very stupid move indeed, perhaps encouraged by the Israelis.
I think I said before but the situation with Ukraine the US and the EU attacking Russian oil depots/refineries is very worrying. At some point, Russia will respond, perhaps soon.