US-Iran peace agreement discussion, part 4

[RedTagAlan]

Thread 4 for those following and commenting on the above subject.

The memes are on point but what about Iran's economy?

5 ways Iran's economy is wilting under Trump's pressure

www.axios.com/2026/08/24/trump-iran-sanctions-bessent-economy

People all over the world are suffering because of this. Donny and Bibi should not have started this war of choice. And he needs to find a way to get out of it ASAP before the world suffers even further.

I would have expected press articles on mines found, vids of exploding mines, photos of destroyed mines with " MADE IN IRAN" printed on.

But I have not seen any of that.

And yeah, I get it. People will say SECURITY. But come on, if they had found a stack of mines it would have been all over the media.

Perhaps write a letter of complaint that the US did not comply with what you expected? You seem to be suggesting the US has not cleared the mines but were that the case there would/will be vids of exploding ships to discuss.

WH announcement.
The US used snipers to kill all the kamikaze dolphins, hence no photographic evidence is available. There were a few tags floating in the water, saying Made in Iran. This is enough to verify that all mines have now been cleared. Trump will have a SoH reopening ceremony in two weeks.

This is not a parody.

Another opinion piece, this time from the Guardian

Iran faces strait of Hormuz paradox as strategic value of chokehold erodes

Is the strait of Hormuz, recently cited by the office of the Iranian supreme leader as “the pillar of Iran’s new security order”, and as transformative as possessing a nuclear weapon, in reality becoming a fast-diminishing asset, leaving Iran increasingly vulnerable to the new planned US wave of economic sanctions?

It is the key debate that is raging inside Iran, with many different conclusions being drawn for Tehran’s negotiating strategy. Those who warn the strait’s value as a chokehold on the world economy will erode, leaving the country without foreign exchange reserves, argue that Iran’s negotiators should seek a deal soon.

One analysis written by Hamid Paktinat, the founder of the Forum of Economic Activists, suggests the construction of alternative pipelines and export routes by Iran’s Gulf neighbours will halve the strait’s strategic value within three years.

The Iranian president, Masoud Pezeshkian, and the parliamentary speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, have both recently made unusually blunt comments about the need to end the war – and the economic consequence of continuing it. Ghalibaf said that regardless of how much military power Iran possessed, “if people are hungry” and there was no economic growth, the country could not endure. Security, he argued, could not be sustained without a functioning economy. He added that, as someone with a military background, “we know the value of peace better than those who talk about peace”.

Pezeshkian was even more blunt: “The war must end at some point,” he said. His argument was that Iran should end the conflict now, while Tehran still believes it is negotiating from a position of strength, rather than wait until its position weakens.

The Iranian central bank governor, Abdolnaser Hemmati, also recently went on TV to warn about the economic pressures. “We are facing four or five major challenges simultaneously, including maximum sanctions, blockade, cutting off oil exports, and a budget imbalance, each of which puts pressure on the economy,” he said. “One of the neighbouring countries told me that if one-fifth of what happened in your country happened in our country, we would not be able to govern the country.”

What is driving these remarks is the pressure on ordinary people in Iran, and an acceptance that the strait cannot become a permanent security doctrine in itself.

Hamid Asefi, a Tehran-based journalist specialising in geo-economics, is one of many warning that if Hormuz is to be played as Iran’s final card every time a crisis arises, this card will gradually lose its value. “A threat that is constantly repeated turns from ‘deterrence’ into a political habit; and a political habit, if not accompanied by concrete achievements, sooner or later leads to an inflation of threats,” he said.

The main question is no longer: can Iran close the strait, he wrote, but if Iran closes Hormuz to the world, does it open the door to power for itself or lock part of its power behind that door?

www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/26/iran-faces-strait-of-hormuz-paradox-as-strategic-value-of-chokehold-erodes

Amazing.

I speculated months ago on these threads that there were no mines. I even looked into the mines that Iran has, the size of boat needed to lay such mines etc, I discussed how the threat of mines was a denial tool that could be used to hold up shipping just by claiming there was mines.

I concluded that it was likely an Iranian bluff. They said there were mines when there was none. And I have been paying attention to the news feeds daily since then. And I recall only one instance reported where a sailor saw something floating in the water that might have been a mine.

And that was odd, because free floating mines like that are not really a thing now. Mines are usually anchored, or on the sea bed.

Yet some people prefer to think there was no exploding ships because Trump cleared all the mines, that Iran ( I suspected) bluffed about laying.

And we can expand on this a little. Iran has not been trying to sink ships. At least it looks that way to me. Because the last thing they want is a massive tanker sunk in their shipping lane with 3 million barrels of oil spilling out. No, they have been using drones to attack ships. They have not been using anti ship missiles to destroy, no, they are saying " Hey, we see you".

And yes, sailors have died. And they are totally in the wrong for killing sailors. The US has also killed sailors. Because they don't use drones, they fire their 5 inch naval guns into engine rooms, without knowing if any crew are in there. They aim to disable ships, and leave them drifting as a hazard. And if they don't have a local destroyer with a 5 inch gun, they send a chopper with hellfire missiles, and again target the engine room.

If we apply Occam's Razor to the above., and more that I missed.... mines or no mines ?

As for the dolphins.... look up exploding seagulls :-)

AND WHERE ARE THE SEALS ?

Actually, the seals are all onboard the Hospital ship that is steaming very very slowly towards Greenland. It's going slow because the seals are trying to figure out what to do about the Greenlandic Polar bears.

Where exactly have you been accused of antisemitism purely for criticising the actions of the Israeli government?

Occam’s Razor isn’t for trying to prove a subjective theory. It’s for distinguishing between two Already Proven mathematical formulas and which is the simplest, most elegant.

So it isn't Alice in Wonderland territory then is it?
You might think that Bennet, etc are crazy or compulsive liars but it is the Israelis that are talking about Turkey being a threat and threatening to take action.

Repeatedly on this 'CITME' section. It happens frequently. There are massive double standards wrt to criticism of Israel and, say, Iran or Russia.

Nope. It's a philosophical principle. I have no idea where you are getting the mathematics claim in this context.

"Occam’s razor, principle stated by the Scholastic philosopher William of Ockham (1285–1347/49) that pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, “plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity: of two competing theories, the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed as “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.”"

Source

Occam’s razor | Origin, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

In my post above, I apologize that I did not clearly state my competing ideas that I was applying it to. That is - 1) Both sides are lying about there being mines. or 2) one or other of each side are lying but neither are presenting evidence for their claim, and nor are the other coastal states/ shipping companies/ press and so on presenting any evidence for mines.

I applied Occams to that, and I come to option 1 as the most likely conclusion.

Remember too, Trump claims he has sunk the Iranian Navy multiple times now. That can be added. I did cover that in my post in terms of mentioning my previous posts on the subject on the size of boat needed to handle and lay the mines. Apologies too for not including all data I have previously posted. I don't want to keep repeating stuff I have previously posted, and I did do a quick mental risk assessment on if my post above had enough info for non regular readers of these threads to be able to follow my logic. Sorry if I got this wrong.

So, do you have any opinion on the actual subject of my post. You know, about the existence of these mines in the sea ?

They won't be able to provide any actual examples because no one gets accused of antisemitism purely for criticising the Israeli government. There's a whole thread on that (currently on "part 7") so that claim is ridiculous.

Reuters: Iraq could serve as an example of how the United States could carry out its threat to force countries that continue trading with Iran out of the dollar-based financial system.

Washington has already sanctioned a host of Iraqi banks accused of doing business with Tehran, though it has avoided measures that would devastate the economy of the strategic ally of both countries.

The United States, since its 2003 invasion of Iraq, has held effective control over the country's oil revenue dollars, primarily through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, giving Washington extraordinary leverage over Baghdad's affairs.

A rare ally of both the United States and Iran, with more than $100 billion in reserves held in the U.S., Iraq relies heavily on Washington's goodwill to keep its oil revenues and finances flowing.

Reuters revealed in late 2024 a fuel oil smuggling network generating at least $1 billion a year for Iran and its proxies in Iraq. Other neighbours of Iran involved in similar schemes could face similar scrutiny from Washington.

While the U.S. has uniquely strong leverage over Iraq compared with other major trading partners of Iran, the U.S. dollar's status as the linchpin of global trade makes its reach formidable.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iraq-may-show-how-us-can-squeeze-irans-trade-partners-2026-08-25/

@Twiglets1 ,

I think you are mostly in the right but it is undeniable that Israel itself is quite quick to declare people and nations who criticise it as antisemitic.

There are some problematic areas such as Israeli donations to politicians. Saying Israel controls other governments feeds into an old antisemitic trope, but can also have some truth to it (look how much money Israel gives to politicians on both sides of the pond).

It also does sometimes seem (and I am choosing my words very carefully here) that Trump is somehow beholden to Netanyahu (and Putin). And there are some very obvious conflicts of interest, such as Trump’s extended family’s investment in the occupied territories.

Much as I often suspect antisemitism, which is obviously upsetting as I am ethnically Jewish, I am enough of a believer in free speech that I would rather let the dubious (although not blatant) posts stand. I can then draw my own conclusions.

When asked "Where exactly have you been accused of antisemitism purely for criticising the actions of the Israeli government?" the reply from Raining was "Repeatedly on this 'CITME' section".

So they were referring to this section of Mumsnet, not Israel.

@Twiglets1 ,

‘While the U.S. has uniquely strong leverage over Iraq compared with other major trading partners of Iran, the U.S. dollar's status as the linchpin of global trade makes its reach formidable.’

This is a massive double edged sword for the U.S and they need to play their cards very carefully. I think I linked up above to a JP Morgan piece on dedollarisation. This is real and it is happening, albeit at a very slow pace.

The more the USD is used by the U.S. government as a weapon, the more countries will try to avoid the USD as a settlement mechanism. Meanwhile China is more than happy to denominate commodity trades in CNY and, in that sense, are seen as a reliable trading partner.

Loss of reserve currency status would be very serious for the U.S given both the size and structure of their debt,

What is becoming increasingly obvious is that Iran is quite determined to hang out for some kind of ‘victory’, and, importantly, China would benefit from this too. The U.S is still undoubtedly very powerful, both militarily and economically. It seems to me that they could win if they really wanted to but that would involve real sacrifice, and it will have to be a military win rather than an economic one.

I don’t think the U.S is prepared to make meaningful sacrifice of financial and, more importantly, human assets, to get slightly cheaper oil and (short term) control of Iran.

@Twiglets1 ,

‘So they were referring to this section of Mumsnet, not Israel.’

Yes, I know, and I did respond in general to that

I don’t want to get into a sterile discussion of what has been deleted, as it is unprovable one way or the other. The deleted posts have gone. And what she may regard as criticism of the Israeli government may have been regarded by the moderators as anti semitic. I don’t think it is that black and white, as I alluded to.

No Twigs.
Read the post. It's very clear.
'I deliberately worded my sentence in the least offensive way I could as I have accused of being antisemitic multiple times on here just for criticising the actions of the state of Israel.'

I was then asked where and I answered the question. HTH.

I think comments have to be very obviously antisemitic (or racist generally) for the mods to delete them. Posts in the grey areas tend to be allowed to stand and the mod advice given will be to challenge them.

On the whole nuke nonproliferation stuff, we get this now. Germany has talked about it before with France I saw, but now it is the UK too.

Germany reportedly considers helping fund UK nukes (ukdefencejournal.org.uk)

I was just quoting a Reuters article I found interesting, was not necessarily agreeing with the whole thing.

Anyway, thank you for your comments - some interesting points. Personally, I don't think Iran is going to achieve any more in the way of "victory" than the concessions already offered to them in the MoU. That was not a bad deal for Iran, and they should have grabbed it with both hands in my opinion. Of course they had to make some concessions too - that is always going to be the case on both sides.

It's one of the major consequences of watching the Iran war play out. The WH said Nato was taking advantage of the US and wanted countries to spend more on defense. Fair doos. New nuclear alliances, independent of the US are now deemed necessary as under Trump the US has shown itself to be an unrealiable ally.

@Twiglets1 ,

‘I was just quoting a Reuters article I found interesting, was not necessarily agreeing with the whole thing.’

It was an interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I was just making some comments for further discussion.

‘Anyway, thank you for your comments - some interesting points. Personally, I don't think Iran is going to achieve any more in the way of "victory" than the concessions already offered to them in the MoU. That was not a bad deal for Iran, and they should have grabbed it with both hands in my opinion. Of course they had to make some concessions too - that is always going to be the case on both sides.’

I don’t think that was a bad deal either, but the devil was in the detail. I don’t think Iran trusted the U.S not to just relax once the strait was reopened and then to rearm for another decisive attack. I guess that is part of the issue of a surprise attack in the middle of the previous negotiations.

Having said that, Iran will have to trust a peace agreement at some point down the road.

It’s very hard to predict an endgame here. As I said, it’s brinkmanship and one side has to blink at some point. However, if I had to guess, I think Trump will at least substantially climb down. Iran feel they are fighting for their survival as a sovereign nation. What does Trump feel he is fighting for here really and, other than his reputation, how much does he care?

Assuming Iran is able to give up their ambition of becoming a nuclear power, at least for a decade or two, and open the canal, I think Trump would give everything else up.

I believe you and the fact that yet another new name with 1 posts attacks you on that says a lot.