Updated on April 7, 2025, at 7:55 pm EST
On Monday, President Trump claimed the US and Iran would be holding direct talks this Saturday, although Iranian officials later said the negotiations would be indirect.
While hosting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the White House, Trump said the talks would be held at a “high level” and that reaching a deal with Iran on its nuclear program would be better than the alternative, referring to his recent threat to bomb Iran and the US military buildup in the Middle East.
According to Axios, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed that ” high-level” negotiations will be held this Saturday in Oman but that they will be indirect, meaning mediators will pass messages between the two sides.
Trump said that if the talks aren’t successful, Iran would be “in great danger.” He has been threatening Iran over its nuclear program even though US intelligence agencies recently reaffirmed that Tehran is not building a nuclear weapon.
Tehran has maintained that it will not hold direct talks with the US in the face of increasing US sanctions and military threats.
Araghchi said on Sunday it didn’t make sense for Tehran to hold direct talks with a country that “constantly threatens to resort to force in violation of the UN Charter and that expresses contradictory positions from its various officials.”
Araghchi said Iran remains “committed to diplomacy and are ready to try the path of indirect negotiations.”
Trump and Netanyahu said they discussed Iran during a closed-door meeting but didn’t elaborate. Recent reports have said that the US is planning to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities with Israel.
Trump will not attack Iran now, American Generals have told him no way.
1. The USA is very short on bombs after sending most to Israel and dumping lots on Yemen.
2. The US Navy is short of missiles after expending half of their inventory in the Red Sea.
3. The USA has not withdrawn soldiers from Syria and Iraq who are sure to be attacked by locals with Iranian support and taken prisoner.
4. In the previous Gulf Wars we saw six US Navy aircraft carrier groups in the region. We only have one that is overdue to return home, and another arriving from the Pacific.
5. It is unclear if Turkey and the Arabs states will allow use of their airfields, especially after Iran warned they would be a target. All we got is Israeli bases and fewer than a dozen B-2s at Diego Garcia to use, a base Iran has said it can attack. I doubt they would risk old B-52 and B-1 who can only lob cruise missiles but not deliver bunker busters from afar.
6. Nukes would spread radiation clouds over the region and big nations would be furious.
7. I have seen no news that military families have been evacuated from our bases in the Persian Gulf, which would be a first step.
8. A war requires lots more logistics support but I have not read about any military reserve activations or sealift command activations.
9. Ukraine is still sucking up lots of our military supplies.
10. Europe struggles with energy supplies after it shut off imports from Russia. Iran can shut off 20% of the world’s oil and 30% of its liquefied natural gas. Europe would soon collapse into chaos.
With all these issues, I’m sure the Pentagon has told Trump “hell no.” Trump is just pleasing his neocon allies by talking shit to distract from the horrors in Gaza.
Not to mention that Russia and China would not sit idle…! Russia has invested a lot in Iran establishing north south corridor and China would depend on Iran's oil at least from Sea of Oman port (in case of Strait of Hormuz blockade) for its economic needs…!
Hope you are right. trump is often unpredictable when cornered. It simply would have to rest on the military to refuse his command.
Everything you write makes perfect sense.
But why do you even dream that rational people will be making the decisions?
Agreed. The adults in the room will never allow temper tantrum throwing Trump to trigger World War 3, which is exactly what he tried to do when he murdered Soleimani in 2020. When Iran retaliated with its initial attack (the full retaliation is not complete), the Pentagon prevented him from declaring all-out war against Iran. They should never have allowed or even offered him the option to murder the Iranian general. They learned their lesson.
Nice list. Number 6 is an understatement.
What if Netanyahu launches the first attack?
Will President Trump continue to support the IDF?
Another possibility is that Iran launches a retaliatory ballistic missile attack before waiting to get hit first.
Don't Be fooled. Direct talks or not. In the end they will insist that Iran completely capitulate to Israel demands of total disarmament which Iran would be forced to not accept. Then they will accuse Iran of making nuclear weapons, no matter what the truth is, which they'll use to justify attacking Iran. Which it has been the plan from the beginning.
I tend to think likewise. They're just trying for some kind of propaganda advantage, nominally jumping through all the UN hoops: seeking negotiations and getting rejected, and finally having to attack to enforce the NNPT.
Be another Libya.
Trump & Netanyahu are setting up this:
Pay close attention to what Mr. Crooke said about Israel/U.S. real aim against Iran. China is the objective!
No Direct Talks…! It would be indirect talks (if happens) most likely in Oman with envoys in separate rooms and Omanis messengers going back and forth between rooms as they've done in the past…!
Qatar, Oman, SAE are vipers. Iran needs to prepare for war. Russia needs to share satellite information as to where the THAAD batteries are, etc.
Listen to Mr. Crooke in this episode of Judging Freedom:
Iran is a stepping stone. The real target of the U.S. is China!
They are ready and Russia will share intelligence…!
Russia, China, and Iran have a meeting in Moscow today.
Iran is preparing for every possibility, given the current situation….
Why on earth would Iran- ANY nation, for that matter- trust the US to uphold any 'deal' that is reached? Trump has already demonstrated he can't be trusted, so from Iran's perspective what's to keep him from walking away from a future deal when he decides he doesn't like it?
Trump needs a “win” bigly … and Iran needs a deal for economic reasons. Win-win …
No, Iran does not need a deal for economic reasons. Despite the propaganda from the West, Iran's economy is doing just fine. A deal is not even possible because Trump demands Iran demilitarize and bend the knee to the US in total servitude.
Understand this: Iran is not and will not ever agree to be a colony or slave, unlike the Canadians, Europeans, and Australians who are exactly that. Colonies and slaves.
Iran would never in a million years abandon its defenses, let alone its ballistic missile program. Iran has ICBMs that can reach the US and that is the principal deterrent that the US wants to remove. Never in a million years.
In short, Trump wants to destroy Iran as a sovereign and independent nation. Iran and the Iranian people refuse to be destroyed and/or enslaved. Thus, no deal.
Iran’s economy is NOT doing just fine. Inflation is completely out of control, normal people are finding it Very hard to afford food and housing, and jobs are scarce.
Add to that the facts that allies in Lebanon and Syria have been decimated and that Russia and China are visibly not charging to the rescue and that the world seems to be observing the utter destruction of the Gazan civilians with little effective reaction and you may forgive the Iranians for trying to find a way to minimize risk of destruction.
Now, as I said, Trump likes to “win” so as long as they can give up some shiny and bright, they may be able to get a decent deal out of it. It’s a Nixon to China situation …
That certainly depends on the deal. Do you really expect Trump to back away from the ridiculous demands he is currently making on Iran? Unless he brings out the original JCPOA and changes a few insignificant words to make it his own, I can't see Iran agreeing to anything. But since he just got done meeting with the butcher of Tel Aviv, I don't see that happening.
As mercurial as he is, I don’t know. Remember, he gets his marching orders re this area from Adelson, not Nuttyyahoo. And he’s a pretty good salesman when he wants to be. And he really needs a good peace win right now to keep his story going a while longer.
I just can't see Iran accepting anything less than the JCPOA. Like, I said, if Trump trots out the JCPOA and slaps his mane on it, maybe so. Otherwise, I see no hope.
Only President Trump would have the chutzpah to slap a 17% tariff on Israel. That's one way to gain leverage in any negotiations with Bibi.
Negotiations? Sure, let's call them that. /s
NSA Waltz Demands Iran Give Up Entire Nuclear Program, Including Civilian Enrichment
https://news.antiwar.com/2025/03/23/nsa-waltz-demands-iran-give-up-entire-nuclear-program-including-civilian-enrichment/
Araghchi said Iran remains “committed to diplomacy and are ready to try the path of indirect negotiations.”
Why, so a third party can tell you to disarm or else?
https://thecradle.co/articles/russia-iran-china-all-for-one-and-one-for-all
September 26, 2017: Had Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not say, "Israel's policy regarding the nuclear deal with Iran [France, UK, Germany, China, and Russia] is very simple – Change it or cancel it. fix it, or nix it."
President Trump would never cancel the JCPOA.
Tucker Carlson
@TuckerCarlson
Whatever you think of tariffs, it’s clear that now is the worst possible time for the United States to participate in a military strike on Iran. We can’t afford it. Thousands of Americans would die. We’d lose the war that follows. Nothing would be more destructive to our country. And yet we’re closer than ever, thanks to unrelenting pressure from neocons. This is suicidal. Anyone advocating for conflict with Iran is not an ally of the United States, but an enemy.
10:17 AM · Apr 7, 2025·
8.3M Views