Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Trump says U.S. will blockade Strait of Hormuz after Iran peace talks fail [View all]dalton99a
(95,048 posts)22. +1. Iran will have nuclear weapons because of Trump & Netanyahu.
Mr. Trump believes that he emerged the victor of the conflict, and therefore, as the special envoy Steve Witkoff puts it, Iran should simply capitulate.
That is not how it happened in the past. The last major agreement between Tehran and Washington, reached during the Obama administration, took two years to negotiate. And it was full of compromises, including allowing Iran to retain a small amount of its nuclear stockpile, and gradually lifting the restrictions on its nuclear activities until 2030, when Iran would be permitted to conduct any nuclear activity permissible under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
But the deadlock Mr. Vance ran into was essentially the same as the ones that derailed negotiations in late February, and prompted Mr. Trump to order the attack. (That negotiation was run by Mr. Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the presidents son-in-law, who were present in Islamabad during the more than 20 hours of negotiations.)
Back then, the Iranians offered to suspend their nuclear operations for a few years, but not to give up their stockpiles of near-bomb-grade uranium or permanently surrender the capability to enrich uranium on their own soil. To the Iranians, that is their right as a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which commits them to never making a nuclear weapon. To the Americans, it is what Mr. Witkoff called a tell that Iran always wants a ready option to build a nuclear weapon, even if it never exercises that option.
Thirty-eight days of war appear to have hardened that view, not loosened it.
That is not how it happened in the past. The last major agreement between Tehran and Washington, reached during the Obama administration, took two years to negotiate. And it was full of compromises, including allowing Iran to retain a small amount of its nuclear stockpile, and gradually lifting the restrictions on its nuclear activities until 2030, when Iran would be permitted to conduct any nuclear activity permissible under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
But the deadlock Mr. Vance ran into was essentially the same as the ones that derailed negotiations in late February, and prompted Mr. Trump to order the attack. (That negotiation was run by Mr. Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the presidents son-in-law, who were present in Islamabad during the more than 20 hours of negotiations.)
Back then, the Iranians offered to suspend their nuclear operations for a few years, but not to give up their stockpiles of near-bomb-grade uranium or permanently surrender the capability to enrich uranium on their own soil. To the Iranians, that is their right as a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which commits them to never making a nuclear weapon. To the Americans, it is what Mr. Witkoff called a tell that Iran always wants a ready option to build a nuclear weapon, even if it never exercises that option.
Thirty-eight days of war appear to have hardened that view, not loosened it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/12/us/politics/vance-iran-talks.html
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
86 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Trump says U.S. will blockade Strait of Hormuz after Iran peace talks fail [View all]
BumRushDaShow
Apr 12
OP
Brilliant. What better way to let the world know that the US closed the strait in the first place?
taxi
Apr 12
#3
Good thinking Donny put our ships and troops close to where they can be hit by Iranian drones and missiles
Botany
Apr 12
#5
Severe global financial disruption & depression then eventual total collapes of numerous world economies..
magicarpet
Apr 12
#55
How exactly is a blockade of multinational ships in international waters going to work?
Hugin
Apr 12
#15
Do they plan to blow up the ships that Iran allows to go through the strait?
travelingthrulife
Apr 12
#38
When will the cowardly congressional republicans join the Democrats in congress
lostincalifornia
Apr 12
#17
If we were Iran, would we being willing to give up our nuclear ambitions after recent events?
paleotn
Apr 12
#21
That hurts the Gulf states, the US, and global economy more than Iran, Donnie. TACO in 3...2...1
paleotn
Apr 12
#20
But Donnie and his pals are all set with their market bets. Demento Donnie
travelingthrulife
Apr 12
#42
I absolutely am not. A strategy doesn't need to be sucessful to be the option that makes the most sense. nt
mathematic
Apr 12
#29
? There is no negotiation to be had. The parties are so far apart that the suggestion is fantasy. nt
mathematic
Apr 12
#32
What is strange is that it was open before Trump's bonehead moves and now
travelingthrulife
Apr 12
#43
Yeah, I agree, "nobody can use the straight but Iran" is not a good move, gives them no incentive to open it
EX500rider
Apr 12
#74
There's only one positive I can think of. Trump has just giving the midterm elections to the Democrats.
Doodley
Apr 12
#52
This makes sense. I believe trump and the republican's goal is to destroy the USA
mucifer
Apr 12
#56
Fine, now American businesses that were waiting on products can go out of business dumbass!
ChicagoTeamster
Apr 12
#73
Overt evidence that both sides want higher oil prices. Doing Iran's work for them
bucolic_frolic
Apr 12
#76