Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 10/07/2026 7:00:36 AM PDT by Miami Rebel
Vice President JD Vance said Monday that any deal with Iran would need Iran to reduce its nuclear enrichment capacity, rather than give assurances of future nuclear drawdowns.
"If you don't want a nuclear weapon, then why do you need 60% enriched fuel? And if you want to show commitment to not building a nuclear weapon, don't build highly enriched fuel. That's a very basic threshold issue," Vance told Reuters after a campaign trip in Alaska.
"I think if they want to show a commitment to not building a nuclear weapon, they would do something meaningful on their enrichment capacity," he added.
Vance also told the outlet that Washington is uncertain about decision-making in Tehran.
"One of the things we picked up on is it's not totally clear how their country makes decisions," [he] said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
I guess we’re resetting expectations on unconditional surrender and regime change.
I’m sure the cheerleaders from March will be along soon to remind us how great it’s going.
Their decision making process might seem murky to us, but to them, it is crystal clear and quite effective. And it produces exactly the results they want. The terrorists are still in control of the country, and they are still enriching uranium and (I believe) producing nuclear weapons. Their style of negotiating is obvious- constantly change positions and break agreements, and make it look like it’s because their internal structure is fractured. This distracts the enemy, and provides false hopes. Regardless, why the Hell does that regime continue to exist? And why, if we did not have a solid ‘Plan B’ before going in, are we still there?
“Unconditional” turns out to be a suggestion.
What Vance is suggesting is nonsense.
1. If Iran isn’t willing to settle for 3% enriched uranium and reprocessing paid for by the USA and supplied by the US, EU, Russia, Pakistan or the PRC it is not serious.
2. Reactors make plutonium.
Solar power is a valid, lower-cost alternative for Iran, a very sunny place.
Pakistan is rapidly deploying solar panels.
Because it's popular and no power on Earth has the ability to remove it at a tolerable price.
“And why, if we did not have a solid ‘Plan B’ before going in, are we still there?”
Because we don’t want Israel to have to use nuclear force.
If you think gas prices are high, you definitely won’t like food prices after dozens of Israeli H-bombs.
If you manage to get low radiation food, have a pistol on hand to defend it.
“Because it’s popular and no power on Earth has the ability to remove it at a tolerable price.”
Take a look at Gaza.
The Israelis, unlike impatient Americans, don’t fool around.
My God, this is sad. Is JD Vance or Cyrus Vance leading our negotiating team? Back to the 70s.
When Vance asked for a ‘meaningful’ reduction, did he say please?
Pretty Please?
It was implied.
That much huh.
Vance has done, is doing and will be doing nothing without the explicit approval of DJT.
But I expect that to change after the election. When Trump becomes even more of a lame duck and Vance - knowing his election chances in 28 depends on his being more than a Trump Yes Man - begins to break away from failed Trump policies.
I doubt Iran will concede to even a meaningful reduction.
But if that were to happen, I suspect Trump and Angry Trumpers would claim victory.
Always ask for more than you expect (Unconditional Surrender) and when you get ‘meaningful’ claim that is what you wanted all along.
Art of the Deal, right?
They believe that nuclear fire with accompany the advancement of Islam and there ability to reach paradise. They also believe that without nuclear weapons you end up like Saddam Hussein or Ghaddafi. They have therefore been pursuing nuclear weapons since 1979. There were articles in the 1980’s describing the Iranians going around sanctions to obtain gas centrifuge parts.
My point, is that our self proclaimed enemy in it’s self proclaimed war on the US, has already been responsible for numerous military and civilian US deaths. Further, it’s proxy terrorist groups account for many more innocent civilians. Importantly, they are moving to try to start a nuclear conflict to ‘fulfill prophesy’, as well as to maintain ‘mullah’ power.
I would be very careful about any deal with Iran, and prefer that they officially declare that they wish ‘death to no one’ that ‘they are not at war’, disavow any terrorism or terrorist links, and completely open their nuclear program to inspection for ‘peaceful pursuit of nuclear power’ including and not limited to, prior not so peaceful pursuits. Otherwise, I would just soon watch them wither and eventually watch the Mullahs run with the money when the people get tired of the sad state.
Vance’s mistake here is that he is using common sense with a group of people that are willing to die for their religion and kill each other for no gain.
wy69
Presidential but unpresidential.
Yes, very, and it's obvious to President Trump as well. We are probably being manipulative in negotiating with them as well - but hopefully it's less obvious.
The Islamic regime of Iran is a cancer on the planet, without question. They can never be trusted. Their 'deal' with Obama was a joke that just allowed them to continue what they were planning all along - while they paid lip service to the 'deal' that allowed them to placate the West while pursuing their expansive goals.
An underground nuclear program, short and long-range missile and drone production, financing proxies (Hezbollah, Houties, Hamas, Shiite militias in Syria and Iraq, Palestinian Islamic Jihad), a myriad of terror attacks and thwarted plots around the world, subversion and plots in many countries (Australia, Albania, France, Argentina, Bahrain, Denmark, India, Kenya, Netherlands, Sweden, Thailand, USA), etc. are all part of their overall ambition to spread their Islamic revolution world-wide.
If we negotiate with them at all it should just be a facade as we pursue an end to their control of Iran.
I agree entirely (I wrote post 18 and then saw your post). They are truly a cancer.
Problem is, you have to assume they are lying, so what good does it do to make agreements with them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.