Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
- During the negotiations, the United States' position was that "Israel" could not possibly accept a ceasefire in Lebanon all at once, and that Washington convinced Tel Aviv of a gradual ceasefire that begins in Beirut and the suburbs, then expands to include all of Lebanon.
- The American tried repeatedly to tell the Iranian delegation that the Lebanon file does not concern you as long as the state in Lebanon is heading toward direct negotiations with "Israel." The Iranian negotiator's response was that Tehran is negotiating on behalf of the will of a significant portion of the Lebanese people, and Tehran will not abandon protecting them, standing by their side, and carrying their causes.
- After the end of the first round today, the Iranian delegation will return to Tehran to conduct an assessment of the extent of Washington's commitment to what they agreed upon. The issue of the ceasefire in Lebanon will be one of the matters included in the Iranian assessment. And based on this assessment, Tehran will decide its subsequent steps.

What do you mean "Washington's commitment"? Do you have a link for these bullet pojnts?

Anonymous wrote:
- During the negotiations, the United States' position was that "Israel" could not possibly accept a ceasefire in Lebanon all at once, and that Washington convinced Tel Aviv of a gradual ceasefire that begins in Beirut and the suburbs, then expands to include all of Lebanon.
- The American tried repeatedly to tell the Iranian delegation that the Lebanon file does not concern you as long as the state in Lebanon is heading toward direct negotiations with "Israel." The Iranian negotiator's response was that Tehran is negotiating on behalf of the will of a significant portion of the Lebanese people, and Tehran will not abandon protecting them, standing by their side, and carrying their causes.
- After the end of the first round today, the Iranian delegation will return to Tehran to conduct an assessment of the extent of Washington's commitment to what they agreed upon. The issue of the ceasefire in Lebanon will be one of the matters included in the Iranian assessment. And based on this assessment, Tehran will decide its subsequent steps.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump was originally slated to go, Vance was unable for “security reasons”. Then suddenly they send Vance. I think they know it’s hopeless and trump doesn’t care about Vance’s future. He wants him to take the blame.

Trump and the Iranian delegation together is a bad idea. They both are full of hubris, like to make threats, play act for the cameras and always have maximalist demands.

If you have been truly following what has been happening for the pat 40 days and not just talking out of your @$$, you would realize the Iranian delegation is smarter and more strategic than us even with, "the cards they have been dealt with," to paraphrase our urbane President.

The US military has been defeated. It performed worse than Russia. In fact if we had gone head to head with Ukraine, Ukraine would have won the war.

The sad part is that we cannot even quickly pivot. Our entire economic system is built to support large weapons manufacturers which are usless now in comparison to cheap drones. The mythology of our empire is built on saavy, handsome fighter pilots and those large weapons can no longer be updated because of the freeze on essential minerals and parts from China.

We are doomed.

Anonymous wrote:JD spoke. Looks like no deal.

America is insisting that Israel not have nuclear weapons. Ooops . I mean Iran.

Anonymous wrote:There is a reason for the propaganda that is being spread about US vessels passing through the street of during very delicate talks.

Asian alliance w/ the US disappears the moment the US no longer controls passage of oil and gas from the mideast. Taiwan opposition meeting w/ Xi. South Korea critiquing Israel. Japan internal dissent in new admin. Winds are a changing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA keeps saying they sent two navy warships through strait to remove mines. Apparently these two ships don’t have that capability, so that’s a lie.
The strait is still closed, despite peace talks.

They do indeed have that capability. Why are you lying? Here are both Indian and Bahrani sources stating as much, since you no doubt weirdly refuse to believe western sources:

“The US Central Command (CENTCOM) forces began setting conditions for clearing mines in the Strait of Hormuz, April 11, as two US Navy guided-missile destroyers conducted operations,” the US Central command said.

The USS Frank E. Peterson (DDG 121) and the USS Michael Murphy (DDG 112) transited the Strait of Hormuz and operated in the Persian Gulf as part of a broader mission to ensure the strait is fully clear of sea mines laid by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

“Today, we began the process of establishing a new passage and we will share this safe pathway with the maritime industry soon to encourage the free flow of commerce,” said AdmiralBrad Cooper, commander of CENTCOM.

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/us-forces-start-clearing-mines-from-strait-of-hormuz/ar-AA20FjS7?ocid=BingNewsVerp
https://www.gdnonline.com/Details/1381176

These were Arleigh Burke destroyers, not minesweepers. Still significant. But Iran isn't going to do anything while they're chatting with Vance, Witkoff, and Kushner in Pakistan. Persians are renowned for their good manners. Famous for it. Can those destroyers get out of the Persian Gulf will be the question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA keeps saying they sent two navy warships through strait to remove mines. Apparently these two ships don’t have that capability, so that’s a lie.
The strait is still closed, despite peace talks.

They do indeed have that capability. Why are you lying? Here are both Indian and Bahrani sources stating as much, since you no doubt weirdly refuse to believe western sources:

“The US Central Command (CENTCOM) forces began setting conditions for clearing mines in the Strait of Hormuz, April 11, as two US Navy guided-missile destroyers conducted operations,” the US Central command said.

The USS Frank E. Peterson (DDG 121) and the USS Michael Murphy (DDG 112) transited the Strait of Hormuz and operated in the Persian Gulf as part of a broader mission to ensure the strait is fully clear of sea mines laid by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

“Today, we began the process of establishing a new passage and we will share this safe pathway with the maritime industry soon to encourage the free flow of commerce,” said AdmiralBrad Cooper, commander of CENTCOM.

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/us-forces-start-clearing-mines-from-strait-of-hormuz/ar-AA20FjS7?ocid=BingNewsVerp
https://www.gdnonline.com/Details/1381176

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA keeps saying they sent two navy warships through strait to remove mines. Apparently these two ships don’t have that capability, so that’s a lie.
The strait is still closed, despite peace talks.

They do indeed have that capability. Why are you lying? Here are both Indian and Bahrani sources stating as much, since you no doubt weirdly refuse to believe western sources:

“The US Central Command (CENTCOM) forces began setting conditions for clearing mines in the Strait of Hormuz, April 11, as two US Navy guided-missile destroyers conducted operations,” the US Central command said.

The USS Frank E. Peterson (DDG 121) and the USS Michael Murphy (DDG 112) transited the Strait of Hormuz and operated in the Persian Gulf as part of a broader mission to ensure the strait is fully clear of sea mines laid by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

“Today, we began the process of establishing a new passage and we will share this safe pathway with the maritime industry soon to encourage the free flow of commerce,” said AdmiralBrad Cooper, commander of CENTCOM.

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/us-forces-start-clearing-mines-from-strait-of-hormuz/ar-AA20FjS7?ocid=BingNewsVerp
https://www.gdnonline.com/Details/1381176

Sources say. CENTCOM said. Somebody heard it at Baskin Robbins from a sisters cousin.

USS Michael Murphy has not crossed. This is factually incorrect.

Post your source.