Flavius Agximus said:

---

FWTXAg said:

---

ProgN said:

---

I have been an ardent supporter of Trump since he came down the escalator to announce he was running for President the first go round, but this "deal" if signed with these conditions is beyond embarrassing. With that said, would one of you tech Ags please AI Trump's face on this pic below. I'd like to use it elsewhere. TIA

---

Man if you're still with him at this point you might as well go down with the ship.

But don't worry, they're probably putting this out to split test reactions from the population. They're in a really bad spot and would probably love nothing more than to get out, but they've sold some people this lie so hard that now some of them actually believe it.

I imagine we'll bomb them a few more times and then figure out a way to lie about confiscating their nukes so Trump can claim a somewhat believable victory. I doubt Trump will settle for something as embarrassing as your worried about.

---

---

Thank you!

Obama peace deal 2.0!

JUST IN: 🇮🇷🇺🇸 Iran agreed to give up enriched uranium in proposed deal announced by President Trump, NYT reports.

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) May 24, 2026

Good context here as to why Israel is worried about this deal:

Quote:

---

The Trump administration took a similar multistage approach to thorny issues in the war in Gaza, pressuring Israel and Hamas to reach an initial deal to stop the fighting and pushing off questions of Hamas's disarmament and Gaza's future governance to a later stage. Seven months later, those issues have yet to be resolved.

---

Most of us have forgotten about Gaza and that deal. It never really materialized. Hamas is still armed and governs rubble now. Guess that's better than it was though.

That whole multi-national peacekeeping force was always a joke and never going to happen.

The UK's Telegraph is reporting (per US officials):

60 day ceasefire extension
Hormuz opens, no tolls
Blockade lifted, waivers of sanctions on Iranian oil
Iran has agreed to give up uranium but concrete plans to be worked out during ceasefire
US mobilized forces to leave but only after final deal secured
Iranian assets released, but only after uranium secured

samurai_science said:

---

The UK's Telegraph is reporting (per US officials):

60 day ceasefire extension
Hormuz opens, no tolls
Blockade lifted, waivers of sanctions on Iranian oil
Iran has agreed to give up uranium but concrete plans to be worked out during ceasefire
US mobilized forces to leave but only after final deal secured
Iranian assets released, but only after uranium secured

---

given the entirety of the situation, this is not bad...esp b/c we're securing the uranium. Historically speaking that's a huge win.

samurai_science said:

---

The UK's Telegraph is reporting (per US officials):

60 day ceasefire extension
Hormuz opens, no tolls
Blockade lifted, waivers of sanctions on Iranian oil
Iran has agreed to give up uranium but concrete plans to be worked out during ceasefire
US mobilized forces to leave but only after final deal secured
Iranian assets released, but only after uranium secured

---

I give it about six hours before Iran tweets that they expect to get tolls to travel the straight, they will be keeping their uranium, and they expect reperations.

Trump said this may take some time and don't rush it. And reiterated Iran can't have nuclear weapons.

YouBet said:

---

Trump said this may take some time and don't rush it. And reiterated Iran can't have nuclear weapons.

---

That's an important point. Until we have an actual deal, there is no deal. People getting all upset or happy about hypotheticals or random social media accounts is just a bunch of unnecessary drama. I'll hold my judgment until we see the real deal with our own eyes, unfiltered from haters or bootlickers.

This is a good sign.

pic.twitter.com/Njc83yyIBZ

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) May 24, 2026

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

There will be a lot of political fallout from this war's failures and from the deal Trump has made.

DeschutesAg said:

---

There will be a lot of political fallout from this war's failures and from the deal Trump has made.

---

If the parameters of what the Telegraph are reporting are true, then I'm more hopeful than I was. Could certainly still fall apart 5 minutes from now.

DeschutesAg said:

---

There will be a lot of political fallout from this war's failures and from the deal Trump has made.

---

You don't even know the deal!!

So predictable!

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

READ THE THREAD!!

DeschutesAg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

---

What failures are you referring to? (Considering you don't know what is in it)

DeschutesAg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

---

We have more recent reports from The Telegraph and now the WSJ that seem to dispute Axios. Considering the history of this saga and Trump himself, it's frankly meaningless to hang a hat on a 3 week old framework.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

---

You somehow think left leaning Axios of Politico lineage is getting the biggest scoop directly from Trump and Rubio? You serious?

It's clear they have not seen any MOU or MOA as there reporting for weeks now has been wrong and wrong again.

Just because you don't want to acknowledge how wrong they are, that doesn't make them any less wrong.

YouBet said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

---

We have more recent reports from The Telegraph and now the WSJ that seem to dispute Axios. Considering the history of this saga and Trump himself, it's frankly meaningless to hang a hat on a 3 week old framework.

---

You said the deal's details being reported now are better than what was reported earlier. I'm trying to understand what that difference is. Can you articulate it?

flown-the-coop said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

---

You somehow think left leaning Axios of Politico lineage is getting the biggest scoop directly from Trump and Rubio? You serious?

It's clear they have not seen any MOU or MOA as there reporting for weeks now has been wrong and wrong again.

Just because you don't want to acknowledge how wrong they are, that doesn't make them any less wrong.

---

Trump regularly calls certain MSM reporters and speaks directly to them. The Axios guy is one of those.

Tell us what the Axios reporter's reporting has gotten wrong.

So what are the particulars that ARE in the deal that you don't like and consider failures?

DeschutesAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

DeschutesAg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

---

We have more recent reports from The Telegraph and now the WSJ that seem to dispute Axios. Considering the history of this saga and Trump himself, it's frankly meaningless to hang a hat on a 3 week old framework.

---

You said the deal's details being reported now are better than what was reported earlier. I'm trying to understand what that difference is. Can you articulate it?

---

It's posted above.

Lindsey Ghramn and Ted Cruz being mad about the deal being made yesterday, has me liking it even more.

Those people are so war hungry, and I have my doubts Cruz has only America's priorities in his thinking.

DeepETX_Aggie said:

---

Lindsey Ghramn and Ted Cruz being mad about the deal being made yesterday, has me liking it even more.

Those people must so war hungry

---

Ted Cruz was mad about how others were reacting to the fake news deal. Believe Lindsey's was the same.

As usual, MSM and folks like Welker are taking the Cruz comments out of context.

Cruz comments were literally just covered. Did you miss it?

DeepETX_Aggie said:

---

Lindsey Ghramn and Ted Cruz being mad about the deal being made yesterday, has me liking it even more.

Those people must so war hungry

---

You like a deal being reported by Iran? Interesting.

The Axios reporting is poorly sourced and inaccurate.

flown-the-coop said:

---

DeepETX_Aggie said:

---

Lindsey Ghramn and Ted Cruz being mad about the deal being made yesterday, has me liking it even more.

Those people must so war hungry

---

You like a deal being reported by Iran? Interesting.

The Axios reporting is poorly sourced and inaccurate.

---

President Trump says a deal with Iran to end the war is close to being finalized and would include reopening the Strait of Hormuz. The reported agreement comes after calls with Middle Eastern leaders and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with Iran also reportedly… pic.twitter.com/lB4K9MUne2

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) May 24, 2026

I like this one, time to get out of Iran. Not our number one priority/concern for America.

I would caution that any agreement that has Iran supposedly giving up the dust and enrichment is very very suspect.

Why, the Islamic regime maintains is ruthless but somewhat fragile hold over its subjects. That is done by convincing their 10% or so who support the regime to be absolutely religiously fanatical about hating western countries and cultures, based on religion and other reasons.

How do they convince the goals of toppling Big and Little Satan matter anymore if they agree to give up any ability to threaten their enemies?

For the terms around the nuclear issues are to be believed, then one must also believe regime change has taken place, is taking place or will be taking place as a deal is finalized.

Else, any deal lasts about as long as it takes an IRGC guy t find his fingers and press a button.

Rockdoc said:

---

So what are the particulars that ARE in the deal that you don't like and consider failures?

---

My post said "this war's failures". The wording was deliberate. The decision to start the war and the economic damage and other dismal results of the war are a huge mistake and a failure in the eyes of most Americans. There will be political fallout as a result.

Likewise, the proposed "deal" Trump announced yesterday, which Iran may still decide to reject, is essentially a deal similar to the one the Obama Administration made. Trump tore up that deal in May 2018 and said it was a bad deal. Now here we are eight years later, trying to get Iran to agree to a similar deal. There will be political fallout from that, too.

Iran has agreed in principle to dispose of its highly enriched uranium as part of ongoing U.S. negotiations, according to a senior White House official.

A final deal has not yet been signed, but the Trump administration believes Iran’s supreme leader has approved the framework.…

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 24, 2026

The Obama deal took their enriched uranium, prohibited ANY enrichment and said no uranium over 3,67%? I don't recall that.

What were the terms of the JCPOA that prohibited Iran from having any say or control over the Strait of Hormuz?

And where in the current deal are we sending pallets of cash directly to the IRGC?

Obama gave sanctions relief up front. And allowed for ongoing program to achieve a nuclear weapon.

Trumps terms are no sanction relief until Iran has shown compliance with deal. And no tolerance on nuclear ambitions. As in you will not do AnYTHING to further pursue a nuclear weapon and will subject yourself to US inspections.

But other than that, just like Obama.

Trump is peace through strength. Obama is peace through stupidity.

if these terms are true it will end up failing like Obama because Iran won't adhere to it either

It won't be like Obama's deal because Trump has 2.6 years to enforce it, and will. However, it is highly unlikely Iran will comply with a deal that Trump will accept. If the folks making the deal do not control the internals in Iran, the deal will be meaningless, and they very well may be killed by the IRGC. I suppose it is possible that a "deal" could actually start civil war in Iran. Finally, at this point there is not really a deal in place yet.

[Don't troll other posters -- Staff]

DeschutesAg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

This is a good sign.

Early reports about the deal framework appear to be false (thank goodness).

---

What early reports are you referring to?

The guy from Axios has been reporting the details for three weeks. His sources were Trump, Rubio, and their direct subordinates. He was given a copy of the MOA that was sent to Iran ten days before the China trip, and he has now been given verbally a detailed outline of what the current MOA draft contains.

---

What's MOA???

Also, if the 'reporter' had the the 'MOA' he would have published it.

DeschutesAg said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

So what are the particulars that ARE in the deal that you don't like and consider failures?

---

My post said "this war's failures". The wording was deliberate. The decision to start the war and the economic damage and other dismal results of the war are a huge mistake and a failure in the eyes of most Americans. There will be political fallout as a result.

Likewise, the proposed "deal" Trump announced yesterday, which Iran may still decide to reject, is essentially a deal similar to the one the Obama Administration made. Trump tore up that deal in May 2018 and said it was a bad deal. Now here we are eight years later, trying to get Iran to agree to a similar deal. There will be political fallout from that, too.

---

You don't have a copy of any deal, or have read only conjecture. Enjoy your fiction.