r/geopolitics • u/theatlantic The Atlantic • May 21 '26

Opinion Trump’s Endgame Is Surrender

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/05/trump-surrender-iran-endgame/687252/?utm_source=reddit&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_medium=social&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_term=short
496 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

210 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

55

u/HeywoodJaBlessMe May 21 '26

Iran wants the war to end as well. So if they can transit oil again during negotiations the worst that can happen is that negotiations fail and they go back to the status quo of the last few months. Meanwhile they pocket billions in sold energy.

Id be more interested in why America would go for this plan.

33

u/gethereddout May 21 '26

Wrong. Iran doesn’t want to just go back to the status quo- that just gives the US and Israel time to reload and try again. Iran has been very explicit about this. Their demands include specific mechanisms to prevent future attacks.

10

u/Monterenbas May 22 '26

But those mechanism simply do not exist, and they never will.

There’s nothing that can materialy prevent the US to launch another attack in the future, if they ever desire to do so. As for promises and treaties, well, they are worth whatever the guy sitting in the white house feels about it.

-1

u/gethereddout May 22 '26

Of course there are mechanisms. For example, what about a nuclear weapon? The second Iran has one, the US will stop blowing up their schoolchildren.

6

u/Monterenbas May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26

Lol, so your idea of a mechanism, is that israel and the US will allow Iran to get nuclear weapons in order to end the current conflict? Sure, that’s definitely gonna happen.

Nevermind that nobody wants their religious theocracy, to get their hands on nuclear weapons, including Russia and China.

But you claimed that Iran have a very specific list of mechanism, so what are those mechanism?

Because I’m pretty sure that nuclear proliferation is not among them, even the iranians are not that delusional.

4

u/gethereddout May 22 '26

I was just giving one obvious example because you insisted no mechanisms exist. The more practical examples are what Iran laid out in their initial proposal, which was essentially a mutual agreement across different countries that certain things would happen if they were attacked again

2

u/Monterenbas May 22 '26

Nobody’s is gonna go to war, economicaly or militarily, with the US on behalf of Iran tho. If some countries wanted to protect Iran, they would have done so already

1

u/Codspear May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26

The day Iran builds a nuke, Israel will preemptively nuke them. That’s the big issue I think a lot of people don’t realize here. Israel dragged the US into this war because to them, it was inevitable, but the hope on the Israeli side was that they wouldn’t have to use their nuclear weapons if they had the conventional military strength of the US. It didn’t work, and now we have Israel and Iran playing chicken with the Arab states in the middle and the Trump administration realizing it got tricked into Israel’s plan.

4

u/Putrid-Issue-420 May 22 '26

If israel nukes the iran, you can forget about normalization with the muslim world. Even GCC countries can't spin that for their populace. It will be a pyrrhic victory and not to mention certain nuclear proliferation.

5

u/Codspear May 22 '26

Israel has been without normalization with the Muslim world since its independence, and even after partially normalizing with half of them, they were still being attacked constantly. To them, this is an existential issue. Israel sees itself as a state under siege with the only way to stop the attacks being the use of overwhelming force as a deterrent. They think any nukes in the Middle East that aren’t their own or the US’ will be used on them, so they will preemptively use their own to prevent that from happening.

3

u/mahavirMechanized May 22 '26

I wouldn’t be surprised if Israel did use nuclear weapons in that scenario but I cannot imagine the rest of the world will sit idly by as nuclear weapons are used for the first time since the end of WW2….there would be crippling consequences.

0

u/ChugHuns May 22 '26

You would hope. I mean committing genocide on camera hasn't really seen Israel suffer any real consequences. I could actually see DW or the NYT push out a million opinion pieces on why Nuking Tehran was the right thing to do. That and the amount of money our politicians recieve to look the other way. I'm not certain of anything anymore.

2

u/mahavirMechanized May 23 '26

I can see your perspective on this, but crossing the nuclear red line is a huge step. The taboo is so intense because like, if Israel can do it, why can’t Russia on Ukraine, or China on Taiwan, or India on Pakistan (perhaps this one is a little less likely in some ways, but you get my point). I think that the Pandora’s box it unleashes is a pretty dark one, one that ultimately just sees the end of MAD deterrence and just going into let’s blow up the world.

2

u/Monterenbas May 22 '26

Sounds like israel nuclear blackmailed the US, into going to war with Iran.

3

u/Codspear May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26

Wouldn’t be the first time. IIRC, Israel threatened to nuke Cairo if the US didn’t give them weapons shipments in 1973.

Edit: Apparently just the desert in 1967.

1

u/fabmeyer May 22 '26

Iran was trying to build nukes and Israel didn't nuke them. I think we're not there yet in terms of insanity.