U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff stated that the Trump administration does not want to solve everything militarily, so Trump has reached out to Iran for a possible new nuclear deal.
Let’s hope that something was learned from America’s recent dealings with Hamas; Witkoff has admitted that he was duped by Hamas. Deception is not the exception for Islamic supremacists. It’s the rule. It is quite astonishing that anything different could possibly be expected from them. But those of Western cultures are often deceived by outer appearances: smiles, gentleness and warm handshakes will convince them of their interlocutor’s good will. Israel was also deceived by Hamas as it instituted a policy of deterrence that Hamas exploited, and then planned and executed October 7. See HERE.
The 2015 nuke deal with Iran was based on lies by Iran’s own admission. Whatever deal that could possibly be made with Iran needs to be guaranteed up front and monitored. Iran ran rings around the International Atomic Energy Energy (IAEA) as the regime flouted agreements and inspections. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi warned in 2021 that Iran’s level of uranium enrichment was only found in countries making bombs.
Trump’s new warning to the Islamic Republic of Iran aligns with his previous record on dealing with the regime. Iran’s unpredictability is a sign of its unease in dealing with a Trump administration, a far cry from the Biden administration, which poured billions into the regime’s coffers and resigned itself to a policy of appeasement, which strengthened Iran. For instance, Iran has been distancing itself from its own proxy, the Houthis, as the group faces US strikes and Trump threats. And in a hostile act of desperation, Khamenei has called for anti-Israel activists in the US and Europe to step up protests to stop the Israeli military in Gaza.
“Trump’s offer of talks with Iran aims to avoid military action, US envoy says,” by Phil Stewart, Reuters, March 23, 2025:
WASHINGTON, March 23 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s outreach to Iran’s top authority, Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on a possible new nuclear deal is an effort to avoid military action, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff said on Sunday.
“We don’t need to solve everything militarily,” Witkoff told Fox News.
“Our signal to Iran is let’s sit down and see if we can, through dialogue, through diplomacy, get to the right place. If we can, we are prepared to do that. And if we can’t, the alternative is not a great alternative.”
Trump said earlier this month that he had sent a letter to Khamenei, warning that “there are two ways Iran can be handled: militarily, or you make a deal.”Khamenei rejected the U.S. offer for talks as “a deception,” saying negotiating with the Trump administration would “tighten the knot of sanctions and increase pressure on Iran.”However, Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi, said on Thursday that Tehran would soon reply to both the letter’s “threats and opportunities.” He cautioned on Sunday that talks with the U.S. are impossible unless Washington changes its pressure policy.Speaking separately on CBS News, the White House’s national security advisor, Mike Waltz, said the U.S. sought “full dismantlement” of Iran’s nuclear program.“Iran has to give up its program in a way that the entire world can see,” he said….
SKA says
Even the Muslim have a saying: “Never get bit twice in the same house by the same dog.” This must be advice for robbing the homes of infidels as no devout Muhammadan would have a dog in his house.
JS says
Iran will never give up their nuclear program. It goes against their Quran for dominance over the “infidels.” Plus, they are closer now with them in the U.S. fighting to keep their terrorists in the U.S. and they’ve practically taken the UK and Europe.
Let’s also not forget that the European Union has given Syrian HTC billions, even as they committed mass murder of the Alawites and some Christians.
Buraq says
Bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities IS a form of negotiation!. Clausewitz’s famous observation from On War is that “war is not merely a political act but a real political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse, a carrying out of the same by other means”.
Witkoff is witless!
Taffy says
It’s amazing that those in power in this country (including officers in the military) have not read von Clausewitz’s “On War.” Or at least they act as if they’ve never read it. It used to be required reading at West Point, but I think that the course is now optional.
Witkoff is an idiot first class. Anybody can kick the can down the road and avoid a PRESENT military confrontation. But, when Iran does go atomic, a war will be much more problematic. I hope that the U.S./Israel has good intelligence where the 90% uranium is located. I have no doubt that with years of operating high yield centrifuges, that Iran already has enough U-235 for several bombs. They still have not tested a working bomb, which is a key step,with respect to going nuclear. Also, they still have no means to reliably deliver a bomb to Israel, especially now that the Syria route seems to be cut off. The U.S. must bomb Natanz and Fordow and put those facilities completely out of commission. I don’t know what we are waiting for. Taking out Iran will solve the Houthi problem,the Hizb’allah problem and the Haas problem as a bonus.
Daniel Triplett says
I’m less worried about Iranian ICBMs or other airborne delivery systems. We don’t know what they’re building, but we have 150kt warheads of our own that are just 12″ x 32″ in dimension. Van; container ship; duffel bag; suitcase… Iran could quietly build several dozen of those; preposition them globally, and hold the entire world hostage to Allah.
This would be catastrophic. Khomeini is on record declaring they don’t care if their entire nation gets incinerated as long as they accomplish their mission for Allah with global submission.
We must destroy their entire nuke production infrastructure NOW, and use nuke weapons to do it. We must have guaranteed, permanent results, with zero risk of retaliation. It’s too late for anything else.
Besides, nuclear “deterrence” is meaningless unless we demonstrate our willingness to actually use them from time to time. Now is the right time.
James Lincoln says
Daniel,
Instead of resorting to nuclear weapons:
Could the United States destroy Iran’s nuclear capability with a few strategically placed MOABs – accompanied by conventional fighter-bombers?
Daniel Triplett says
Perhaps. That’s likely what they’ll do if they conduct a kinetic strike. For this attack here, I’m not proposing targeting population centers, mind you. Just production and storage infrastructure, with a low but suitable yield to guarantee the necessary battle damage.
The US does possess nuclear ordnance designed to penetrate the ground before detonation, specifically for targeting underground bunkers.
For example, the B61-11:
– This is the primary U.S. nuclear earth-penetrating weapon.
– It’s a modification of the B61 nuclear bomb, featuring a hardened casing that allows it to penetrate the ground before detonation.
– This ground penetration enhances its effectiveness against hardened underground targets.
The GBU-43/B MOAB stands for Massive Ordnance Air Blast. It’s a large-yield, conventional (non-nuclear) bomb.
– It’s designed to create a massive blast over a wide area.
– Detonates in the air, creating a powerful blast wave, targeting large, above-ground formations.
The GBU-57/A/B Massive (conventional) Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) is our large, precision-guided “bunker buster” bomb, designed to penetrate deeply into the earth or hardened concrete before detonating.
The Iranians have already made the defensive calculations for a conventional strike when constructing their facilities. So, to exceed those design limits, we’ll need something like the B61-11 earth penetrating nuke weapon.
James Lincoln says
Daniel,
Thank you for your very informative reply.
I think that the main problem with using even “very targeted” nuclear weapons would be the international “optics”. Would it make countries like Russia, China, Pakistan, and North Korea more likely to use theirs – depending upon the situation?
But:
If the top US military weapons experts believe that this would be the ONLY viable alternative, then it may have to be done.
Daniel Triplett says
That’s right James. Although nukes would often be the right tool for the job, it’s political considerations that interfere.
Here’s what Gen Curtis LeMay had to say about it:
“I think there are many times when it would be most efficient to use nuclear weapons. However, the public opinion in this country and throughout the world throw up their hands in horror when you mention nuclear weapons, just because of the propaganda that’s been fed to them. As far as casualties were concerned I think there were more casualties in the first attack on Tokyo with incendiaries than there were with the first use of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The fact that it’s done instantaneously, maybe that’s more humane than incendiary attacks, if you can call any war act humane. I don’t, particularly, so to me there wasn’t much difference. A weapon is a weapon and it really doesn’t make much difference how you kill a man. If you have to kill him, well, that’s the evil to start with and how you do it becomes pretty secondary. I think your choice should be which weapon is the most efficient and most likely to get the whole mess over with as early as possible.”
Daniel Triplett says
Consider this: The Trinity Test was 16JUL1945. The Hiroshima strike was just 3 weeks later on 6AUG, which was about as fast as they could ship the weapon into position at Tinian.
If our grandfathers had atomic weapons on 7DEC1941, would they have waited 3 1/2 years and sacrificed 405,399 of our finest young men before using them? Of course not. They weren’t stupid.
One of these days, if the Kafirs are to prevail in the zero-sum global Islamic War, we’re going to have to ally with all Kafirs. Everyone on the planet chooses a side. That means allying with China and Russia.
Now, I don’t think that’s going to happen today or this week, and perhaps never under President Trump. But it’s going to take a man like Donald Trump to do it – with those kind of balls and strategic vision.
James Lincoln says
Daniel,
Thanks again for your very informative reply.
I fully understand.
James Lincoln says
Daniel,
Thanks again for your very informative reply.
I fully understand.
Buraq says
Bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities IS a form of negotiation!. Clausewitz’s famous observation from On War is that “war is not merely a political act but a real political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse, a carrying out of the same by other means”.
Witkoff is witless!
End PC says
I don’t see why the IDF has not bombed out the Iran mullahs, their Revolutionary Guard and their nuclear facilities weeks ago with Trump’s blessing. This is extreme religious insanity we are dealing with and that’s the only way to deal with it.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
I do appreciate the Trump Administration’s desire to minimize the use of military action. However, there are enemies for whom that is unavoidable. Otherwise, why is the US bombing the Houthis in Yemen?
I know that given the histories in both Afghanistan and Iraq, there is a major reluctance to go after Iran. But it doesn’t have to follow the same nationbuilding procedure of Bush. Just like Israel had bombed Syrian military positions and completely neutered Syria’s ability to make war, similarly the US can do the same thing to Iran. After that, maybe the islamic regime will collapse, or maybe it’ll remain. But whatever happens, it’ll be up to the Iranian people to sort that out on their own. The only thing we need to do is warn Iran’s neighbors – Turkey, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq to avoid exploiting the situation to carve up Iran
Pursue the peace w/ Russia, and do what’s possible to deter Beijing from going after Taiwan. But recognize that there are some situations where military solutions will be unavoidable
Sherry Miller says
Diplomacy is not in the vocabulary of the Mullahs. Violence and deceit are their life blood. If diplomacy were a possibility there would not be enough fissile material for Iran to construct several nuclear bombs. Every bit of diplomacy that has been tried has been fraught with deceit and has ended in failure. Absent an overthrow of the regime, military action will be the only option to save Western Civilization. Even as a child (I am 80) I used to say it would be a third world country that would use a nuclear device irresponsibly. I thought it would be Pakistan, but now it is quite clear that it would be the Mullahs in Iran. They must be stopped.
gravenimage says
US envoy Witkoff says Trump’s outreach to Iran is aimed at avoiding military action
……………………………………
The Mullahs can *not* be trusted. Any negotiations have to be backed up by negative consequences if they violate the agreement.