· 68 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 20, 2026 at 9:41 PM

Ghalibaf says no talks under threat, warns of new ‘battlefield cards’

Posted by InterestingGrass5038


www.iranintl.com
Ghalibaf says no talks under threat, warns of new ‘battlefield cards’

🚩 Report this post

68 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Althusser_Was_Right 4 days ago +39
Battlefield cards? "It's time to duel"
39
Phoenix_Maximus_13 4 days ago +25
“I play, POT OF GREED, WHICH LETS ME DRAW 2 CARDS! And what’s this!? POT OF GREED”
25
Unhappy-Peasant7985 4 days ago +3
New booster pack dropped, Shifty Straights
3
Direct_Dare_9699 4 days ago +12
Once a negotiator starts talking about “new cards on the battlefield,” it is hard to pretend the diplomatic track is anything more than leverage wrapped in ceasefire language.
12
InformationHorder 4 days ago +2
I mean, war is just politics by other means. So when the politics stop working they duke it out some more. If you think victory can be assured through fighting then you fight.
2
Direct_Dare_9699 4 days ago +1
Sure, but that’s also what makes “ceasefire language” sound so hollow. If both sides still think they can improve their position by fighting, then diplomacy starts looking more like a pause button than a real path out.
1
InformationHorder 4 days ago +5
They're in the "You wanna go again bro?!" phase of posturing. If fighting was to their benefit they'd be at it already. They're looking for an excuse not to have to again.
5
Direct_Dare_9699 4 days ago +2
Exactly. It feels less like either side actually wants round two and more like they both need a story they can sell at home for why they backed off.
2
InformationHorder 4 days ago +4
You nailed it. Iran got the shit kicked out of them, and the US severely underperformed. Neither wants to admit it.
4
Direct_Dare_9699 4 days ago +3
Exactly. That’s what makes all the posturing sound so fake. Neither side wants to admit what this actually looked like, so now it’s all chest-thumping and face-saving.
3
Elegant-Employer-725 4 days ago +2
Iran never wanted round one (nor did the rest of the world bar Israel!)
2
Slide-Maleficent 4 days ago +12
The reason a person keeps a stockpile of enriched Uranium is generally so they can assemble a nuclear bomb quickly. Enrichment is the hard part, assembly could be done well enough to work in a very short period of time and very rough circumstances. I also remember hearing a IAEA guy say a few years ago that a decent team of engineers with a physicist could be expected to assemble one from an existing stockpile in about 2 weeks - the amount of time they say they spent preparing 'new cards on the battlefield.' Now, I don't know what they might think they could actually *do* with one besides test it and tell the US to f*** off. I also have no way of knowing if they have one, or simply want people to think that they do. One thing I know with absolute certainty, however, is this: Donald Trump is the worst possible piece of senile genetic refuse to have in charge during this situation.
12
dbandit1 4 days ago +7
ask Ukraine if they wish they still had nukes
7
FrequentFortune123 4 days ago -2
They never had nukes. They had Russia’s nukes and no launch capabilities. The Russians would never have let them keep them, if they tried they would have just been invaded sooner. 
-2
peepee2tiny 4 days ago +8
They had the Soviet Union's nukes, not Russia's nukes.
8
FrequentFortune123 4 days ago -4
The Soviet Union collapsed which is why they were asking for the nukes back. This is a serious nitpick. 
-4
peepee2tiny 4 days ago +5
Not really. You do understand that Russia =/= Soviet Union. Yes Russia is the largest component of the Soviet Union but that doesn't mean everything that was in the Soviet Union automatically belongs to Russia. The nuclear program was based on Ukraine and when the Soviet Union collapsed Ukraine inherited the full nuclear arsenal. You aren't wrong in that Russia would have invaded Ukraine a lot earlier had they not given them the nukes, but it still doesn't mean they were Russia's to start with.
5
Elegant-Employer-725 4 days ago
They were Russias in that all the military launch controls were in Russian USSR, so never did a part of the USSR outside of Russian USSR have the controls to launch the missiles?
0
FrequentFortune123 4 days ago -4
If the US stationed nukes in Oklahoma and Oklahoma seceded, they would still be the US’s nukes. Your assertion is clearly wrong given that all the major powers at the time wanted the nukes returned to Russia. 
-4
peepee2tiny 4 days ago +7
No no that's very different. Ukraine didn't separate from Russia, the Soviet Union collapsed. It would be akin to saying, if the nukes are in Oklahoma and the US collapses then Texas or California would ask for their nukes. Edit: the rest of the world agreeing to give nukes to Russia and agreeing to protect Ukraine from Russian aggression doesn't disprove the assertion. It just shows that the world knew Russia would be the aggressor and take the nukes by force. Which could lead to Ukraine defending themselves by using nukes or having a lot of blood shed in Ukraine as Russia had a larger army.
7
Elegant-Employer-725 4 days ago
USSR did not collapse!! - it was a political movement called Perestroika to move towards democracy. It’s obviously gone pear shaped since (try and find an example of a country which hasn’t after the West have helped them move towards democracy democracy), but border lines were drawn up and confirmed and those countries became independent(ish). Ukraine is a complicated one because it’s never really existed as a country like it does now. It has pretty much always been invaded, whether by Iranians, Poles, Turks, Mongols etc etc, so the borders where very much a line in the sand (for example, I don’t think Crimea was ever part of a historic Ukrainian people?)
0
FrequentFortune123 4 days ago -2
Lmao Ukraine absolutely separated from Russia what are you even talking about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_of_Ukraine
-2
fury420 4 days ago +5
They separated from the USSR, not from Russia.
5
peepee2tiny 4 days ago +4
Thanks for proving my point. Soviet Union is not Russia. Russia was PART of the Soviet Union, as was Ukraine. Russia was just a bigger part.
4
Elegant-Employer-725 4 days ago +1
The Soviet Union didn’t collapse, it was transferred to democracy by Gorbachev, then (as a ‘democratic model’) Russia ‘collapsed’, just like all our western models are doing now!!! - America has troops on the streets and it now costs 13 x your annual wage to buy a house in the south east of Uk…
1
DramaticDirection292 4 days ago +2
So….they had nukes
2
kindnesscostszero 4 days ago
“Three decades ago, the newly independent country of Ukraine was briefly the third-largest nuclear power in the world. Thousands of nuclear arms had been left on Ukrainian soil by Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But in the years that followed, Ukraine made the decision to completely denuclearize. In exchange, the U.S., the U.K. and Russia would guarantee Ukraine's security in a 1994 agreement known as the Budapest Memorandum.”
0
ScaffOrig 4 days ago +3
You're not disagreeing. They had the missiles but the launch codes were in Moscow. Could they have got past the protections? Likely, in about a year or so of concerted effort, but that would have been highly problematic. No-one else wanted them to have the weapons, they would have not only had Russia appearing on their doorstep. And even if the succeeded they're left with a bunch of decaying warheads with no way to keep them serviced and no way of targeting. That was all calculated and owned in Moscow. Likewise the OTH radar hardware might be in Ukraine, but the systems that used the data all sat in Moscow. Standing up the missing pieces of the nuclear capability would have been a massive task. Ironically the size was the problem - the systems were too integrated and sophisticated. Had it been North Korea's, perhaps they would have had a chance to take it over, but they were essentially left with a dismembered arm of the USSR nuke capability.
3
0x476c6f776965 4 days ago +2
You do realize Ukraine was the industrial arm of the USSR? They absolutely could have bypassed the protection, or even used the warheads on another rockets, you also don’t need to build new enrichment facilities to maintain your existing nukes. The Ukrainians simply made a wrong decision at that time that they’re probably regretting deeply.
2
ScaffOrig 4 days ago +2
Of course I know that. They built a bunch of the rockets and a ton of the hardware. But still, the arming mechanism was(is) cryptographically locked. The flight paths to the Western cities were calculated and saved to tape in Moscow and would need complete reprogramming, the launch on detect sensors had no control centres, the comms network would need rebuilding and a complete command and control infra would need to be put into place. None of this is impossible, but it's not easy and not something that could be done overnight. It would have taken a good year or two of very clear "hey, we're getting ready to be able to use nukes" signals. Existing nuclear powers were strongly against having more in the club. It wasn't just Russia. START I had wiped out tons of missiles. Ukraine gaining them would be against the Zeitgeist of the time by a massive amount. But the main driver was the tactical nukes. Ukraine had thousands of things like nuke shells, backpacks, landmines. The big fear was that with the USSR going south these would be sold on, and suddenly we'd have a few thousands nukes that could appear anywhere on the planet at any time and wipe out towns or suburbs. The backpacks were up to 1KT. After the fun and games of Afghanistan, Iran, etc and funding dodginess, ME Terror was growing. The US was just as anxious as Russia to get those weapons out of Ukraine's hands.
2
dbandit1 4 days ago +1
and now theyve been invaded
1
aintnoonegooglinthat 4 days ago +6
Is that a translation issue or is he cringe in Farsi too
6
PureLock33 4 days ago +2
also how do you say cringe in Farsi?
2
bloodpomegranate 4 days ago +3
Zaye’
3
PureLock33 4 days ago +2
my Main Character vibes right now: The global geopolitics is just viral marketing to get me back into TCGs.
2
ExistingFun5496 4 days ago +2
Same deck of cards they have been using, they’re just down to the last deuce.
2
Ultra_Metal 4 days ago -2
The Islamic Republic's leaders keep getting more delusional every day, like Hitler in his final days.
-2
AcanthaceaeUnited713 4 days ago +8
If iran was like Hitler in his final days the US would not be willing to negotiate a settlement of hostilities.
8
Ultra_Metal 4 days ago +2
Trump is not like FDR or Truman. Obviously he will act differently than they did.
2
restore_democracy 4 days ago
Or Trump
0
Previous-Layer7872 4 days ago -1
Iran needs to get Oil as high as possible by 230 tomorrow... they have financial missles heading g straight for the usa ... its wild 
-1
Ultra_Metal 4 days ago +2
High oil prices help the US because the US is an oil exporter. The US has been selling a lot more oil since the war started.
2
Previous-Layer7872 4 days ago
Oil Shorts 2:30 today... you watching Oil rise ... 100 dollars at 2:30,is 150 billion dollars of economic damage 
0
National-Charity-435 4 days ago -13
Please, they managed to rebuild their nuclear arsenal in less than a year after hegseth's claimed it was "totally obliterated"
-13
Preds-poor_and_proud 4 days ago +12
Iran has never even once had a “nuclear arsenal”. They had a nuclear weapons development program that is now currently buried underground. I hate the Trump administration as much as anyone, but let’s all try to live in the same reality.
12
Remarkable-Matter134 4 days ago -2
The Art of the Deal is not working out for Trump has he had planned. If you keep doing the same old thing - you will keep getting the same old results. With Trump, you can’t teach the old dog new tricks. Time for him to fold ‘em.
-2
Brief_Hospital_1766 4 days ago +2
Then say goodbye to the Petro-Dollar and say hello to US economic collapse. Without being the reserve currency they will not be able to service their debt.
2
Hamiltonblewit 4 days ago +3
That’s not how the USD works, no serious economic professor would ever say the U.S reserve status is significantly dependent on the Middle Eastern oil market. Additionally, U.S debt to GDP ratio isn’t even the most rates out there 
3
Opening_Station_6067 4 days ago +1
I don't think the Petrodollar is in serious jeopardy, yet. It's hegemony is, perhaps.
1
Brief_Hospital_1766 4 days ago +1
If countries are forced to pay a toll to travel through the straits in Yuan, and they will, the Petro-dollar's hegemony is not only in jeopardy, it's over.
1
B_the_ball 4 days ago +2
Lol this guy's never played p****. Iran is the guy whose stack is dwindling and is  trying to bluff their way back in to the game.
2
Opening_Station_6067 4 days ago +1
Nonsense.
1
B_the_ball 4 days ago +1
How so?
1
restore_democracy 4 days ago +1
It’s almost Taco Tuesday!
1
stonertear 4 days ago -10
Do we know why Iranian propagada rag is being posted here?
-10
itsFelbourne 4 days ago +14
There is always value in understanding what messages a country is trying to send and how it’s trying to portray its position, even if/when they turn out to be lying You can tell a lot about a country’s intent by its posture
14
Lunaticonthegrass 4 days ago +9
iran international is anti regime [https://www.iranintl.com/en/202604180942](https://www.iranintl.com/en/202604180942) Pro-regime media wouldn't be quoting a death figure of 36,500 during the protests.
9
Esteban8899 4 days ago +10
some people believe that there are perspectives worth considering outside of American mainstream media, shocking as it may be
10
Decent_Relative_4070 4 days ago +1
also, it's literally a UK founded company that supports Pahlavi lmao
1
Available_Finger_513 4 days ago +4
I mean our own media constantly pushes trump lies as truths and gets posted all the time.
4
LetterNo7829 4 days ago +4
What part of it is propaganda? 
4
xythrowawayy 4 days ago -1
Because listnook?
-1
Decent_Relative_4070 4 days ago +5
it's literally anti government lmao
5
fury420 4 days ago
This is kind of the opposite, it's a site opposed to the regime that's merely reporting on internal Iranian propaganda.
0
BOPSurfcasting1 4 days ago -9
How the f*** did we get to this point where Iran AND the US are blocking the strait. Iran: Strait closed, no talks, new battlefield cards. US: Strait closed, give us your uranium, blow you up.
-9
B_the_ball 4 days ago +5
US is blockading Iranian ports, Iran is "blockading" the strait by saying they may shoot at you with some shitty gun boats if you pass through.
5
fury420 4 days ago +7
The US is still only blocking vessels coming to/from Iranian ports, not the strait generally.
7
BOPSurfcasting1 4 days ago +1
Yes, completing the blockade of the whole strait.
1
← Back to Board