· 128 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 8, 2026 at 5:05 PM

Iran 10-point plan says U.S. must accept uranium enrichment, lift all sanctions

Posted by thhvancouver


Iran 10-point plan says U.S. must accept uranium enrichment, lift all sanctions
The Hindu
Iran 10-point plan says U.S. must accept uranium enrichment, lift all sanctions
Iran's 10-point plan demands U.S. acceptance of uranium enrichment and lifting all sanctions to end the conflict.

🚩 Report this post

128 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Inaccurate93 2 days ago +876
Uranium enrichment? You mean the initial reason why the US created this mess?
876
Kevadu 2 days ago +309
Art of the deal!
309
Ok_Put_5567 2 days ago +34
Art of the steal!
34
JonBoy82 2 days ago +19
Part of the meal?
19
whackablemole 2 days ago +12
Cart with no wheels.
12
ultrahighhorse 2 days ago +8
Shart on a seal 🦭
8
heeeeres_jonny 2 days ago +5
Fart of the heel
5
jimgolgari 2 days ago +1
Tart of the Peel 🍋
1
Dhinakar_b 2 days ago +1
Mart on wheels
1
AdCreepy5165 2 days ago +1
All of the meal!
1
peatoire 2 days ago +80
Yes, the uranium enrichment that Obama stopped by agreeing to to incrementally release sanctions for every international weapons inspection they passed. The deal that Trump tore up because, well he didn’t like Obama having the credit.
80
tutoredstatue95 2 days ago +12
It has nothing to do with credit at all. They needed the deal gone for a "cassus beli" of nuclear weapons. If you can't check, you can't know, and that allows for uncertainty. It looks impulsive, but a lot of what has happened is planned.
12
Koss424 2 days ago +11
there is no plan. Vance just said they didn't think about Lebanon in the ceasefire deal. That's a pretty big oversight.
11
mf-TOM-HANK 2 days ago +10
That's the thing about this whole catastrophe. If the current regime remains in power, then it becomes priority #1 to enrich weapons grade uranium and develop nuclear arms ASAP. There's no ifs ands or buts about it anymore, it's become a matter of survival I make no apologies for this brutal theocratic regime but I don't disagree with the logic. They will have a nuclear weapon (maybe *actually* in two weeks this time lol) because Israel and the US have forced their hand by ripping up multilateral agreements and attacking them within their borders
10
RandyMuscle 2 days ago +54
The thing that Obama’s previous deal COMPLETELY handled at no cost to us? Why yes!
54
rhino369 2 days ago +25
It didn't completely handle it. Iran was allowed to enrich uranium under the Obama deal.
25
Irr3l3ph4nt 2 days ago +56
They were not allowed to enrich past commercial and medical usage levels. As soon as Trump cancelled the deal, they started refining further.
56
CRUSTBUSTICUS 2 days ago +32
It’s a bit more nuanced than that. They were actively building/had built the infrastructure to enrich at a capacity far beyond civilian or medical purposes even if they might not have been actively enriching due to the deal. This is essentially circumventing the deal even if I think Trump is a dumbass for getting involved in all of this. That’s like saying you won’t own a firearm while actively seeking/storing disassembled parts of a gun. Like yeah ok technically you don’t own one but is there much of a distinction at that point?
32
flatulating_ninja 2 days ago +12
If they were building the infrastructure as you say then it would be more like building a gun factory while saying you won't own any guns.
12
CRUSTBUSTICUS 2 days ago +3
Yeah that works. But in the world of international diplomacy they can point fingers and go “see we followed the terms!!” Which combined with an unhinged leader gets us here.
3
pingveno 2 days ago +16
With the additional stipulation that inspectors would be checking to make sure that the gun stayed disassembled. Also, the gun takes a long time to assemble and assembly leaves behind a lot of traces.
16
Settra_Rulez 2 days ago +9
And after 15 years the restrictions would be lifted.
9
pingveno 2 days ago +17
Those types of treaties always have an expiration date, at which point you negotiate a renewal. For reference, the START treaties.
17
Waterwoogem 2 days ago +2
Because, they totally, 100% wouldn't have returned to negotiations to extend, work it out more when the period was approaching...
2
Settra_Rulez 1 day ago +1
Who knows? Maybe they would and maybe they wouldn’t. But they’d have spent the intervening time using the sanctions relief to fund proxy networks and ballistic missiles for strategic deterrence and building the capacity to enrich even if they didn’t start enriching. They’d be in a much better position to achieve a weapon whenever they felt they had the opportunity.
1
Irr3l3ph4nt 2 days ago +9
At least back then they understood that the best way to avoid a rogue state getting nukes is to start normalizing and giving it a reason not to be rogue. MAGA seems to only think in terms of "I punch you hard in the face, therefore you do as I say." They're too cowardly to conceive someone could resist them and suffer just out of spite.
9
CRUSTBUSTICUS 2 days ago +9
In other circumstances I would definitely agree with you but I truly think the theocratic state/dictatorships of this degree of magnitude that are already so incredibly soured by the west/would always see the west as their most existential threat to absolute power even if sanctions were lifted and they were left alone etc. would always result in them seeking a nuke. I mean, NK basically speed ran nuclear weapons and the west just waved a finger at them and put more sanctions and something tells me if we lifted all sanctions and acted normally towards them they would still have done it.
9
Hour_Contact_2500 2 days ago +2
The Obama deal was a stall tactic with an expiration to the nuclear restrictions. Obama just wanted to make sure the nukes were not developed under his watch.
2
Jewnadian 2 days ago +5
Just think, if we kept renewing that deal so the weapons weren't developed under Trump's first watch, then Biden's watch then Trump's fiest watch Iran's nuclear program would still be stalled. And we wouldn't have started a war we have no plan for winning or even exiting. Not to mention the tiny detail of a major waterway being indefinitely closed or at best a toll road.
5
Cobrastrikenana 2 days ago +1
Do you really think we started this war over a nuclear program we “obliterated” a year ago?
1
Dassman88 2 days ago +9
No it was to free the Iranian people, remember?
9
Alps_Useful 2 days ago +13
I heard if you blow up all the water and gas, the citizens will be free
13
PluginAlong 1 day ago +3
Don't forget about the bridges. Gotta get those too for true freedom.
3
smurfsundermybed 2 days ago +1
That was sooo early March!
1
King_Roberts_Bastard 2 days ago +10
It definitely was started for enrichment purposes. Just not uranium, but Trump enrichment purposes.
10
Key-Rough-8346 2 days ago +3
Yeah, the deal we had under Obama that Iran honored, until Trump tore up that agreement. And now they know they have no choice but to get a nuke, or risk being attacked by Trump again.
3
redditismylawyer 2 days ago +1
This is the 7th dimension of maga chess
1
clazaimon 2 days ago +1
The US holding all the cards /s
1
dafunkmunk 2 days ago +1
>US created this mess? Well trump created this mess and he did it to distract from the epstein files. The US put trump in position to create this mess because racism, misogyny, and the price of eggs
1
Justryan95 1 day ago +1
But this time the US and the entire global will pay for it with passage fees.
1
Mapag 2 days ago -21
Well, after seeing how iran act, i am strongly in favour to never let them have access to nuclear, because we are 100% certain the second they have one they will use it, like litteraly in the same second it is operationnal
-21
o_MrBombastic_o 2 days ago +9
We had a deal in place to stop that, along with inspections and enforcement and still got to keep sanctions in place. Trump pulled out of it, he then started killing the people who were showing up to negotiate a new deal, he then destroyed all of America's soft power and good will while driving away America's Allies and started this mess we're in now
9
smokeyleo13 2 days ago +4
This really doesnt make sense after seeing how they act or what would be logical
4
Melinoe2016 2 days ago +9
Trump is as unhinged as anyone in Iran. Should we destroy all of our nukes since he’s our leader? Or does your logic only work one way?
9
truttatrotta 2 days ago +1
That’s sensible. But it was obliterated last year.
1
IntelArtiGen 2 days ago +78
Is this even the 10-point plan they agreed to discuss? They say the versions we can see online isn't the one they're using. Pakistan also said Lebanon was included in the ceasefire and clearly Israel / the US don't think so. This negotiation is really poorly handled. Pakistan must really call out the countries that are not respecting the ceasefire. The ceasefire must be monitored closely by other countries (india? china? france? uk?). Someone has to do the job, to monitor the situation, and to ensure the ceasefire is working and the strait is open.
78
Wanna_make_cash 2 days ago +15
And what do those nations do if the ceasefire isn't working?
15
IntelArtiGen 2 days ago +12
When a country can monitor the situation, it's able to publicly say which one is breaking the ceasefire, which is important for public opinion in the world and for accountability. It can also military act against this country as a peacekeeper. For example if it's a drone, it can destroy this drone. It's also able to prevent things like false flags. If a country says "we received a drone coming from X", countries monitoring the situation can say if it's true or not. After many wars, and most of the big ones, there are peacekeepers, otherwise this peace isn't worth much. China, France and UK are members of the UNSC, it's their job. Obviously the US isn't going to do it. And Russia also probably cannot be trusted. While India has no interest in the continuation of the war and could probably also help.
12
Augnelli 2 days ago +1
Where are the adults in this administration?
1
PluginAlong 1 day ago +1
Abusing little children.
1
mesopotato 2 days ago +116
Definitely not going to get accepted by Trump if that's the case.
116
PrestondeTipp 2 days ago +147
Most of the Iranian terms are a non-starter for every US ally
147
DavidlikesPeace 2 days ago +51
As are the American terms to Iran and its proxies. It was hard enough getting people on the table before we killed the Ayatollah. There is likely no achievable map to peace that satisfies everyone. Thats why you don’t start a forever war.
51
National-Two2417 2 days ago +2
Trump will give in. Just like he did in Afghanistan. He loves negotiating with terrorists.
2
JTP1228 2 days ago +6
That was a 20 year war with no end goal in sight. Are you really slamming Trump for ending a war? He has a million criticisms, this is not a valid one in my opinion.
6
restore_democracy 2 days ago +1
The one he promised to end but didn’t?
1
restore_democracy 2 days ago +1
\*capitulating to
1
AngleParticular2914 2 days ago +13
Nor should he
13
death_by_chocolate 2 days ago +20
I'm f****** confused. Is this the same 10-point-plan that Trump is calling a 'good start'? This sounds like a total win for Iran. No sanctions, enrichment, control of the Strait. Wasn't this pretty much the status quo when the Obama agreement was in place?
20
Current-Function-729 2 days ago +41
lol. There were still some sanctions under Obama. There were meaningful caps on enrichment. The strait was an international waterway and fully open.
41
Playful_Rip_1280 2 days ago +9
It’s not. The US have clearly said their plans involve no enrichment, removal of HEU, and limiting ballistic missiles. it’s just Iranian propaganda that Listnook is eating up.
9
Tidzor 2 days ago +8
Maybe people wouldn't eat up what Iran says if the orange in chief wasn't contradicting himself every 2 hours through increasingly demented genocidal tweets before TACOing out.
8
mesopotato 2 days ago +10
Calling something a good start doesn't mean they accept every point in the 10-point plan. He said "it's a workable basis" meaning they will start negotiating from there. A total win would be Trump saying "I accept this ceasefire and we withdraw immediately", if that was the case, this wouldn't be a 2-week ceasefire, it would be a permanent ceasefire because there would be nothing to discuss/negotiate.
10
King_Roberts_Bastard 2 days ago +12
>this wouldn't be a 2-week ceasefire It barely lasted 2 hours.
12
mesopotato 2 days ago +5
This somewhat proves my point. If this was wrapped up like some are acting it is, all parties would have agreed and there would be no room for misinterpretation/changing. Obviously there is still a lot to discuss.
5
Tricky_Big_8774 2 days ago +3
He probably thinks it's an intentionally absurd low-ball opening, because that's something he would do.
3
mesopotato 2 days ago +4
It is a "low-ball opening" because Iran knows there's 0 chance that he agrees to this. It's against everything he has said, so they put forward a proposal so they can still get some of the things they want and negotiate some of the other things they know are unrealistic.
4
urbanacrybaby 2 days ago +3
Yeah, people are saying as if any negotiation is 'surrender' by Trump. This kind of crazily extreme ideology is what starts wars in the first place. No, Trump is not giving up everything by agreeing to a start to negotiations. If you believe that you're childish and should never comment on diplomatic stuff ever again. An\[d\] yes, the war was counter-productive. The US should have stuck to the negotiations back in February.
3
Kaffe-Mumriken 2 days ago +3
He’s gaslighting himself and us into an off ramp
3
-Ophidian- 2 days ago -1
I mean yesterday was basically Trump surrendering so Iran is right to think they have leverage
-1
mesopotato 2 days ago +15
Was he? He didn't agree to this plan. He said the plan was "a workable basis" meaning that they'd start there with negotiations.
15
Toofargone9999 2 days ago +10
iran surrendered too then lol
10
[deleted] 2 days ago -1
[deleted]
-1
stonk_fish 2 days ago +7
The US gained nothing in this ceasefire, all the did was not bomb Iran's stuff which they could have also just not done without one. Iran on the other hand gets to unilaterally toll the Strait now and push it's own terms. Iran is the big w***** here.
7
rhino369 2 days ago +5
\>The US gained nothing in this ceasefire Have you seen the price of oil? That's the gain. \>Iran on the other hand gets to unilaterally toll the Strait now and push it's own terms. The US didn't agree to this, at least yet. Doubtful the world will agree to it long term. \>Iran is the big w***** here. Sure, but that's the outcome unless the regime falls.
5
Hodr 2 days ago +5
I mean the US is spending quite a more than the amount Iran extorts for transit in munitions, so if your justification for w***** is based on money then the US wins. That's a poor metric though.
5
[deleted] 2 days ago -1
[deleted]
-1
onlyheretogetfined 2 days ago +5
Seeing as the ceasefire is already over, the fact you think a deal will be reached is cope. The strait is closed again, Isreal never stopped bombing, and Iran has a list of crazy demands. What deal do you think is coming lol
5
PrestondeTipp 2 days ago +233
Iran's wet dream. Any listnookor who believes this deal was signed needs to stop deepthroating Iranian propaganda.
233
Worth-Tank336 2 days ago +103
Exactly...the amount of pro-Iranian propaganda on Listnook is disconcerting.
103
afoogli 2 days ago +8
There are poster claiming the Supreme Leader was a kind spiritual leader, and all the death by protestors were committed by Israel and US that’s the legal of insanity here
8
Ender16 2 days ago +8
The weird part is it seems to come in waves. There will be obvious propaganda and Doom Posting along with hundreds of comments thinking the U.S having a plane downed vs destroying over 90% of Iran's Navy and Airforce means the U.S is on the backfoot. And then suddenly its pretty calm. The same real news is being talked about, but everyone is seemingly less obnoxiously doomerish and just people that hate or support the war on a scale. Its one \*terrible\* comment and 5 replies "not all jsldkjfls" or "You can hate extremism and still xyz" repeated a few times at the top of every comment section . I feel like I see some Israeli stuff too in the same way, but its not as obnoxiously dominating. Or I'm imagining it. Or I haven't lined up when those waves hit and when school gets out.
8
Fuckyoursadface 2 days ago -1
It's not Iranian propaganda. Trump is the one touting a new narrative EVERY SINGLE DAY. Iran has openly said it is not approaching negotiations, nor has any interest in a peace deal that does not meet their expectations. They're not the ones plastering it publicly, Trump is. In fact the agreement and announcement of the ceasefire also came from Trump.
-1
mesopotato 2 days ago +25
Pakistan brought this deal to Trump 2 hours before the bombing was supposed to start yesterday.
25
5HITCOMBO 2 days ago +6
Right after they posted the draft tweet they were sent by the US on accident first
6
PrestondeTipp 2 days ago +25
Tehran had been saying we won't, never will, haven't negotiated, or the US is negotiating with themselves for weeks: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260326-iran-rejects-negotiations-with-us-says-araghchi/?amp https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2026/3/2/irans-larijani-refutes-claims-tehran-pushed-to-resume-us-talks https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-military-spokesperson-says-us-is-negotiating-with-itself-state-media-2026-03-25/ The *day after* the US threatens oil infrastructure and before the deadline suddenly they're at the table. *** The U.S agreed to a ceasefire in return for a fully open and free straight of hormuz. This is Iran giving up the only leverage they had (which they've now recanted) Trump agreed to consider the 10 point proposal Iran created, and Iran agreed to consider the 15 point proposal the U.S had (read their official message on this). So in other words, there is no telling what the outcome of what the negotiation and agreement will actually be. The announcement of the ceasefire came from Pakistan.
25
[deleted] 2 days ago +17
[deleted]
17
666666Satanislife 2 days ago +2
Is this even true? Immediately after the ceasefire they started firing at Israel and UAE, now the straight is close again. There’s so much propaganda it’s hard to believe anything at the very least with Trump, you can’t believe anything he says because he’s trying to spin his own narrative
2
cultureicon 2 days ago +1
No one is saying the deal is signed. It took anyone with a brain a fraction of a second to realize every demand Iran has is a non starter. Trump entered into a negotiation with Iran holding the straight as a bargaining chip. You're the one that needs to remove the object from your a***.
1
Animated_effigy 2 days ago
You do get that enriching Uranium is allowed for all signatories of the Nuclear non proliferation Treaty right? For use in nuclear reactors that make electricity. Israel has not signed that treated and actually has nukes so what are we talking about??
0
TactitcalPterodactyl 2 days ago +66
As much as I hate with how Trump went about this war, pretty much everyone agrees that Iran absolutely can not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. They're huffing glue if they think the US would agree to this.
66
Murray38 2 days ago +21
Everyone but Trump agrees. He tore up the deal to stop that in the first place.
21
Mayor__Defacto 2 days ago +15
The ‘deal’ only kicked the can down the road to about now anyway.
15
terivia 2 days ago +17
Wouldn't it be cool though if we were negotiating about potentially reupping a previous deal instead of trying to negotiate an end to a war that we started? Personally I think it would be very cool if we could solve some of these problems, even temporarily, with words and money instead of lives. Oh well, that's the kind of difficult negotiations that EVERY PREVIOUS PRESIDENT has done a better job at than Trump. We can't expect Trump to be able to negotiate or make good deals.
17
theZoid42 2 days ago +5
Say you’re a misinformed maga without saying you’re a misinformed maga
5
Murray38 2 days ago +2
Wow, Trump seems even more incompetent with his play then. Thanks for backing me up, bro!
2
Every-Development398 2 days ago +8
If you think this will hold you out of your mind, this is time frame to reload, and get ready for the next stage.
8
Funny-Ambition-7631 2 days ago +8
The fact that Iran is willing to bring itself to a war tpo just be able to enrich uranium instead of import it from outside tells a lot about why they wanna do it and insist on it
8
a1b3c3d7 2 days ago +1
Import enriched uranium from where and from who?
1
prettybeach2019 2 days ago +3
Not happening without IAEA inspectors
3
Meme_Theory 2 days ago +3
Guys at work were like "We didn't agree to their plan", and I was like "Tell that to Iran".
3
lepreqon_ 2 days ago +3
Yeah. Good luck with that.
3
44Stryker44 2 days ago +7
I’ve seen a bunch of different versions of this “10 point plan.” Do we actually know what the real one is?
7
gumbril 2 days ago +1
Same. I am wondering what is in the actual 10 point deal. Or maybe Pakistan gave the usa and Iran two different deals.
1
PluginAlong 1 day ago +1
I've seen about six items that seem pretty solid across different stories. Not saying they're agreed to or anything, just items that seem to be in common across to board.
1
JD0x0 2 days ago +23
No one would nor should they let Iran have access to nukes.
23
Mac62961 2 days ago +6
Yea not happening. Weren’t these people volunteering women and children around bridges and power plants as a “ defense” ?! The iranian regime is really over playing their hand. Its like they want to be attacked
6
CBT7commander 2 days ago +3
Reminder to everyone here: the U.S. has not accepted this plan. Stop believing idiots who claim otherwise
3
n16r4 2 days ago +2
Yeah it's a point they are most likely willing to concede on same as before, obviously the US doesn't have some sort of right to prevent other countries from building nuclear weapons, so it's a pretty valuable bargaining chip. Putting it in the negotiations is also good for Trump so he can tell his base "see they really wanted to build nukes, but art of the deal, I struck it from the agreement"
2
kashkoi_wild 2 days ago +3
Iran can ask to make Tehran the capital of USA. Doesn't matter shit what you ask , only what you can achieve
3
Ultra_Metal 2 days ago +7
The US never agreed to those things. The Islamic Republic is spreading lies, as usual. They also violated the ceasefire by attacking Arab countries again.
7
SirArthurPT 2 days ago +3
honestly; does anyone thinks that goes anywhere?!
3
sovietarmyfan 2 days ago +3
Iran is acting like its the "big man" like its a superpower. Like it has negotiation power. Meanwhile theyve lost a significant part of their government including one of their oldest leaders and american and israeli fighter planes frequently fly over Iran.
3
Bigbird_Elephant 2 days ago +2
I thought the nuclear program was obliterated 
2
HoneybucketDJ 2 days ago +2
Bombs away
2
ejrasmussen 2 days ago +2
Lol, they still haven't learned a thing.
2
adethi 2 days ago +2
What a colossal fuckup by the US.
2
Unfair_Resolution836 2 days ago +3
Goodbye iran it was nice knowing you.
3
Talentagentfriend 2 days ago +2
There is never going to be a legitimate deal again. Both sides are just going to keep posturing until something catastrophic happens. Either that or Trump takes a deal that makes us worse off than we were before (which will mean Iran would win). But I’m sure Trump would say we won despite losing. He’s using this war to crash the economy and distract from the Epstein files.
2
ChatamKay 2 days ago +2
Iran ten point plan is unconditional surrender. That’s what the Americans have done. Surrendered.
2
ChaLenCe 2 days ago +1
The only card Iran can honestly play right now is an end to Uranium Enrichment if the US stops funding Israel. Both are popular desires across the globe.
1
Opinions_ideas 2 days ago +1
This whole thing feels really off since yesterday! I really have no idea what comes next.
1
whoopercheesie 2 days ago +1
This plan is such a L for the us... It's comical 
1
seven_worth 2 days ago +1
I think people forgot the point of negotiation. There is no world where people come with term that satisfy both side and they sign right away. If you do that the opposite side will just push so that the term favour them more and since you start with already concession term you can't get more from the negotiation. You start with term that heavily favour you then you decrease that till the opposite side agree. The term will always favour the side with advantage because they can come up with the term. 
1
MagnificoReattore 2 days ago +2
It feels like the treaty that Obama built and Trump destroyed in his first mandate was way better that whatever we have now. And without killing civilians and the economy. 
2
HandsLikePaper 2 days ago
1. Iranian Regime intact - Check 2. Iranian uranium enrichment - Check 3. Iranian control over the strait of Hormuz - Check Why did Trump surrender? What did our soldiers die for?
0
Current-Function-729 2 days ago +2
So Russia could make money selling oil.
2
BumpoSplat 2 days ago +1
Trump's response, "we will not let them enrich thier aquarium!"
1
← Back to Board