Iraq?
sorry i don't follow news closely, whats happening with Iraq?
466
UnknownFiddler3 days ago
+466
There are factions in just about every middle east country that are Iran aligned. Most of them considered terrorist groups with varying degrees of power. This one is not the Iraqi government.
466
AdPure56453 days ago
+100
It's the people's Islamic popular front resistance for the great state of iraq , not to be mistaken for the people's popular Islamic front resistance. Naturally, both are run by Iran.
100
SnooStories64043 days ago
+41
Splitters !
41
WintAndKidd3 days ago
+30
Judean People’s Front?! We’re the People’s Front of Judea!
30
DarthGuber3 days ago
+4
Splitters!
4
Little-Chemical50063 days ago
+173
An Iranian proxy group in iraq
173
SpaceYetu5313 days ago
+40
Iran has been attacking several countries in the region via proxies for many years.
40
UnTides3 days ago
+10
Nothing to do with the ceasefire. They already had these Spring Break plans well in advance, 2 weeks of beers and babes in WIldwood New Jersey!
10
Terry-Shark3 days ago
+6
Why don't you read the article instead of asking the comments questions that are answered in the article?
6
unruly_mattress3 days ago
+2
Iran funds Islamic terrorism and destabilization throughout the Middle East, Iraq included.
2
FlexFanatic3 days ago
+109
So if they do agree to open the Strait does that mean all ships during that two week period can pass through and will the need to pay a toll to Iran?
109
Timely-Archer-54873 days ago
+108
It doesn't really matter, two weeks of ambiguity is effectively as bad as maintaining the blockade. It's too narrow of a window for producers to ramp up production, or for shipping companies to sail in on the risk of the resumption of hostilities.
108
eorlingas_riders3 days ago
+27
“Open” and “Closed” just describes if it is “safe” to travel under current conditions.
Iran currently dictates that safety. So to the current extent possible, they define what “open” means.
That could be a toll, and/or a specific transit lane through straight… or whatever else they want really.
27
biggest_tony3 days ago
+22
Iran has apparently setup a toll station, and the latest examination of the terms says the daily passage of ships will follow "specific rules of Iran". So I'd guess the toll would need to be paid.
[https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2026/4/7/iran-war-live-trump-warns-of-devastating-attacks-as-deal-deadline-nears](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2026/4/7/iran-war-live-trump-warns-of-devastating-attacks-as-deal-deadline-nears)
Having said that, Israel is still bombing Lebanon, and Pakistan said the ceasefire is supposed to include Iran's allies. So who knows if this will stick. Israel could ruin it, and they'd do so happily.
Even if it wasn't actually part of the ceasefire, the separate armed groups that threaten the strait may not accept continued attacks on Lebanon, since Iran is so decentralized right now.
I wouldn't be placing any bets right now.
22
Chippiewall3 days ago
+2
I'm sure Iran would love the ceasefire to apply to their proxies, and probably publicly say it should and whine about Israel. But I don't think they'll cancel it over Lebanon.
2
CryHavocAU2 days ago
+5
Yea people forget that Iran got a significant concession for two weeks. Not having bombs/missiles exploding across their country.
Iran had significant leverage by closing the strait. But so did the US.
It had just become a strategic game of chicken to see if someone would cave first.
5
biggest_tony2 days ago
+1
Maybe. I don't really know the sentiment over there.
But we do need to remember that it's not one person deciding to stop over there. Conditions for ceasefire need to be good enough to satisfy a bunch of people to keep the Strait safe.
And some people might focus on the safety of their countrymen, but others will care about their fellow muslims. It's not necessarily a pure nationalist sentiment over there like it is in other countries.
Even if it doesn't break the ceasefire, it'll probably continue to be a point of negotiations.
1
milespoints3 days ago
+2
Seems like they will partially open it, allowing 15 ships a day or so (vs 100+ pre-war).
Gonna have to see tomorrow how many ships actually get through
2
Rogerdodgerbilly3 days ago
+20
You got to pay the troll toll if your going to get the boys hole
20
throwforthefences3 days ago
+3
The statement said it would be opened "in coordination with Iran's armed forces", so yeah, probably.
3
tagillaslover3 days ago
+207
Did the Pakistanis actually do it….?
207
BabyBearBjorns3 days ago
+184
Nobel Peace Prize nomination soon.
184
funnypsuedonymhere3 days ago
+94
Could you imagine the meltdown...
94
busted_bass3 days ago
+34
That just might kill him… do it!
34
TopChard12743 days ago
+4
Very much Sir
4
Phrecki3 days ago
+3
Naaaah, but that FIFA Peace Prize could be up for grabs!
3
Magnetronaap3 days ago
+1
Mcdonald needs to hand in his FIFA Peace Prize *today*
1
a_black_pilgrim3 days ago
+57
WOW GRAPE!
57
throwforthefences3 days ago
+43
No, go read what's in Iran's 10 point plan for peace. It includes things like the lifting of all sanctions, war reparations, the US withdrawing from all bases in the Middle East, and placing the strait under control of Iran's military. The US and Iran couldn't be further apart in their demands, there's no way this gets resolved over 2 weeks.
Trump just saw a way for him to make it look like he managed to end the war without actually ending it.
43
grympy3 days ago
+14
No of course
14
New_tireddad3 days ago
+22
Now to the comments to see what the experts think
22
Prestigious_Window_83 days ago
+31
Pakistan will probably claim success here, but it's important to remember a two-week ceasefire is exactly that. *Two weeks*.
Short term ceasefires like this rarely lead to any sustainable suspension of operations, roughly **80–90%** break down or revert back to conflict relatively quickly. Such examples are Korea (51), Gaza (14, 21, 23) and Syria (14-18). All of which saw conflict resume relatively quickly after signing. Nowhere in this plan is any enforcement mechanism.
The momentum is there, and neither side appears fully satisfied with this 10 point plan. This will give both sides time to regroup, after which we should expect hostilities to resume.
31
mindbodyproblem3 days ago
+25
I doubt this ceasefire lasts but you can't just pick six out of the hundreds of ceasefire in the last 75 years to prove your point, no matter how many asterisks you use.
25
Prestigious_Window_83 days ago
+16
Between 1989 and 2020 there were approx. 2202 ceasefires across 66 countries. I will admit I was trigger happy on throwing out a % figure, thank you for pulling me up on this. I did not, however, cherrypick my data.
[Here is the dataset I used ](https://ceasefireproject.org/download/)if you wish to look for yourself. The Ceasefire Project has 2,202 declared ceasefires on record between 1989 and 2020 (we only have definitive data going this far back unfortunately). Out of these cases, 158 (7.2%) are classified as *definitive*, meaning they are made as a result of long-term peace agreement and can plausibly produce long-term peace.
You can read on if you wish. [Clayton et al. (2022)](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00220027221128300) has a rather good paper on this. It suggests that ceasefires are more likely to break down if they are imposed before all of the conflict parties recognise the favorability of peace. Likewise, ceasefires are effective only once the outline of a solution has been identified.
I am not so sure that the conditions have been met here. I think Iran notices that the longer it drags the US along, the more favourable the negotiating terms can be.
16
RedIndianRobin3 days ago
-6
Ah armchair listnookors. Iran is literally running out of drinking water and here you're claiming war will return in 2 weeks based on what? Something happened in some other country years ago lol.
-6
Prestigious_Window_83 days ago
+8
I study Peace and Conflict Studies, and have done so for the last 5 years. Based on what I have studied I am arguing that the war will likely resume because short term ceasefires are typically not designed to end wars. They are usually intended to achieve limited immediate objectives like facilitating humanitarian aid or creating temporary pauses in fighting for strategic positioning.
I will let you read deeper if you wish, but [Clayton et al. (2021)](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13533312.2021.1894934#abstract) argue short ceasefires should not be evaluated based on whether they produce longterm peace, because that is not what they are designed to do. Their effectiveness does not lie in ending conflicts completely.
For that reason, I believe it is reasonable to expect fighting will resume. If the parties genuinely intended to end the war, they would be negotiating or implementing more comprehensive, longterm agreements rather than a temporary pause in hostilities. Perhaps they are, but I have not seen anything substantive enough to believe that yet.
Drought does not fundamentally change this. There is no strong evidence that drought discourages interstate or civil wars. Countries affected by drought still engage in conflict, as seen in cases like Somalia and Syria. At most, drought acts as a background factor, not anything decisive.
8
RedIndianRobin3 days ago
+1
Literally last year, the ceasefire between Iran and Israel lasted just fine after a few days of conflict. India and Pakistan had a lasting ceasefire from last year. You can't take a few examples and use it for your claim.
The fact is, there's a temporary ceasefire and there will be talks for a permanent end to the war in the next two weeks. We'll see where this leads. For now, nobody knows.
My guess is, unless Israel fucks this up, it should deescalate from now on.
1
SuspiciousYard24843 days ago
+5
Two Week Tuesday!
5
Infamous_Copy_36593 days ago
+5
Is Israel leaving Lebanon?
5
Little-Chemical50063 days ago
+12
No
Israel backs Trump's two-week pause on Iran strikes, says Lebanon excluded - https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/netanyahu-backs-iran-ceasefire-says-lebanon-not-included-israeli-media-says-2026-04-08/
12
Infamous_Copy_36593 days ago
+11
that doesn't work, and they know it. There will be no ceasefire.
11
nunii3 days ago
+9
It is astonishing to witness the level of ignorance displayed by a significant portion of Listnook users. Despite the fact that Iran has suffered a catastrophic loss of leadership, its navy, and a substantial portion of its military capabilities, the majority of Listnook users seem to believe that Iran has emerged victorious. This is a disconcerting observation, as Iran’s situation is dire. Without the Strait of Hormuz, which serves as a crucial lifeline for its economy, Iran would be in a state of complete devastation.
9
Alert-Algae-66743 days ago
+36
If you look at the Vietnam War, North Vietnamese forces had over 1 million deaths while US only had about 50,000. And by “kill/death ratio” US military was winning that war and was fighting way more efficiently than the Vietnamese.
But at the end North Vietnam was the one to accomplish their goal while US didn’t so it still counted as a win for them.
Of course Iran has taken severe damage and obviously lost more than US or Israel has. However “victory” for US depends on whether we can achieve our own initial objectives which are more proactive than Iran’s.
The Islamic Republic’s goal is to survive by the end of this while US has basically set the goal to be complete regime change and dismantling of the nuclear program
If Trump moves the goalposts for “victory” and chooses to pull out before that happens it would be hard to see it as a genuine win
And I personally do want to see Iran move to being a democracy, and generally I support strikes on IRGC to make uprising easier. But Trump recently threatening mass attacks on civilian targets seems to contradict the goal of helping Iran’s people
36
I_am_le_tired3 days ago
+8
>But Trump recently threatening mass attacks on civilian targets seems to contradict the goal of helping Iran’s people
Hmm hmmm, "seems to"? 🤔🤨
8
Alert-Algae-66743 days ago
+1
At least it shows some desperation on the part of Trump and Netanyahu. They made the decision to attack expecting a clean simple war that would be over very quickly, with little political or economic consequences.
Now they are both losing patience over it, knowing a long dragged out war is bad for their popularity. And popularity is already pretty bad for the both of them at home.
Trump potentially opening up civilian targets is a sign that current strategy of just bombing IRGC targets and missile and drone facilities is not working as fast or effectively as they would like. Otherwise why wouldn't they just stick to mostly military related strikes and win without risking international condemnation?
1
misatos_whiteknight3 days ago
+9
i think you're misunderstanding the comment intents. The sane ones acknowledge Iran is getting destroyed but it's still ahead of US in terms of war win condition
To simplify Iran is not winning, more like US is losing an unwinnable fight
9
AcerolaUnderBlade3 days ago
+8
The strait was free to pass for everyone before, now people need to pay tolls to pass. US now need to pay for the destruction that they've done in Iran. The US need to withdraw their forces from the middle east. Trump have said that they're winning for a month now, but look at where we are right now. Keep coping harder i guess. Lol.
8
Tzukkeli3 days ago
+4
In war, everyone loses. In this particular war, USA lost more than Iran
4
FrostingHour83513 days ago
+7
In what way?
7
DarwinF1nch3 days ago
+18
We look like f****** idiots on the world stage. You may think I’m kidding but our soft power continues to erode with each of the current admin’s idiotic military endeavors.
18
FrostingHour83513 days ago
-6
Idiots sure but iran has had most of their top leaders killed and infrastructure severely damaged while dealing with a water crisis with no real way to repair the damage.
-6
SMTTajWAR3 days ago
+7
Iran can now collect tolls from Hormuz and will almost certainly get sanction relief. Why? because Iran wouldn't let ships pass through unless they pay the toll. And those who have sanctions against Iran won't be let through. So, in order to get Oil and other by-products from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Iraq and Bahrain, you must have good relations with Iran. Bolstered by this, the Houthis might set up their own toll booths on Bab al Mandeb. So, the Arab states must have good relations with Iran or else. The 13 US bases are all destroyed. It's unlikely Iran will allow the Arabs to invite the US back.
In other words, unless they are somehow destroyed with nuclear weapons, Iran will be the sole hegemon of the Middle East, getting a cut from everything of the GCC countries and Iraq. Even if they lift the Toll, they'll still get tons of business because the world will never want the Strait of Hormuz blocked again. So, preferential treatment from Japan, Korea, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, pretty much every nation that gets resources from the Gulf. And that includes Europe too. I don't think we have seen a power shift of such epic proportions in our lives.
Iran got Sanction relief, unconditional business opportunities, emboldened proxies, bargaining chip of Hormuz, toll booth, and possibly reignition of their nuclear program. And the only way to stop them is Israel's Samson Option. You want to stop Iran, you must blow up the whole world.
7
rimshot993 days ago
+10
1. The USA was looking for regime change, the regime did not change, it got worse as more hardliners are in charge now, the IRGC has more influence now. The USA got the opposite of what it was hoping to achieve.
2. Iran, and the rest of the world, now understand Iran controls the price of oil and gas around the world to a huge extent, a recession inducing, crisis extent. Iran has grown confident that it can only have its oil go through and the Americans will just watch the Iranian oil go by, while the rest of the gulf can't ship. The Iranians can charge a toll on others, no problem. This is so simple and effective Iran will be beefing up their capability here - I bet there will be 1,000 drones aimed at the straight from now on.
3. Iran always strategically chose not to have an actual nuclear weapon, but have enriched uranium on hand so they could make a weapon quickly. They, and every other crackpot country, now understand North Korea was right - Iran has to make and test nuclear weapons now, they have to as its the only credible threat the Americans respect. They already have decent ballistic missile capability so its a no-brainer.
4. The USA has lost its soft power - it called for military assistance from countries after Trump repeatedly insulted their militaries after he screwed up and cornered himself. Every country rightfully thumbed their nose at him.
This was all predicted by experts but Trump and crew decided to eschew experts so they get trapped by avoidable pitfalls. Now that they understand what experts knew all along, I doubt they would have chosen to do this. And perhaps have taken Obama's approach which kept Iran contained far more effectively than we are right now. Don't get me wrong, no way jihadists can have a nuke. Trump's way turned out to result in enduring losses for the West, temporary losses for Iran, but important and enduring gains for Iran.
10
FrostingHour83513 days ago
+2
1) they still might get it given the water and wealth crisis that are already plaguing Teran which will make most of the points except loss of soft powe moot.
2
[deleted]3 days ago
+1
[deleted]
1
Luname3 days ago
+4
>what's easily the most impressive CSAR mission ever
I'm looking forward for the inevitable movie that's made out of this.
4
PrestondeTipp3 days ago
-7
Lots of Iranian bots and troll farms
Listnookors somehow believe the United States of America accepted Iran's wet dream of a proposal.
They're not living in real life.
-7
VastInvestment27353 days ago
+22
ya it's the rest of the world living in another reality, totally not batshit insane yanks. lmfao at these people
22
Hayes4prez3 days ago
-3
Well sure. They won. Trump agreed to Iran’s terms.
-3
royalx3 days ago
+256
I can’t tell if everyone is a moron, or if I’m a moron. There is no agreement - the whole point of the cease fire is to come to an agreement. If anything, this confirms America and Iran have been negotiating, there is an open line between America and Iran and a potential path to peace is on the way.
256
SetOpening31633 days ago
+110
You are correct. No one reads past headlines on Listnook.
110
_PROBABLY_CORRECT3 days ago
+20
I come here & consult the hive-mind to help me make important life decisions
20
ValensTheThrowaway3 days ago
+4
I'd argue that consulting the hive-mind used to be a useful tool when making important life decisions, but the hive-mind has since been put into a contained chamber. And if you'll allow me to mix metaphors, it used to be something like a mixed old-world forest with different layers from the canopy to the roots, but now it's something more akin to a Pando bonsai, climate and temperature controlled to produce the optimal sprouts.
The nutrients fed into the bonsai, are naturally controlled and fertilized to produce the best outcomes.
4
Tumble853 days ago
-4
Trump "won".
He will capitulate to worse terms than before we started bombing Iran, but Iran and most of U.S media will keep quiet on that so we can leave this debacle quietly.
It's the best situation we get.
-4
iNiite3 days ago
+19
I’m just worried about the administration’s position on the 10-points presented by Iran to be “a good basis for negotiations”. If you read these points, even a fraction of them implemented would just mean a massive, non-debatable victory for Iran.
19
jqman693 days ago
-1
A war that Iran didn't start
-1
PM_POLITICAL_BELIEFS3 days ago
+3
JFC, yes, it's neck breaking how people on this site switch from "the world is ending tonight" to "oh, so now everyone is payng a toll?! Iran just gets what they want?!" Because a cease fire was agreed to.
3
TheOriginalBroCone3 days ago
+53
You're not. The guy you're replying has to be a bot. Iran has troll farms, and since Listnook has a predisposition to hate America, they'll believe them whole-heartedly.
With a globalized economy, war is way too costly.
53
royalx3 days ago
+11
Lol gotcha. I’m no expert in political strategy, but the price of oil is tanking and I thought that’s been Iran’s only piece of real leverage here. Guess we will see what comes next.
11
davidbklyn3 days ago
+8
The price oil doesn’t matter if you get a bunch of money for every ship transporting through your strait
8
SMTTajWAR3 days ago
+1
Don't forget about sanctions relief. If you have sanctions against Iran, you cannot pay Iran their toll. Therefore, no oil and by-products from the GCC countries or Iraq. So, you must strike a deal with Iran or plunge into darkness and famine.
This means Iran not only got sanction relief, but they also got their own sanction hammer against whoever they don't like. So make sure your PM looks and smells nice when they meet the new Pay-a-toll-ah.
1
richarm873 days ago
+11
Gas has dropped every time Trump said there's a cease fire deal in the works... thats been atleast 3x already. It always has done that when an announcement of peace has been mentioned.
11
royalx3 days ago
+5
Yeah but I guess the difference is Iran acknowledged it this time.
5
richarm873 days ago
+4
Yes. But in there 10 point plan they still manage the strait. They still have leverage. Trump acknowledged using Iran's 10 points as a starting point. Bot his 15.
Also markets are based on expectations not actual performance. Expectations were horrible for this war... now just bad.
4
royalx3 days ago
+6
Again, going to emphasize I am probably a moron and not a political strategist, but step one is to get the ceasefire in place I would think. Everything after that is up to negotiation. I would be shocked if what’s ultimately agreed to is in-line with Iran’s 10 points.
6
Thisguymoot3 days ago
+4
Yeah. Far too much on that list is fundamentally incompatible with not just Trump, but with any US military and geopolitical strategy as well as Isreal’s. I’m glad there’s a starting point, but I can’t see yet how anything possibly comes from it unless there was something absolutely, scandalously substantial that happened behind the scenes today to force Trumps hand to the table. We’ll see.
4
richarm873 days ago
+4
Do I think all 10 points will be agreed upon. No.
But I think Trump realizes he stepped in shyte and he's trying to find a way out that he can spin to his Maga group as a win some how. So basically tossing out his demands and working on Iran's framework is a big shift in their favor already. Basically If Trump brings up his demands Iran would just leave the table as that is not the framework of the deal they agreed to negotiate
But that's only the case if negotiations are honest and not some ploy again
4
HonestDespot3 days ago
-2
What leverage do the Americans have?
Other than a nuclear attack nothing they do will turn the tide.
The Iranians will withdraw and enact guerilla warfare and evasive techniques in a landscape they know and are familiar with, while the American public will quickly sour on a costly pointless war where young men and women are dying and everyone’s lives are slowly getting worse.
-2
Krivvan3 days ago
+6
It's because Trump mentioned the 10-point plan as a good starting point and that plan basically gives Iran everything they want. They didn't actually come to that agreement yet, but because we knew about the plan before today it currently ends up feeling like Trump gave into something existing rather than it being a new development.
If it really was a good plan, then why didn't Trump consider it a good faith starting position several days ago? Why only today? The answer may really be because of Pakistan pushing for it, but to many people it ends up feeling like Trump gave in.
6
athamders3 days ago
+4
But Israel accepted the 10 point plan too. Why would they do that?
I am also going crazy from all listnookors saying Taco Tuesday and Iran "won", when it felt like we were one second from doomsday clock.
4
richarm873 days ago
+5
It's more based on trump posted he would be working along Iran's 10 point framework... Trump had a 15 point plan.... Iran had a 10 point plan... Trump said negotiations will be based on their 10 points (not his).
Also his history of bluster then backing off leads you to believe it happened again.
5
davidbklyn3 days ago
+2
Thank god
2
donkeykong641233 days ago
+4
parroting trump lost and capitulated to the IRGC is just listnook being listnook.
Anyone outside the echochamber sees this is absolutely not the case. Likely pro IRGC bots spreading propaganda
4
richarm873 days ago
-1
Trump (and even fox) said they are negotiating on Iran's 10 point framework... not Trumps 15 point deal.
Now nothing has happened but if the negotiations are real and not another scheme to get Iran's negotiators then that is shifting to Iran
It's like if an athlete wants 10 years 100 million with a no trade clause and the team was just 4 years 20 million. But the team said hey to get this going we will agree at 10 years and a no trade clause. You would say the team is already caving in. No?
Deal isn't done (or even started) but one side shifted over already
-1
sooodooo3 days ago
+4
Even before that, Trump had Kushner and Witkoff “negotiating” but they were ignored, Iran requested JD Vance and low and behold it’s Vance and Rubio are on the line with Pakistan as the middleman. Vance is expected to join the talks in Islamabad.
Btw Iran’s 10 point plan includes the US to withdraw their military from the region, reparations and Iran officially controlling the Strait, lifting of all sanctions against Iran … and Trump calls it a good starting point 😂
4
GrimHoly3 days ago
-7
You’re not a moron this is just listnook and Trump must always be bad on here
Edit: Love seeing my point proven in real time in the replies.
-7
HonestDespot3 days ago
+30
Child rapist sex traffickers tend to not get the benefit of the doubt, strange concept for some I knows
30
BrofessorFarnsworth3 days ago
+33
Well, he is Epstein's best friend and has been known to lie more often than not?
Edit: Ope, apparently calling Trump a pedophile angers the bots.
33
sargsauce3 days ago
+18
And whatever comes out of this is likely going to be worse than before Trump started meddling, not to mention the needless deaths.
18
WHY-IS-INTERNET3 days ago
+16
Quit your bullshit. Trump is hated beyond Listnook.
16
davidbklyn3 days ago
+16
Way beyond
16
GrimHoly3 days ago
-8
People hate Trump outside of listnook therefore Listnook doesn’t just hate Trump and that has not blinded their judgement for what actually happened today? Am I following your argument right my friend?
And I hate to tell you even after this past year +, he still polls at around 40% approval according to real clear politics.
-8
HonestDespot3 days ago
-5
Lol. You are so transparently a three time Trump voting MAGAt it’s f****** hilarious.
-5
GrimHoly3 days ago
+13
Actually no I didn’t vote for Trump 3 times hate to tell ya. I’m just able to dissociate my feelings with the actual observable reality of what happened
13
WHY-IS-INTERNET3 days ago
-6
What happened today? Did your orange daddy pull through for you?
-6
GrimHoly3 days ago
+10
Well so far we know there is a ceasefire that has been confirmed by Israel Iran USA and Pakistan. We do not have verified terms yet as to what the deal entails. We know that there is a long term deal being discussed but not made yet. We don’t know if it will be made or if the ceasefire will last.
Also, I didn’t know the Lorax was my dad, does that mean I might actually be able to get things to grow in my garden?
10
WHY-IS-INTERNET3 days ago
And Donald Trump deserves credit for…?
0
GrimHoly3 days ago
+4
Re read my original comment and tell me where I said he deserves credit please. I was merely responding to someone who said that there is no agreement and that it is still just a ceasefire. However the absolutely massive amount of responses is proving my point. You heard Trump and immediately assumed I was defending the guy and that I must be some “Evil MAGA”. And you don’t think your hatred of the guy hasn’t clouded your judgement as to what the ceasefire is and isn’t?
4
Smearguru3 days ago
+13
Less than 24 hours ago he threatened to “wipe out all civilization in Iran”. So foh trying to empathize with him and claim it’s everyone else who is being unnecessarily aggressive. Pathetic.
13
Barbossal3 days ago
+6
TBF op could be a moron, it's just unclear from that one comment.
6
royalx3 days ago
+4
Can confirm. I am probably a moron.
4
GrimHoly3 days ago
+6
Shrodingers moron
6
jude_lawl3 days ago
+4
You're not a moron either this is just listnook and trumpets don't do words good.
4
HMS_Pinafore3 days ago
+2
The child rapist?
Yeah, he's bad in real life as well.
I'm not giving him props on a temporary case fire for his pointless war.
2
GrimHoly3 days ago
+6
Did I ask you too? I am merely saying that your thoughts on a man don’t determine what we do and don’t know about the ceasefire made today.
6
Lumpy_Potential_7893 days ago
+1
Everywhere. It’s facts.
1
Crypt33x3 days ago
+1
Or someone lies about Iraqs Islamic resistance saying that. Irans leader also supposed to be in a coma, so can they even negotiate without him? Who is willing to negotiate in the name of a dictator in a coma?
1
lacronicus3 days ago
-2
Trump said he'd destroy iran if an agreement wasn't reached by tonight.
iran said "here's what we want"
trump said ok, didn't destroy iran, and then announced a ceasefire.
there's clearly not a deal, he obviously won't accept the terms they've put forth, but also there's clearly enough of a deal to count as "having a deal".
you can hardly blame the public for not knowing what's happening here.
is there a deal we don't know about? was trump just bluffing? is he just lying about there being a deal because iran called his bluff, and now he needs a way out? did he actually try to nuke iran and the military told him no? nobody f****** knows.
-2
Scriefers3 days ago
+33
Iran agreed to a cease fire. No way in f****** hell are their initial terms/demands sticking.
This is a cease fire to negotiate further, and if IRGC continues to play hardball, the cease fire will end rather abruptly.
33
PapaSheev73 days ago
+5
The simple fact of the matter is that we have no idea what the concrete terms of the ceasefire are. Neither Iran nor the US has used anything other than vague language to indicate what terms there are for traffic to transit the strait, beyond merely that ships won't be shot at by the IRGC anymore during this period. As for whether the transit fee remains $2mil, is less than that, or is gone entirely is just speculation at this point.
5
Gloomy_Experience1123 days ago
-2
So what demands did Iran submit to? Tell me what murica got that wasn't there before this "war"? Is it Tuesdays coz seems like there's tacos everywhere
-2
Apart-Oil-87313 days ago
+24
No one got anything because it is a ceasefire to discuss negotiations.
24
richarm873 days ago
-2
But trump mentioned Iran's 10 points is the basis for the negotiation
-2
soggybiscuit933 days ago
+15
Yes. The *basis* of negotiations. That's Iran's starting point in the negotiation. Not what the US has agreed to.
15
Amadon293 days ago
+10
The whole point of the ceasefire is to negotiate terms while combat ceases for a bit.
10
yopetey3 days ago
+5
thats sane thinking , most likely each side is reloading
5
Nonhinged3 days ago
+3
Suspending operations...
3
toggiz_the_elder3 days ago
+2
The concession is stopping operations that only started because the US attacked them?
2
Nonhinged3 days ago
+4
Are you claiming Iraq's Islamic resistance did nothing before?
4
TheColourOfHeartache3 days ago
They destroyed large parts of Iran's military and ecconomy. Until Iran rebuilds (where will it get the money from) it is a deminished threat.
0
PapaSheev73 days ago
+8
This is just speculation at this point. Neither side has said anything about the conditions of the ceasefire to my knowledge beyond vague statements that the strait is now open and commercial vessels won't be fired upon.
8
HonestDespot3 days ago
+6
You know what isn’t speculation though?
The operation that was supppsedly supposed to take a couple weeks and Iran was going to topple like a house of wet cards, has now been going on for a month and Trump yet again backed down from his inane threats when his handlers told him that he couldn’t follow up on his genocidal war crime threats because the entire rest of the world would turn against them and WW3 would start.
No speculation there.
This entire operation is a loss on every level for the USA and no agreement will change anything.
They’ve legitimized Iran, further alienated their most important allies, and showed themselves to be far less of super power and wholly ill prepared for any large scale battle.
6
[deleted]3 days ago
+3
[deleted]
3
PapaSheev73 days ago
+4
I may be mistaken but wasn’t Trump’s initial estimate for the war about 4-6 weeks? Also, I’d consider Trump backing down from his threats a very good thing, considering just how utterly insane his post was so I’m not sure what your complaint is there. As far as alienating their allies, I fully agree with you there, the damage between the US and Europe won’t soon be forgotten.
Regarding the outcome of the war, the US unequivocally failed to incite regime change, but as for all of their other stated goals it’s too early to tell as negotiations have only just begun via Pakistan.
Edit: Forgot to mention that both the Iranian 10-point plan and the American 15-point plan will form the basis of the discussions in the talks, as per Iranian FM Aragachi. So the final terms of the settlement(ideally a proper resolution and not a ceasefire) are anyone's guess at this point.
4
stoutymcstoutface3 days ago
+2
The shart of the deal
2
ObviouslyRealPerson3 days ago
+4
2 weeks!
4
-HealingNoises-3 days ago
+2
Uhh, are you sure this is what you want to teach trump? Like teaching a toddler?
That he only has to resort to the most bigly threat that makes everyone think of nuclear then you give him what he wants?
2
Ditka853 days ago
+3
Trump’s is going to fire a missile at an Iranian target before the 2 weeks is up. Then things are really going to get bad.
3
[deleted]3 days ago
-7
[deleted]
-7
Straight-Ability3 days ago
+32
I swear some of you lack critical thinking. Too many bots steering our dumb people awry
32
rustic9963 days ago
+17
It seems like I'm talking to literal children here who just hope for the worst. I mean i know things are not good, but some people in this comment section even is.
17
rustic9963 days ago
+20
Uh this is a ceasefire my guy, trump didn't accept any deal yet, no one did. Iran didn't win, Trump didn't win, no deal has been made. The Ceasefire is used to discuss terms and deals and I'll be shocked shitless if trump agrees to any of Iran's demands because no way in hell are they sticking.
20
HonestDespot3 days ago
-7
Trump has no leverage, America is not equipped for a long battle, and they are speed running their way into gift wrapping Chinas supreme super power status for the next several generations.
The attack was supposedly going to end right away, they didn’t need NATO allies because it was over, then any NATO allies who didn’t help were supposedly traitors to NATO.
Then Trump threatened a genocidal war crime, and backed down when his handlers realized it might just be the straw that makes some republicans grow a spine.
Anyone framing this as a positive for the Americans so far, or promising on any level sounds like a bot.
-7
rustic9963 days ago
+13
listnookor is being listnookor, I'm shocked! I know people love to think iran is winning because listnook but outside if this godforsaken app the reality is abit murky
13
YearlyLemon83 days ago
+1
I don't think Iran was or is winning I was just misinformed
All the news was still new to me at the time, and I took headlines for what they are. Apparently Iran even launched missiles toward Israel after the cease fire was agreed to. However I don't think the cease fire last at all and nothing likely changes.
1
King-Rat-in-Boise2 days ago
+1
Gas prices too high for operations probably.
1
Ramen-893 days ago
-13
Trump folded. I know it’s early but based of the info coming out Iran won big time. Massive US embarrassment that conservatives will somehow cheer on.
-13
donkeykong641233 days ago
+19
No deal has been made. Listnook is spreading misinformation by repeatedly stating the US agreed to all of Iran's demands. No credible source has confirmed this. This is purely listnook speculation and assumptions.
Do your part and stop spreading misinformation.
The purpose of the ceasefire is to come to the table and negotiate. Us has a list of conditions to end the war as does Iran. They will compromise or keep the war going and try again another time.
19
Phoenix_Maximus_133 days ago
+4
Yeah Trump and Iran said they both agree that the deal is a START to a better more sustainable deal with them working out details
4
HonestDespot3 days ago
The offensive is in its fifth week and the Americans just hastily agreed to a last minute ceasefire after the president outright threatened genocidal war crimes against 70 million people.
The Americans are reeling and desperately trying anything to come out of this with a “win” but anyone with had a brain can see there’s no positive outcome from this for the States.
0
soggybiscuit933 days ago
+5
>and the Americans just hastily agreed to a last minute ceasefire
Uhh? It's equally true that Iran "hastily" agreed to a 2 week ceasefire to discuss terms of a truce shortly before the bombers that were inroute began dropping their bombs.
There's a very strong chance that no deal is struck within these 2 weeks and the war resumes again.
No deal has been made other than no fighting for 2 weeks to discuss a deal.
5
donkeykong641233 days ago
+5
The US and Iran have been in talks mediated by Pakistan for weeks now. This wasn't a sudden decision. Iran agreed to come to the table right before the deadline trump gave.
I truly don't understand how a ceasefire gets this much hate. Iran and us are negotiating. Oil prices will ease. No killings of civilians. Let's hope a reasonable deal for all parties is reached and this can end.
5
HonestDespot3 days ago
+2
The Americans have no goals. No plan.
Any demand they have would simply be them asking for how things were before Trump in both his terms made things far worse.
2
Elegantsurf3 days ago
+2
The military already announced they were only going to target dual use targets so no war crimes were going to be commited
2
HonestDespot3 days ago
+1
A presidents official social media account making a statement is an on the record official statement by the president of the United States.
Courts have determined this, genius.
1
Elegantsurf3 days ago
-1
Yes and the targets selected to fulfill his statement would have been dual use. Try using google.
[https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/06/pentagon-iran-war-crime-accusations-00860468](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/06/pentagon-iran-war-crime-accusations-00860468)
-1
[deleted]3 days ago
+1
[removed]
1
Elegantsurf3 days ago
+3
At least I'm not simping for Iran
3
HonestDespot3 days ago
+2
You’re simping for a child rapist traitor to the United States, so I’m really not too concerned about your opinion.
It’s obvious what and who you are. You are not clever enough to be anything but transparent.
2
Elegantsurf3 days ago
+1
Who and what am I. All I said was the US military is not preparing to commit war crimes in response to the demands from Trump.
1
GrimHoly3 days ago
+17
Literally just a ceasefire…. Also, maybe not the best idea to believe info coming out of the country that claimed they were blowing up aircraft carriers. Wait to see what happens in 2 weeks
17
HonestDespot3 days ago
+6
Iran won the moment Trump demanded the NATO allies join in his stupid pointless illegal attack and one by one made mocking statements to let him know America wouldn’t be getting f*** all from them.
America is severely weakened, Iran looks stronger and will be more emboldened, and the USA also come off looking like Israel’s toadie.
It’s hilarious watching three time Trump voters and bots try to spin this as a positive for America.
154 Comments