Iran to sign deal

[Moonglow]

In the future (if a deal is made) any time they get out in the streets chanting "Death to America" a "leader" must die.

Thank you Satan.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Well, surely there is another nation Trump can violate.

/----/ Cuba -- North Korea -- and your other idealistic countries.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Thank you Satan.

/----/ Moonglow, typical democRAT.

 

[Bad Bob]

It appears Iran is on its last leg, hanging on by a thread. Of course they are famous for breaking every deal they ever signed. Time will tell but it looks like it’s over.

‘Designated target’ Mojtaba Khamenei to sign Trump deal in ‘unprecedented’ courier setup

Experts say the U.S. is negotiating with an invisible counterparty as Mojtaba Khamenei reportedly remains in hiding and relies on secret couriers.

www.foxnews.com

Iran’s supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, would have to approve any final deal with the U.S. through secret courier networks while remaining in hiding as a "designated target," counterterrorism experts said Tuesday.

The unprecedented arrangement, they claimed, means Washington is negotiating a high-stakes accord with an entirely invisible counterparty, with a potential memorandum signed by a regime leader and a "designated target" who can never publicly show his face.

If they can't be trusted, then why sign a deal?

Trump declared he'd only accept unconditional surrender. Is that going to happen?

 

[Bad Bob]

/----/ Cuba -- North Korea -- and your other idealistic countries.

The MAGA flip-flop on Forever Wars is fascinating.

 

[kyzr]

The MAGA flip-flop on Forever Wars is fascinating.

Let's try to define a "Forever war" shall we? How about longer than ~8-years?
Korea never ended
VN was 20-years
AFG was 20-years
Iraq was 8.7 years
Iran is 3-months and counting...

 

[Cellblock2429]

Let's try to define a "Forever war" shall we? How about longer than ~8-years?
Korea never ended
VN was 20-years
AFG was 20-years
Iraq was 8.7 years
Iran is 3-months and counting...

/----/ Devine Farts can't stand seeing Iran liberated from the mullahs.

 

[kyzr]

Ahh, No. I see they did not teach you English in school. You said Trump cannot be xyz this, AND Trump cannot be trusted, either. In that context, W6, either leaves an incomplete thought... Either this or WHAT? In that context, either offers a choice.

The correct english is that Trump cannot do this, and cannot be trusted NEITHER, meaning not this and not that. $50.00 if you look it up and I'm wrong, Jack, I've written three technical books/textbooks plus numerous scientific papers where spelling and syntax kind of weigh heavily.

I just asked Copilot...

The correct English is:

“Trump cannot do this, and cannot be trusted either.”

Why​

• In negative sentences, either is the standard word used to add a second negative idea.
  
  • He won’t go, and I won’t go either.
  • She doesn’t like it, and I don’t like it either.

Why​

• Neither is used to start a negative clause, not to end one.
  
  • Correct: Trump cannot do this, and neither can he be trusted.
  • Incorrect: …cannot be trusted neither.

So your two correct options are:

• “Trump cannot do this, and cannot be trusted either.”
• “Trump cannot do this, and neither can he be trusted.”

If you want, I can help you choose the tone—stronger, softer, more formal, more conversational—just tell me what style you’re aiming for.

 

[toobfreak]

I just asked Copilot...

Sorry, but you better throw out your computer-aided website because it is wrong. Either that or they've change the rules to English (which I doubt). Pretty sad state of affairs when people do not only not know their basic grammar, but have to depend on a machine to tell them how to speak; worse, that they throw up some crappy website link or article as proof when the internet is the MOST unreliable source of info where any bullcrap can be printed as true.

When you say something cannot do something (a negative) then you add that it cannot do something else, too (another negative), you do not lump the two negatives together by saying either, you add that the object cannot do the other thing NEITHER.

 

[kyzr]

Sorry, but you better throw out your computer-aided website because it is wrong. Either that or they've change the rules to English (which I doubt). Pretty sad state of affairs when people do not only not know their basic grammar, but have to depend on a machine to tell them how to speak; worse, that they throw up some crappy website link or article as proof when the internet is the MOST unreliable source of info where any bullcrap can be printed as true.

When you say something cannot do something (a negative) then you add that it cannot do something else, too (another negative), you do not lump the two negatives together by saying either, you add that the object cannot do the other thing NEITHER.

I'm no English expert, but I won a quarter on a bet with an English prof once on the spelling of "supersede".
So if you disagree with Copilot put up your proof. Simple.

 

[toobfreak]

So if you disagree with Copilot put up your proof. Simple.

So, after me telling you that I do not trust nor believe some random webpage I never heard of before, you want me to prove it wrong by posting a link to yet another webspace???

Leftists are constantly tweaking things more politically correct, but I know the english rules as taught me for years and years, studied for years and years and used for years and years.

Your own site contradicted itself by claiming bother either and neither were interchangeable for the same use by merely locating them differently in a sentence.

That makes no sense. If you don't believe me, I suggest you hunt down an older school teacher at least 50+ years old. Or you could ask Sweet Sue. She just retired as a school teacher.

 

[kyzr]

So, after me telling you that I do not trust nor believe some random webpage I never heard of before, you want me to prove it wrong by posting a link to yet another webspace???

Leftists are constantly tweaking things more politically correct, but I know the english rules as taught me for years and years, studied for years and years and used for years and years.

Your own site contradicted itself by claiming bother either and neither were interchangeable for the same use by merely locating them differently in a sentence.

That makes no sense. If you don't believe me, I suggest you hunt down an older school teacher at least 50+ years old. Or you could ask Sweet Sue. She just retired as a school teacher.

I think that there are grammar tools like GRAMMARLY or CHATGPT or TEXTGUARDAI that could be used to settle the debate.

Grammarly: Free AI Writing Assistance

Grammarly makes AI writing convenient. Work smarter with personalized AI guidance and text generation on any app or website.

www.grammarly.com

https://chatgpt.com/?c_id=571091190&c_agid=1184176188842139&c_crid=&c_kwid=kwd-74011511505567:loc-190&c_ims=&c_pms=97270&c_nw=o&c_dvc=c&msclkid=1dbb86dda02416c69aadeccaf4b10533

TextGuard - Plagiarism Checker and AI Assistance Detection

Ensure originality in your texts with our plagiarism checker and AI assistance detection tools. Humanize and rewrite your content for better readability and engagement.

textguard.ai

 

[toobfreak]

I think that there are grammar tools like GRAMMARLY or CHATGPT or TEXTGUARDAI that could be used to settle the debate.

No thanks. There is no debate. All your websites will show are the CURRENT language rules even if the were the same for 399 years and were just changed last year.

I'd be interested to hear Sweet Sue's opinion on this though.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No thanks. There is no debate. All your websites will show are the CURRENT language rules even if the were the same for 399 years and were just changed last year.

I'd be interested to hear Sweet Sue's opinion on this though.

Nobody asked me, but it is just a horribly constructed sentence that could have easily been written another way.

 

[georgephillip]

It appears Iran is on its last leg, hanging on by a thread. Of course they are famous for breaking every deal they ever signed. Time will tell but it looks like it’s over.

‘Designated target’ Mojtaba Khamenei to sign Trump deal in ‘unprecedented’ courier setup

Experts say the U.S. is negotiating with an invisible counterparty as Mojtaba Khamenei reportedly remains in hiding and relies on secret couriers.

www.foxnews.com

Iran’s supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, would have to approve any final deal with the U.S. through secret courier networks while remaining in hiding as a "designated target," counterterrorism experts said Tuesday.

The unprecedented arrangement, they claimed, means Washington is negotiating a high-stakes accord with an entirely invisible counterparty, with a potential memorandum signed by a regime leader and a "designated target" who can never publicly show his face.

How much will Americans be paying for gas if Trump's failure in Iran is still in progress next November?

https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/27/world/live-news/iran-war-us-news

"During the meeting, Trump said he won’t be rushed into a deal, warning that Iran’s efforts to outlast him won’t work because he doesn’t 'care about the midterms.'

"He also discussed certain terms that would need to be met, saying that the administration is willing to resume fighting to secure its demands."

 

[Cellblock2429]

How much will Americans be paying for gas if Trump's failure in Iran is still in progress next November?

https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/27/world/live-news/iran-war-us-news

"During the meeting, Trump said he won’t be rushed into a deal, warning that Iran’s efforts to outlast him won’t work because he doesn’t 'care about the midterms.'

"He also discussed certain terms that would need to be met, saying that the administration is willing to resume fighting to secure its demands."

/----/ What failure? Why do you clowns always resort to strawman arguments?

 

[JoeB131]

Let's try to define a "Forever war" shall we? How about longer than ~8-years?
Korea never ended
VN was 20-years
AFG was 20-years
Iraq was 8.7 years
Iran is 3-months and counting...

No, no, no, Little Marco just told us Iran has been at war with us for 47 years.

 

[Cellblock2429]

No, no, no, Little Marco just told us Iran has been at war with us for 47 years.

/------/ We have been. It was in all the papers.


The 1979 Iran Hostage Crisis and the U.S.–Iran War
The 1979 Iran hostage crisis was the direct result of the Islamic Revolution that overthrew the U.S.-backed Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and the deep-seated anti-American sentiment it unleashed.

Background: From Allies to Enemies​

For decades, the U.S. and Iran had been allies, with American support for the Shah’s modernization and anti-communist policies. However, the 1953 CIA-backed coup that reinstated the Shah alienated many Iranians, especially religious and leftist groups govfacts.org+1. The Shah’s authoritarian, Westernized regime suppressed dissent and clashed with Iran’s traditional institutions, fueling resentment.

By the late 1970s, mass protests and civil unrest had toppled the Shah in February 1979. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile and led the revolution, which combined religious revival with anti-imperialism www.inthewarroom.com+1.

The Hostage Crisis​

On November 4, 1979, Iranian militants stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, taking 52–66 American diplomats and citizens hostage www.inthewarroom.com+1. The embassy was seen as a symbol of American imperialism and interference in Iran’s sovereignty www.inthewarroom.com. The hostages endured 444 days of captivity, marked by physical and psychological trauma www.inthewarroom.com.

Escalation and U.S. Response​

The U.S. government imposed economic sanctions and froze Iranian assets, severing diplomatic relations www.inthewarroom.com. The failed Operation Eagle Claw rescue attempt in April 1980 killed eight American servicemen and further inflamed tensions www.inthewarroom.com.

War and Aftermath​

While the hostage crisis itself was a political and diplomatic standoff, it became a catalyst for the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988), in which Iran fought Iraq over territorial and ideological disputes. The U.S. did not directly enter the war, but the crisis deepened the U.S.–Iran rift, turning Iran into a long-term adversary govfacts.org+1.

Legacy​

The 1979 crisis marked the end of U.S.–Iran friendship and the beginning of a decades-long rivalry. It remains a defining moment in modern U.S. foreign policy, symbolizing the consequences of imperial overreach and the power of anti-imperialist movements govfacts.org+2.

In short: The 1979 Iran–U.S. “war” was not a direct military conflict, but a prolonged political and diplomatic war fueled by the revolution, the hostage crisis, and mutual distrust that continues to shape U.S.–Iran relations today.

 

[Bad Bob]

Let's try to define a "Forever war" shall we? How about longer than ~8-years?
Korea never ended
VN was 20-years
AFG was 20-years
Iraq was 8.7 years
Iran is 3-months and counting...

Your defense of your Orange Daddy is commendable, kyzr.

Unlike you, your fellow MAGAts and your LWL counterparts, I have higher expectations of our leaders. The whole "with great power comes great responsibility" thing.

 

[Kruska]

/----/ Cuba -- North Korea -- and your other idealistic countries.

I would love to see TACO take on North-Korea.

The US has never taken on a nuclear wielding country - they ONLY go for military underdogs.