He continues to spew the lie that the midterms are NOT affecting his retreating policies on Iran, but we all know that such denials coming out of a brainless bovine idiot are exactly the opposite of what is going on. If he and his GOP-MAGA minions lose the midterm elections in November, he becomes a sitting duck president, liable to be prosecuted by a Democrat-dominated Congress thirsty for revenge for all the illegal, corrupt and unethical crimes the Imbecile-in-Chief has committed so far. Just like Ben-Yamin Netanyahu who also faces courts of justice once he stops his warmongering.
Of particular interest in this charade of a war is the case of Lebanon. All previous Republican administrations have sold Lebanon when it came to pleasing other wealthier, more powerful stakeholders: Syria, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, etc. You'd think that these self-declared "Christian" presidents (Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr) would have at least tried to rescue the Christians of Lebanon, one of the most beleaguered community in the mosaic of the region, out of the clutches of the Syrian Stalinist dictatorship of the Assad dynasty. But no, instead they handed Lebanon to a Syrian occupation of 30 long years out of love for Saudi oil. Or out of the claws of a foreign Zionist implant south of the border whose survival can only be ensured with warmongering and territorial expansion, but no, the US allows Israel to rampage, kill and destroy because peace is anathema to a colonial Jewish supremacist ultra-religious barbarian regime.
At this time, Iran pretends to want to include Lebanon as part of its impending deal with Donald Dumb. One of Iran's cards in the region if the ultra-religious Islamist terrorist organization of Hezbollah who is genotypically Iranian while pretending to be phenotypically Lebanese. If Donald Dumb agrees to a ceasefire in Lebanon, he would give Hezbollah a "victory" of having survived Israel's attempts at eliminating it, though Israel would have occupied - and presumably annex - much of the Lebanese south. If Donald Dumb refuses and allows Israel to continue its destruction of the Lebanese south, he would have shafted the Lebanese Christians who, unlike 1975, refuse to take up arms and fight another war (in 1975 against the Palestinians, and now against Hezbollah) relying instead of the supposed "goodwill" of the US, Europe, and the international community.
Many in the Lebanese Christian community, both at home and in the diaspora, love Donald Dumb because he is "ballsy", i.e. reckless, braggard mindless brawler with gonads not brains. They've done it before. They love strong men, criminals, warlords... like Michel Aoun or Samir Geagea or the feudal Gemayel and Frangiyeh clans. And every time, they lose, both with the strongman they choose to follow and the Americans who impale them on the altar of geopolitical interests.
The Lebanese Christians have literally nothing to offer to potential friendly countries - no oil, no minerals, no trade advantages, no technology or industry - only corruption, incompetence, and an abject and archaic ultra-religiosity (saints roll out of the Maronite Church like Henry's Ford Model T car out of the assembly chain that is irking even the Vatican) along with falafel, tabbouli and Kibbi, and a few ancient ruins they can barely preserve. It is understandable that they'd be the cheapest commodity to trade in the region, but they do exist, they are free-minded and terrified at being swamped by the crushing advances of fanatic Islam and Judaism around them. Regardless of their ineptitude, they deserve the right to be left alone in neutrality and not be dragged by the Arabs and Israel into futile wars as has been the case for some six decades.
My bet is that Donald Dumb, like all his predecessors, will sell Lebanon in order to strike a deal with Iran. Lebanon is likely to come out of this umpteenth round of warmongering amputated of its south and dominated by either Hezbollah's residual influence (maintained as part of the Iran deal) or Syria's new and improved Al-Qaida/ISIS regime of Al-Sharaa whose task would be to crush Hezbollah in a sinister alliance with Israel, just like its Baath Assad predecessor regime crushed the Palestinian PLO of Yasser Arafat. Both Hezbollah and Al-Sharaa's Al-Qaeda would be highly inimical and dangerous to the Lebanese Christians.
To the so-called Lebanese Lobby in Washington DC, a heterogenous hodge-podge of miserable wannabes mined with internal infighting and whose "lobbying" over the decades has failed over and over again at improving the lot of the old country and its Christians, is again sticking its head up the rectum of another criminal imbecile, Donald Dumb who, they think, likes them because they are "Christian". They haven't learned anything from their failures and continue to wager on the pity of being a minority. Taken all together, the US will always prefer Israel's Jews to Lebanon's Christians as its favorite pet: The Israelis at least have something to offer and a lot of leverage in American domestic politics. Back in the 19th century, it was the Christians of Lebanon who served the West as the pretext of a minority to protect. Now it is Israel's Jews who define the "Question d'Orient", not to forget the up-and-coming Arab Muslims of the Gulf who, while not Christians, have a lot of oil and cultural ass-kissing to give the Americans.
Mark my words, Lebanon will - again - be the ultimate biggest loser in America's warmongering in the Middle East, this time it is the turn of Donald Dumb's Iran war. Reuters reports that eleven children are killed and injured every 24 hours in Lebanon, according to the UN, as Israel has expanded strikes across the country despite a ceasefire.
================================================
5 things to know about tentative US-Iran ceasefire deal
Sophie Brams
Thu, May 28, 2026
A tentative agreement has been reached between the U.S. and Iran to extend a fragile ceasefire in the three-month conflict by 60 days, reopen the Strait of Hormuz and establish a framework for broader talks on Tehran’s nuclear program, according to U.S. sources.
Negotiators have been working to finalize the terms of the memorandum of understanding (MOU), which is awaiting President Trump’s sign-off, as tensions continue to flare in the Persian Gulf. Iranian state media says the deal is not yet finalized on its end either.
Tensions in the Persian Gulf escalated this week after the U.S. launched what it called “defensive strikes” in southern Iran; Tehran, in turn, targeted Kuwait with ballistic missiles.
If approved, the agreement would mark the biggest breakthrough on a permanent deal to end hostilities since the war began in late February. However, it falls well short of Trump’s stated goals in the war.
Here are five things to know about the emerging deal:
Axios reported that “unrestricted” transit would be restored under the deal, with Iran committing not to impose tolls on ships attempting to pass through. Tehran would also be required to remove all its mines from the strait within 30 days.
The U.S. would gradually lift its naval blockade in exchange for Iran loosening its grip on the strait. Sanctions waivers would also be issued, allowing Tehran to resume selling its oil.
“The strait’s got to be open to everybody; it’s international waters,” Trump told reporters during a Cabinet meeting Wednesday. “We’ll watch over it, but nobody’s going to control it. That’s part of the negotiation that we have.”
Oil prices falling
Oil prices dipped Thursday as reports of a tentative deal began to emerge.
Brent crude, the international benchmark, was trading at about $94 per barrel as of Thursday afternoon, down from about $96 per barrel earlier in the day. U.S. benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude was around $89 per barrel, down from about $91 per barrel.
Oil prices have spiked since the start of the U.S.-Iran war following the effective closure of the strait, which has strained global supply and pushed domestic gas prices to near record-highs.
Drivers were paying an average of $4.43 per gallon for gas nationwide as of Thursday afternoon, according to AAA, down about 12 cents from the previous week.
“Much of the decline came after renewed optimism surrounding a potential U.S.-Iran agreement pushed oil prices lower, easing geopolitical pressure on energy markets,” Patrick De Haan, the head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, wrote in a Tuesday blog post.
“While uncertainty remains elevated, the market appeared more confident that immediate worst-case supply scenarios may be avoided,” De Haan added. “That said, volatility remains firmly entrenched, with oil prices still reacting sharply to every new headline tied to negotiations and regional developments.”
High gasoline prices have been a major source of political pressure on Trump and Republicans ahead of this year’s midterm elections.
A Quinnipiac University poll conducted last month found that more than half of registered voters blamed Trump “a lot” for rising gas prices, while 14 percent blamed him “some.”
Nuclear specifics TBD
The proposed memorandum leaves some open questions about the fate of Tehran’s nuclear program and stockpiles, which has long been a sticking point in the negotiations.
Senior Trump administration officials justified the war from the outset as primarily being about stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, arguing that the country posed an “imminent threat” to the U.S.
Iran has continually rejected demands to halt uranium enrichment, insisting that its program is intended for peaceful purposes, such as energy production.
Sources said the MOU would include a pledge from Tehran that it will not seek to develop a nuclear weapon, while opening a new round of talks to negotiate the matter further.
Addressing Iranian enrichment and how to dispose of its existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium would be the first issues discussed during the 60-day ceasefire extension window, according to Axios.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters in a Thursday briefing that there would be no sanctions relief until “Iranians agree that they have to turn over the highly enriched uranium.”
Trump in a Truth Social post said Monday the “nuclear dust” could either be turned over to the U.S. or destroyed “at another acceptable location.”
5 things to know about tentative US-Iran ceasefire deal
Sophie Brams
Thu, May 28, 2026
A tentative agreement has been reached between the U.S. and Iran to extend a fragile ceasefire in the three-month conflict by 60 days, reopen the Strait of Hormuz and establish a framework for broader talks on Tehran’s nuclear program, according to U.S. sources.
Negotiators have been working to finalize the terms of the memorandum of understanding (MOU), which is awaiting President Trump’s sign-off, as tensions continue to flare in the Persian Gulf. Iranian state media says the deal is not yet finalized on its end either.
Tensions in the Persian Gulf escalated this week after the U.S. launched what it called “defensive strikes” in southern Iran; Tehran, in turn, targeted Kuwait with ballistic missiles.
If approved, the agreement would mark the biggest breakthrough on a permanent deal to end hostilities since the war began in late February. However, it falls well short of Trump’s stated goals in the war.
Here are five things to know about the emerging deal:
Strait of Hormuz reopens
The memorandum would reopen the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping traffic, according to U.S. sources, a step that would help ease the economic pressure on both sides.
The strait emerged as a flashpoint early in the war, with the U.S. and Iran locked in a struggle for control of the strategic waterway through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply flows daily.
The channel was fully open to commercial shipping traffic before the start of the war, but Iran closed it off as one of its first retaliatory acts, implementing a blockade that has roiled the global market for oil and related industries like fertilizer.
The memorandum would reopen the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping traffic, according to U.S. sources, a step that would help ease the economic pressure on both sides.
The strait emerged as a flashpoint early in the war, with the U.S. and Iran locked in a struggle for control of the strategic waterway through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply flows daily.
The channel was fully open to commercial shipping traffic before the start of the war, but Iran closed it off as one of its first retaliatory acts, implementing a blockade that has roiled the global market for oil and related industries like fertilizer.
Axios reported that “unrestricted” transit would be restored under the deal, with Iran committing not to impose tolls on ships attempting to pass through. Tehran would also be required to remove all its mines from the strait within 30 days.
The U.S. would gradually lift its naval blockade in exchange for Iran loosening its grip on the strait. Sanctions waivers would also be issued, allowing Tehran to resume selling its oil.
“The strait’s got to be open to everybody; it’s international waters,” Trump told reporters during a Cabinet meeting Wednesday. “We’ll watch over it, but nobody’s going to control it. That’s part of the negotiation that we have.”
Oil prices falling
Oil prices dipped Thursday as reports of a tentative deal began to emerge.
Brent crude, the international benchmark, was trading at about $94 per barrel as of Thursday afternoon, down from about $96 per barrel earlier in the day. U.S. benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude was around $89 per barrel, down from about $91 per barrel.
Oil prices have spiked since the start of the U.S.-Iran war following the effective closure of the strait, which has strained global supply and pushed domestic gas prices to near record-highs.
Drivers were paying an average of $4.43 per gallon for gas nationwide as of Thursday afternoon, according to AAA, down about 12 cents from the previous week.
“Much of the decline came after renewed optimism surrounding a potential U.S.-Iran agreement pushed oil prices lower, easing geopolitical pressure on energy markets,” Patrick De Haan, the head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, wrote in a Tuesday blog post.
“While uncertainty remains elevated, the market appeared more confident that immediate worst-case supply scenarios may be avoided,” De Haan added. “That said, volatility remains firmly entrenched, with oil prices still reacting sharply to every new headline tied to negotiations and regional developments.”
High gasoline prices have been a major source of political pressure on Trump and Republicans ahead of this year’s midterm elections.
A Quinnipiac University poll conducted last month found that more than half of registered voters blamed Trump “a lot” for rising gas prices, while 14 percent blamed him “some.”
Nuclear specifics TBD
The proposed memorandum leaves some open questions about the fate of Tehran’s nuclear program and stockpiles, which has long been a sticking point in the negotiations.
Senior Trump administration officials justified the war from the outset as primarily being about stopping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, arguing that the country posed an “imminent threat” to the U.S.
Iran has continually rejected demands to halt uranium enrichment, insisting that its program is intended for peaceful purposes, such as energy production.
Sources said the MOU would include a pledge from Tehran that it will not seek to develop a nuclear weapon, while opening a new round of talks to negotiate the matter further.
Addressing Iranian enrichment and how to dispose of its existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium would be the first issues discussed during the 60-day ceasefire extension window, according to Axios.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters in a Thursday briefing that there would be no sanctions relief until “Iranians agree that they have to turn over the highly enriched uranium.”
Trump in a Truth Social post said Monday the “nuclear dust” could either be turned over to the U.S. or destroyed “at another acceptable location.”
Both sides say deal not done
Though negotiators have agreed to terms of the 60-day deal, both sides are leaving some wiggle room, saying neither Trump nor Iranian leadership have officially signed off yet.
Trump said over the weekend that a “largely negotiated” proposal was on the table and an announcement should be coming soon. But Secretary of State Marco Rubio hinted at delays while speaking to reporters in India on Tuesday, saying it could be “a few more days” before the details are ironed out.
“I mean, when you get down on some of these things, you’ve got to hear back, and it takes the Iranians – takes them a little while longer to get back,” Rubio said at Palam Air Base in New Delhi.
The Tasnim News Agency, which is affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), reported Sunday that there were still a few unresolved issues in the possible memorandum, according to Iran International.
Tasnim quoted officials Thursday saying Iran would announce a deal through Pakistan, which has been mediating talks.
Reuters also reported this week that the release of billions in frozen Iranian funds had been a point of contention standing in the way of a final agreement.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has reportedly said that no major decision would be made without the approval of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, who has not been seen in public since he was injured in a strike on the first day of the war.
Unclear if Congress will have say
The prospect of a deal has received mixed reactions from lawmakers on Capitol Hill, and it remains unclear whether Congress will ultimately get a say in what happens.
Some more hawkish Republicans have expressed skepticism about the terms of the memorandum, arguing that any deal that allows the current Iranian regime to remain intact and in power could undermine the U.S. military operation and embolden the country’s theocratic leaders.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Saturday that Trump’s decision to strike Iran in February was the “the most consequential” of his second term, raising concerns that the “extraordinary military results” it achieved could all be for naught.
Others, meanwhile, have urged their colleagues to be patient and allow the president time to work out the details.
“War virtually always ends with negotiations,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), an outspoken critic of the war, wrote on Sunday. “Critics of President Trump’s peace negotiations should give President Trump the space to find an American First solution.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has called for any peace deal to be brought before Congress for a vote, saying the process used to “test the Obama Iranian deal is a sound way forward.”
“Fair and challenging questions with a full opportunity to explain, and a healthy dose of sunlight is generally the right formula to understand any matter,” he wrote in early April.
Congressional involvement in approving the deal likely hinges on what exactly it stipulates.
The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 “prevents the president from waiving or suspending [existing statutory] sanctions before Congress has the chance to vote on an agreement, if one is reached, and allows Congress to permanently remove these authorities if it disapproves of the deal over a presidential veto,” according to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
It also requires the president to submit within five days a proposed nuclear agreement with Iran to Congress for review.
Though negotiators have agreed to terms of the 60-day deal, both sides are leaving some wiggle room, saying neither Trump nor Iranian leadership have officially signed off yet.
Trump said over the weekend that a “largely negotiated” proposal was on the table and an announcement should be coming soon. But Secretary of State Marco Rubio hinted at delays while speaking to reporters in India on Tuesday, saying it could be “a few more days” before the details are ironed out.
“I mean, when you get down on some of these things, you’ve got to hear back, and it takes the Iranians – takes them a little while longer to get back,” Rubio said at Palam Air Base in New Delhi.
The Tasnim News Agency, which is affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), reported Sunday that there were still a few unresolved issues in the possible memorandum, according to Iran International.
Tasnim quoted officials Thursday saying Iran would announce a deal through Pakistan, which has been mediating talks.
Reuters also reported this week that the release of billions in frozen Iranian funds had been a point of contention standing in the way of a final agreement.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has reportedly said that no major decision would be made without the approval of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, who has not been seen in public since he was injured in a strike on the first day of the war.
Unclear if Congress will have say
The prospect of a deal has received mixed reactions from lawmakers on Capitol Hill, and it remains unclear whether Congress will ultimately get a say in what happens.
Some more hawkish Republicans have expressed skepticism about the terms of the memorandum, arguing that any deal that allows the current Iranian regime to remain intact and in power could undermine the U.S. military operation and embolden the country’s theocratic leaders.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Saturday that Trump’s decision to strike Iran in February was the “the most consequential” of his second term, raising concerns that the “extraordinary military results” it achieved could all be for naught.
Others, meanwhile, have urged their colleagues to be patient and allow the president time to work out the details.
“War virtually always ends with negotiations,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), an outspoken critic of the war, wrote on Sunday. “Critics of President Trump’s peace negotiations should give President Trump the space to find an American First solution.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has called for any peace deal to be brought before Congress for a vote, saying the process used to “test the Obama Iranian deal is a sound way forward.”
“Fair and challenging questions with a full opportunity to explain, and a healthy dose of sunlight is generally the right formula to understand any matter,” he wrote in early April.
Congressional involvement in approving the deal likely hinges on what exactly it stipulates.
The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 “prevents the president from waiving or suspending [existing statutory] sanctions before Congress has the chance to vote on an agreement, if one is reached, and allows Congress to permanently remove these authorities if it disapproves of the deal over a presidential veto,” according to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
It also requires the president to submit within five days a proposed nuclear agreement with Iran to Congress for review.
No comments:
Post a Comment