“In case we don’t make a deal, we’ll need it,” Trump has said. Iran remains defiant in the face of ultimatums, pledging unprecedented retaliation to any attack.

Jeremy Scahill and Murtaza Hussain
Feb 18, 2026

A former senior U.S. intelligence official who is an informal advisor to the Trump administration on Middle East policy told Drop Site that, based on his discussions with current officials, he assesses an 80-90% likelihood of U.S. strikes within weeks.

Iran realizes that it is facing an unprecedented threat from the U.S. if a deal that conforms with Trump’s terms is not reached, former Pentagon official Jasmine El-Gamal told Drop Site. “This is not a dress rehearsal,” she said. “This is it. This is not the negotiations of last year or the year before or the year before that. They’re backed into a corner. There’s no off ramp.”

  • dizzle18@lemmy.zip
    496·
    2 days ago

    Is the likelihood of an invasion based on something Iran is doing? Or is it dependent on how horrifying the next Epstein file drop will be? I mean…I know the fucking answer to this already. Doesn’t make it any less infuriating. This piece of shit will start World War III, all to distract everyone from the fact that he raped children. “No new wars.”

    • mrdown@lemmy.world
      47·
      2 days ago

      It is about controlling the straight of hormuz for the usa and to crush any resistance to the greater israel plan for Israel

    • CommieKhinkali@lemmygrad.ml
      8·
      2 days ago

      lets be real here, americans dont give a shit about epstein files. the info of the epstein class has been revealed that they eat and rape children and traffic them globally. i get that, if that is something theyre willing to release/leak, what theyre not showing the public must be at least 10x worse, but the americans basically havent done shit since finding out that almost every conspiracy is real lol. i think this is just a contention of usa to have full control over the world. i mean i dont know what to tell you when the opposition party is for going to war with iran, dems and reps align 99% on foreign policy. i just hope that iran wins this and survives to see another day.

    • ExistentialNightmare@lemmygrad.ml
      181·
      2 days ago

      What a dogshit liberal take, it’s primarily about keeping America the top dog through imperialism. Not saying the Epstein controversy has nothing all to do with this but Trump would still be doing similar warmongering even if the files had not been so damning to him and his circle.

      • CommieKhinkali@lemmygrad.ml
        6·
        2 days ago

        idk if they had or have nuclear weapons, but honestly they should get them asap. north korea hasnt been invaded only because they have nukes.

        • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
          122·
          1 day ago

          They weren’t, weapons grade is 90, 60 is what is permitted by the NPT agreement, which is what they were enriching to.

            • Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz
              4·
              20 hours ago

              That resolution refers to the requirements set by the 2019 agreement after the Trump unilaterally tore up the previous, multilateral agreement. America does not get to dictate what other states are allowed to do.

                • Attacker94@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  14 hours ago

                  I started trying to help cite what the actual amount of enrichment that is allowed, and based upon what I read it would seem that the enrichment amount is unimportant, the only requirement is that is must be used for “peaceful purposes”, this can be found in Article III section 3, and by extension article IV, treaty Article 3.3

                  The safeguards required by this Article shall be implemented in a manner designed to comply with Article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international co-operation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, including the international exchange of nuclear material and equipment for the processing, use or production of nuclear material for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this Article and the principle of safeguarding set forth in the Preamble of the Treaty.

                  Article 4

                  1.        Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

                  1.        All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

                  The percentage may have come from a standpoint of plausible deniability for civilian uses, but based on the treaty itself, enrichment does not mean anything.

      • felixwhynot@lemmy.world
        56·
        2 days ago

        Not that I support this action, but Don’t they have an enrichment facility with centrifuges?