- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Several newswires reporting Vance may travel to Pakistan to take point on Iran diplomacy
Posted on 3/24/26 at 11:42 am to jammajin
Posted on 3/24/26 at 11:42 am to jammajin
quote:
bitching about the fact that we are sending the second most powerful man in the world to directly have these discussions.
Jousting at windmills here. Everyone in this thread (myself included) except you accepts that sending someone other than Witkoff/Kushner is more likely to produce fruitful negotiation than sending Witkoff/Kushner back.
You can’t reasonably fricking argue that they won’t talk to Witkoff just because Israel when Witkoff is literally who they were originally talking to. How can people be this dense?
Y’all sound like the boy who cried anti-Semite. You ironically sound like race-obsessed marxists.
Some of you are too emotional to have a rational conversation about anything.
This post was edited on 3/24/26 at 12:01 pm
1
Posted on 3/24/26 at 11:51 am to DeathByTossDive225
I'm questioning why you've decided it's Witkoff and Kushner's fault that this evil lying regime
who lied to us about their nuclear capabilities
and the range of their missiles
were incapable of saying something to Kushner and Wifkoff other than:
yeah we have enough 60% enriched material to make 11 weapons and you can go frick yourself if you think we are going to hand it over.
I'm questioning why you, who claims he's not actively rooting against the US, seems to have every reason in the world why the US and their representatives are wrong in this process and the evil lying regime is right.
Some of you are so infected with TDS that you will actively root against the US while claiming you are not.
who lied to us about their nuclear capabilities
and the range of their missiles
were incapable of saying something to Kushner and Wifkoff other than:
yeah we have enough 60% enriched material to make 11 weapons and you can go frick yourself if you think we are going to hand it over.
I'm questioning why you, who claims he's not actively rooting against the US, seems to have every reason in the world why the US and their representatives are wrong in this process and the evil lying regime is right.
Some of you are so infected with TDS that you will actively root against the US while claiming you are not.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 11:52 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
Saudi doesn't seem very upset or believe Trump was misled
Where does MBS say anything at all here about pre-war negotiations? Also are you saying you think we shouldn’t negotiate an end to the conflict? Genuinely asking, it’s a fair argument.
But someone can oppose the decision to start bombing & simultaneously understand that the only acceptable long-term outcome here is regime change. They’re not mutually exclusive.
Was MBS saying bomb Iran before we started bombing Iran?
Posted on 3/24/26 at 11:53 am to jammajin
We bombed them twice during negotiations and, quite frankly, the optics of those two doing the negotiations are terrible. If we legitimately want a deal, why not change it up?
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:00 pm to jammajin
One more time…
The facts are that we had Israeli intelligence that this was going to be an opportune time to topple the regime. The credible criticisms of Witkoff at the outset are not Iranian sources.
Regardless of what YOU think, Iran saw the prior negotiation as a ploy & is literally saying they will not talk to Witkoff/Kushner.
Probably why we are sending Vance. What do you want me to do about it?
quote:
Everyone in this thread (myself included) except you accepts that sending someone other than Witkoff/Kushner is more likely to produce fruitful negotiation than sending Witkoff/Kushner back.
The facts are that we had Israeli intelligence that this was going to be an opportune time to topple the regime. The credible criticisms of Witkoff at the outset are not Iranian sources.
Regardless of what YOU think, Iran saw the prior negotiation as a ploy & is literally saying they will not talk to Witkoff/Kushner.
Probably why we are sending Vance. What do you want me to do about it?
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:01 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
We bombed them twice during negotiations and, quite frankly, the optics of those two doing the negotiations are terrible. If we legitimately want a deal, why not change it up?
who's saying we shouldn't?
I'm saying
a) your BS about optics is just that. As are all the other reasons why this somehow didn't go well the first time around because of something the US admin did or didnt do
b) people here want to bitch about who we sent over the first time, we decide to send Vance to "change it up" and people are already bitching about how he's supposed to be "focused on something else".
there's a theme here. You're all a bunch of bitches because OMB
you bitch that Kushner and Witkoff were at fault round 1.
you bitch that Trump decides to pound their asses over round 1
Trump gets round 2 going and you bitch he's lying about it
Round 2 gets announced and you bitch that round 2 is being handled by somebody who has other things to do, while still throwing round 1 under a BS bus
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:03 pm to jammajin
so much for fixing our issues at home. this never ends.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:03 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
Regardless of what YOU think, Iran saw the prior negotiation as a ploy
how'd that work out for them?
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:05 pm to jammajin
The only person bitching here is you.
I’m not like just randomly suggesting we should send Vance to negotiate lmao. It’s reportedly what the US govt has discussed with Pakistani mediators.
If we send Witkoff back to Iran feel free to come back and dunk on everyone.
I’m not like just randomly suggesting we should send Vance to negotiate lmao. It’s reportedly what the US govt has discussed with Pakistani mediators.
If we send Witkoff back to Iran feel free to come back and dunk on everyone.
This post was edited on 3/24/26 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:05 pm to FMtTXtiger
quote:
so much for fixing our issues at home. this never ends.
I rest my case
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:07 pm to DeathByTossDive225
I’m not like just randomly suggesting we should send Vance to negotiate lmao. It’s reportedly what the US govt has discussed with Pakistani mediators.
you were saying something about being dense. You're so dense you think this is about who we send to negotiate.
It's about you actively rooting against every decision we make
you were saying something about being dense. You're so dense you think this is about who we send to negotiate.
It's about you actively rooting against every decision we make
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:12 pm to DeathByTossDive225
when Vance is unsuccessful in this process you will tell us all the reasons why he and the US were the cause of the lack of success.
if Vance is successful in this process you will immediately look at what was agreed to and bitch about what didn't happen (like regime change) and hold that up as the only measure of success.
when you don't do either of these things let me know and I'll apologize for being wrong.
but this is your history
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:17 pm to jammajin
quote:
It's about you actively rooting against every decision we make
Moreso about the fact that you see literally any commentary other than “frick yea!” as someone actively rooting against their own country.
The post you were replying to was in response to someone claiming Iran will not sit with Witkoff/Kushner because they are Jews.
That makes it odd that they ever sat with Witkoff and Kushner. I wonder what could have changed between then and now. Would love to hear your ideas.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:21 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
Iran won’t entertain negotiations if Witkoff or Kushner involved.
Both from a special tribe we cannot name. Interesting isn’t it. Lmao.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:27 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
That makes it odd that they ever sat with Witkoff and Kushner. I wonder what could have changed between then and now. Would love to hear your ideas.
It doesn’t matter who they sit with. Your reaction will be the same whoever they sit with and whatever is resolved or not resolved
1) here’s everything the Trump admin did wrong why it didn’t work or
2) well yeah that worked but what about XYZ which was really important.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:30 pm to DeathByTossDive225
you never answered my question.
How'd it work out for the powers that be in Iran who decided Trump sent Kushner and Witkoff over as a ploy?
while you sit here being right about that they are busy becoming worm food.
How'd it work out for the powers that be in Iran who decided Trump sent Kushner and Witkoff over as a ploy?
while you sit here being right about that they are busy becoming worm food.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:30 pm to jammajin
quote:
if Vance is successful in this process you will immediately look at what was agreed to and bitch about what didn't happen (like regime change)
When I made a topic asking if regime change was the only acceptable outcome for the US, the majority of the board opined that it was.
Whether we accomplish anything strategically in this is a long-term issue. There are pros and cons to negotiating… an obvious upside would be avoiding an economic downturn.
In any case, the fact that we may send Vance to negotiate signals that we may be serious about negotiating. It’s news.
This post was edited on 3/24/26 at 12:38 pm
Posted on 3/24/26 at 12:43 pm to DeathByTossDive225
"When I made a topic asking if regime change was the only acceptable outcome for the US, the majority of the board agreed"
Like I said
after we destroy their abilities
when we negotiate all kinds of positive things for the US and the world
but we don't get the people who we are negotiating with to agree to negotiate themselves out.
But we leave them more vulnerable to regime change from within.
you will focus on your sentence above and your "focus group" as the only "acceptable" thing that would have constituted a win.
So whoever goes over there on behalf of the US to negotiate is destined to fail before they begin in your eyes.
And if they said "the only acceptable outcome is you guys are out of power" Iran would turn them down and you'd be here to talk about a ploy and optics and how we were negotiating in bad faith.
You can't even wait to see what happens to get out in front of it. You set yourself up for a "win" at the expense of the US no matter what occurs.
Like I said
after we destroy their abilities
when we negotiate all kinds of positive things for the US and the world
but we don't get the people who we are negotiating with to agree to negotiate themselves out.
But we leave them more vulnerable to regime change from within.
you will focus on your sentence above and your "focus group" as the only "acceptable" thing that would have constituted a win.
So whoever goes over there on behalf of the US to negotiate is destined to fail before they begin in your eyes.
And if they said "the only acceptable outcome is you guys are out of power" Iran would turn them down and you'd be here to talk about a ploy and optics and how we were negotiating in bad faith.
You can't even wait to see what happens to get out in front of it. You set yourself up for a "win" at the expense of the US no matter what occurs.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 1:01 pm to jammajin
quote:
You can't even wait to see what happens to get out in front of it. You set yourself up for a "win" at the expense of the US no matter what occurs.
This thread just says JD Vance may take point on diplomacy in Iran through Pakistani mediators…
Are you asking me whether or not I think we should negotiate? Or whether I think the last 10 years of decisions on Iran was handled well? Or whether or not I agreed with the decision to strike? Or to reconcile my stance on those things?
Are you upset that we are negotiating? Do you want Witkoff to be the negotiator? You’re accusing me of hedging bets, but you haven’t made your own opinion clear.
For the record, the prospect of the regime simply negotiating their own ouster is absolutely some fanciful rainbow unicorn bullshite.
Posted on 3/24/26 at 2:53 pm to Stewiepeters00
quote:
Vance is the next president he is the CIA/Mossads golden boy. Wouldn't be shocked the plan is remove Trump in the next couple years and get him a head start
I am a Vance supporter, but he won't be doing that. You are a troll.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News