28 ms·
US and Iran announce deal to end military operations
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/iran-says-draft-us-deal-includes-oil-sanctions-waiver-nuclear-limits-asset-2026-06-14/ https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/iran-says-draft-us-d...
- fightforcause 3mo ago[dead]
- jeffbee 3mo agoTotal capitulation by America, Israel might not even be on-board with this deal, and Trump still has 5 days to chicken out or forget.
- esseph 3mo agoTrump said they would sign something today. An hour later, now they're not signing anything until Friday.
- breatheoften 3mo ago"For purposes of mine removal" -- what the hell is that line about ...
- irishcoffee 3mo agoI have it on good authority that Iran doesn’t know where all the mines are buried.
- ggm 3mo agoI have it on good authority there are still ww1 mines in the North Sea. Mines drift. At best you know the co-ordinates of where you released them from a ship.
- irishcoffee 3mo agoYeah, the difference is these were laid months ago.
- comrade1234 3mo agoSurely trump deserves the Nobel prize for this deal!
- mrcwinn 3mo ago[flagged]
- amanaplanacanal 3mo agoI think the Obama prize was just a reaction to how terrible the Bush administration was, not that he actually deserved it.
- Thegn 3mo agoYeah, if you watched Obama’s energy he had kind of a “Thanks guys, but why?” air about him through the whole thing.
- mrcwinn 3mo ago[flagged]
- zahlman 3mo ago> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.
- netsharc 3mo agoSomewhere it's written that he and his team discussed internally about refusing it, but thought that action would be considered arrogant and diplomatically bad form. Meanwhile 17 years later...
- Rzor 3mo agoSomeone on HN said a long time ago that if you want to understand Obama's prize, just look at who it upsets.
- 3mo ago
- calmbonsai 3mo ago5 days is forever in the history of these negotiations. I would be shocked if it actually happens.
- epolanski 3mo agoThe Israeli will drag Trump again.
- woodruffw 3mo agoAre the terms of the deal public yet? If they're essentially a return to the status quo ante bellum, that would be a pretty embarrassing conclusion for the US (and would presumably further harden any belief within Iran that the only permanent regime-preserving solution involves accelerating the process of obtaining nuclear weapons).
- jeffbee 3mo agoIt's much worse than that. This gives Iran de jure control of traffic in the strait.
- toomuchtodo 3mo ago“Art of the deal.” Thousands of deaths and tens to hundreds of billions of dollars borrowed and spent to be in a worse position than before this started. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2026_Iran_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2026_Iran_wa... https://iran-cost-ticker.com/ https://iran-cost-ticker.com/
- petilon 3mo agoHow so? Trump Claims Strait Will be ‘Permanently Toll Free’ Under Agreement With Iran (NYT headline).
- woodruffw 3mo agoIf I understand 'jeffbee correctly, I think they mean that Iran now has practical evidence that it can gum up the strait and therefore extract political concessions from it, even if they don't literally result in tolling. (In other words, every barrel of oil that passes through the straight will now have an $X risk surcharge on it, whether or not that surcharge ends up in Iran's coffers.)
- sanid 3mo agoIranians have said they cannot charge a "toll" according to international law, but they can charge a "fee". Charging a fee for maintanance, environment or security is fine, so it will be just a different branding to the "toll". Personally I think they should charge an environmental fee with the amount of traffic going through there. https://www.dawn.com/news/2007544/cannot-impose-tolls-on-strait-of-hormuz-under-intl-law-but-service-fees-will-be-collected-iran-fm https://www.dawn.com/news/2007544/cannot-impose-tolls-on-str...
- 3eb7988a1663 3mo agoWith nuclear questions to be resolved at a later time. Wasn't total disarmament the core, non-negoitable for this entire conflict?
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- dools 3mo agoThe core non negotiable for the conflict was meeting a handful of Israel’s military objectives at the expense of virtually everyone else globally.
- 3eb7988a1663 3mo agoFor sure, but the eventually-settled-upon rationale was some kind of nuclear deterrence. To walk away with Iran (likely) to maintain its uranium stockpile + possible toll control of the strait is such a complete and utter self-own.
- corvad 3mo agoAt the very least it should quell the markets for this week.
- zahlman 3mo agoMarkets reached ATH this month and are only a couple percent off that mark. What is there to "quell"?
- petilon 3mo agoTrump says "The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete." The deal opens the Strait of Hormuz to all, while leaving the thorniest nuclear issues for another day. So basically the same as when the war started.
- colonCapitalDee 3mo agoWe'll see if it happens. Quote: "mediators will facilitate a series of meetings this week. These pre-implementation discussions will lay the foundation for the technical talks and the official signing ceremony." It's concepts of a plan all over again
- sillysaurusx 3mo agoI wonder how the stock markets will react tomorrow. I know someone who turned $6k into $150k by buying options on war related news. The logic is that the markets will almost certainly go up, so bet big at a time like this. It sounded like an easy way to lose $6k, but maybe the upside is worth the risk. I don’t have any experience to know whether this is a sufficiently good bet though.
- zahlman 3mo agoInstitutional investors get to trade outside of hours that most ordinary people can't; presuming that this is net positive for markets, they will already be up when the bell rings.
- kelnos 3mo ago> maybe the upside is worth the risk The upside is worth the risk if you can stand to lose $6k without it hurting too much. If you can't, then it isn't.
- dingaling 3mo ago> The logic is that the markets will almost certainly go up The markets go up because people buy expecting that the markets will go up, which causes sellers to increase their price because they expect people will pay more because of FOMO, which people still buy because they expect the market to go up further. The snake somehow keeps eating its tail.
- lwansbrough 3mo ago[flagged]
- oblio 3mo agoNo, it's not a waste. That would imply that the end result will be 0. Nooo, it will be much worse. The end result will be a huge net negative. This administration will bring down the US a lot.
- an_guy 3mo agoWell Obama gave $3 billion dollars in cash to Iran. Atleast he didn't do that, right? RIGHT???
- beefmumbai 3mo ago[dead]
- LPisGood 3mo agoLooks like 25 billion this time around.
- kennywinker 3mo ago> The US and its allies delivering reconstruction plans for Iran worth at least $300bn
- throw03172019 3mo agoIt will be more.
- ergocoder 3mo agoIt's the last bump before I liquidate all my stocks. I predict that the crash will come at the end or the beginning of the next president which is likely democrat. Not that it's democrat's fault but democrat is more disciplined
- LPisGood 3mo agoI have some thoughts on that. It’s possible that the current administration’s lack of oversight has artificially propped up the stock market. If the next president decides to return to a more traditional rules based structure, the market will probably react very poorly. US debt is also getting more expensive and interest is ballooning. Making the country less desirable to the most skilled immigrants and eroding the capabilities of the strongest research universities will also mean there is probably hell to pay in the medium term.
- ergocoder 3mo agoThe swing of the market based on the president's crazy tweets is just insane. This cannot go on for much longer. I will be parking my money at a safer place
- zahlman 3mo ago> The swing of the market based on the president's crazy tweets is just insane. A quick glance at charts shows that VIX is not at all out of line with historical patterns, and asking ChatGPT to crunch some numbers confirms that. The "liberation day" spike was not nearly as bad as in 2008 or for COVID, and in fact not much more than events in 2010 and 2011 that people don't even have names for.
- Sabinus 3mo agoMy fear is that Trump will keep the show going until the end of his term but generally destroy the market's fundamental health and stability. Then a Dem president tries to re-rationalise the markets, they can't handle the correction, there's a crash, and with the backlash the USA is set up for a real spicy government.
- bhouston 3mo agoIs this going to end Israel’s offensive into Lebanon? It isn’t clear. It may be that Israel has permanently expanded its borders into the ethnically cleansed southern Lebanon just like it has into Syria recently. This is what Katz is saying: https://www.ynetnews.com/article/qeko153ri https://www.ynetnews.com/article/qeko153ri
- riazrizvi 3mo ago[flagged]
- hnbad 3mo agoIt's a war between Israel and the US vs Iran that was literally initiated by the US after a meeting between Trump and Netanyahu. Also Israel is a rogue state that has been committing war crimes including genocide and is engaging in expansionist wars worse at this point than Russia's. It's in everyone's interest that Israel be either stopped or undergo a regime change that abandons Apartheid and creates a multicultural Western democracy.
- throw378467 3mo ago[dead]
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- riazrizvi 3mo agoAfter 400 years of Ottoman rule, we the Brits took that region because we won WWI. We gave some to different Arab groups, and some to the Israelis. The muslim religious head of Jerusalem wrote fan mail to Hitler advocating for the Final Solution. The hostility toward Jews had been whipped up for years and the general unwillingness of the neighboring regions to agree to the lines that the UK delegated to the UN is why after we left the region descended into war. The Israelis held on to their land. The Iranian mullahs came along in the 70s and jumped onto the cause because they feed on hate. My father was an advocate of the Iranian regime, because he was a vulnerable conflict survivor with deep psychological issues. But I saw what they were peddling 45 years ago and I heard what they were inculcating in him, through the mullahs that they trained and sent to the UK. They love to stress the idea of Abraham sacrificing his children. These are people that use children in war. They fire their rockets and shoot their guns where their own civilians will get hurt in the counterattack because they are just pawns to them. They sent young boys to the frontlines against the Iraqis and they use human shield tactics against the Israelis. It's a tragedy when innocents die, but against a foe that uses innocents in the propaganda war, only steely resolve and self-preservation will rid this world of the scourge that is these Iranian mullahs.
- ep103 3mo agoAccording to the NY times, its a 60 day ceasefire on all fronts, and a return to pre-war status on issues like the (blockade, tolls, nuclear program, sanctions) starting this coming Friday. Also on Friday, a new round of negotiations will begin to discuss these issues. So basically, both sides agreed to go back to the pre-war status quo for 60 days while negotiations continue. Except one thing so far, apparently Trump has agreed to unfreeze Iranian financial assets. Remember: the reason Trump said Obama's nuclear agreement was terrible was because Obama was "paying the Iranians to not develop nuclear weapons". What Obama did, was pay them out of these frozen assets. Which trump just gave them back for free, and without a nuclear deal.
- firesteelrain 3mo agoI don’t know how this is worse for the US or the World. Iran’s leadership and military was decapitated. It’s in the best interest of US, Europe and Israel and the Middle East. The nuclear program had a huge setback. What are the counter arguments to these facts if we really end up in peace with Iran along with the bad actors gone too?
- ls612 3mo agoif the strait actually reopens and Iran actually ships the enriched uranium out of the country this is a reasonable outcome imo. My concern centers on the fact that neither of these two outcomes are guaranteed by a long shot at this point.
- firesteelrain 3mo agoIran just confirmed the MOU.
- fightforcause 3mo ago[dead]
- recroad 3mo ago[flagged]
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- firesteelrain 3mo agoI don’t think they are the bad actors.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- cosmicgadget 3mo ago
- petilon 3mo agoDetails here: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/iran-says-draft-us-deal-includes-oil-sanctions-waiver-nuclear-limits-asset-2026-06-14/ https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/iran-says-draft-us-d... Key bullets: What Iran gets: * The U.S. agrees to release $25 billion of Iran’s frozen assets, including via direct cash transfers, cooperation among regional countries, and financial credit lines. * Washington, in coordination with its regional allies, would prepare a reconstruction and development plan for Iran, to be negotiated and agreed with Tehran within 60 days. What the US gets: * Tehran agrees that it will neither produce nor acquire nuclear weapons. * Pending a final agreement, Iran would maintain the current status of its nuclear programme, refraining from further uranium enrichment and expansion of nuclear facilities. * The United States agrees to allow Iran to dilute its stockpile of highly enriched uranium on Iranian soil under a future comprehensive agreement. * Iran’s nuclear programme, uranium enrichment activities and mechanisms for handling its stockpile of highly enriched uranium would be negotiated within 60 days of the memorandum and addressed in a final agreement.
- bhouston 3mo agoThis is nothing significantly different from the Obama P5+1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal
- rasz 3mo agoother than $300B war reparations
- bhouston 3mo agoGaza hasn’t got its $10b funding yet so do you really think Iran will get $300B? And remember most of the fund are just confiscated Iranian funds anyhow.
- 420official 3mo agoThe funds that are confiscated are the 25b of released frozen assets. I do think that the US will uphold its agreements, as it absolutely should. If the US and allies didn't want to spend the 300b they should've stuck with the existing agreement that didn't include 300b in repairs.
- peterbecich 3mo agoWhat are the odds of the optimal deal being reached on Trump's birthday (Eastern Time)? Who knows, maybe US stalled before, and/or gave a little extra concession to conclude today.
- dav_Oz 3mo agoYou are probably right it was timed deliberately this way, this is why the Iranians also didn't rush it ... > Iran waited until the clock passed midnight local time to finalize the agreement, because it did not want the momentous occasion to coincide with President Trump’s birthday on Sunday, according to two Iranian officials who could not be identified because of the matter’s sensitivity. The seven-and-half-hour time difference allowed both Tehran and Washington to claim their preferred version of when the deal was finalized. President Trump had said it would be on Sunday, and Iran had said it would be on a later day.[0] [0]https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/06/14/world/iran-war-trump-us https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/06/14/world/iran-war-trump...
- wolvoleo 3mo agoSo basically the Obama agreement that Trump trashed. Only now people had to die to get to this point.
- kennywinker 3mo ago…plus iran gets $300bn in reconstruction money
- bilalq 3mo agoThis completely ignores the shareholder value to the military industrial complex and the truth machine value of prediction markets from the not-insider traders.
- bhouston 3mo agoFrom who? Trump can not even get the $10B he said would go to Gaza?
- kennywinker 3mo ago“US and allies” apparently
- Barrin92 3mo agoidk about 300 billion, but the Gulf States have already, and rather silently, unfrozen north of 10 billion in assets (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/12/uae-to-unlock-frozen-iranian-funds-amid-us-ceasefire-push https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/12/uae-to-unlock-froze...) which is of course the real kicker, The Gulf states are going to pay for the adventure and deal with an emboldened Iran and their damaged economies and infrastructure. Having US bases in the region has turned from a security guarantee into a disaster, the implications of this are pretty obvious.
- tejohnso 3mo agoAlso... The US' limitations in its ability to project power have been exposed. Having American bases in the middle east has been shown to be nothing but a liability for host countries. And Iran has proven that it can withstand anything the US is willing to throw at it, and hit back hard, over a relatively prolonged period. And Iran has shown that its constitution is strong and power succession is effective even after a massive decapitation strike. There was seemingly zero turmoil, control appears to have been maintained without issue. And Iran's non nuclear option of controlling the strait has been tested andd shown to be highly effective. And Iran has gained significant operational experience with its massive stores of drones and missles. And the US has lost multiple billion dollar intelligence installations in the region. And Americans have been made aware of the Israel lobby like never before, and Trump is in a very difficult position heading into the midterms.
- mostafah 3mo agoI’m an Iranian in my 40s, and the regime and Western countries have been negotiating for most of my life. I remember being in high school when the first nuclear talks began, and ever since, it has been a never-ending series of talks, understandings, and plans without any real conclusion. I remember there were cases when they talked for weeks, and their main achievement was agreement on the time and place of the next negotiations. Today’s “deal” is no different. No party is releasing an official text; apparently, it’s not a real deal but a memorandum of understanding outlining a plan for further talks over the next 60 days. Another 60 days on top of the last two decades. And all of these have only bought time and money for the regime to continue its nuclear ambitions, terrorism plans, and oppress the people of Iran, including almost daily executions of innocent protestors during the last few months as these negotiations went on. The truth is, it won’t be possible to solve this issue with this approach. You can’t get a snake to sign a document to agree not to be poisonous anymore.
- comrade1234 3mo agoThe original Obama deal kept Iran isolated and their nuclear stockpile limited. It didn't do anything for the Iranian people and that's tragic but until trump it wasn't the west's problem. The decades of negotiations was to everyone's benefit (except the Iranian people) Now it is the wests problem (with the strait) but even now no one is going to send an army to Iran. I know my views are probably overly simplistic.
- khuey 3mo agoI would bet considerable sums of money that this deal is also not going to do anything for the Iranian people.
- sanid 3mo agoIt actually does, how about not dying from US/Israeli bombs? People tend to forget there is a human cost to this and not only oil and money involved. There are 3.5k people dead in Iran many more injured. The US killed indian sailors in the last couple of days, guess the remaining ones will be happy to not live with this danger.
- drnick1 3mo agoWe had a once in a lifetime opportunity to completely destroy the theocratic regime and we did not finish the job. This "deal" (or what transpired of it) is pathetic and will only allow the mullahs to rearm and come back stronger in the future. We will live to regret not resuming combat operations and weakening the regime until it isn't a threat to anyone.
- kennywinker 3mo agoBeing attacked strengthens a nations unity, strengthens regimes, and eliminates room for dissent - did you miss 9/11? Oct 7th? Pearl harbour? The blitz?
- comrade1234 3mo agoThat would require an invading force. Not worth it when we could keep Iran isolated and under sanctions and under nuclear inspections by doing nothing.
- cosmicgadget 3mo agoThey're pretty good at projecting power in the region though.
- PaulHoule 3mo agoIt is one thing to destroy the regime, it is another thing to build something stable which isn’t going to spread terrorism.
- mostafah 3mo ago> Tehran agrees that it will neither produce nor acquire nuclear weapons. Of course they do. They have always said they don’t want nuclear weapons while pursuing them relentlessly. > Iran’s nuclear programme, uranium enrichment activities and mechanisms for handling its stockpile of highly enriched uranium would be negotiated within 60 days of the memorandum and addressed in a final agreement. If that is still to be discussed, then what have they been discussing so far? That has always been the main issue.
- spwa4 3mo ago> If that is still to be discussed, then what have they been discussing so far? That has always been the main issue. If the agreement means Iran seriously agrees to dilute (which boils down to destroying) it's nuclear stockpile, with UN or US or ... witnesses, that's pretty damn new.
- ep103 3mo agoTrump released Iran's frozen assets, in return for them opening the straight and thereby dropping oil prices before the midterm elections. Reminder, the reason Trump hated the Obama deal was because he construed it as paying Iran not to develop nuclear weapons. Obama was paying Iran with the money from Iran's frozen assets. Trump's deal gives them that money, and has no nuclear agreement.
- petilon 3mo ago
- pkulak 3mo ago> Reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days "under Iranian arrangements" Oh my goodness. So it stays closed for the better part of a month (or more, who knows), then opens up with each ship paying Iran for passage. I very much look forward to how this will be spun as some kind of a "win" for the United States.
- cosmicgadget 3mo agoI imagine: "Under Biden we would have surrendered to Iran and then the world would be destroyed by an alien probe looking for humpback whale sounds."
- Animats 3mo agoConfirmation from Iran's Security Council.[1] It's just a 60-day cease fire extension, according to the New York Times. Trump posted something on Truth Social. There's no announcement on the U.S. Department of State site. That's full of a deal between the US Government and the Ultimate Fighting Championship people. Compare with the April 8th ceasefire.[2] Al Jazeera, which reports on this in detail because their readership is in the target area, is trying to figure it out.[3] [1] https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202606139149 https://www.iranintl.com/en/liveblog/202606139149 [2] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/us-iran-ceasefire-deal-what-are-the-terms-and-whats-next https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/8/us-iran-ceasefire-de... [3] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/14/will-the-us-iran-deal-be-signed-on-sunday-what-we-know-so-far https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/14/will-the-us-iran-de...
- throaway23663 3mo agoPeace - in whatever form is something the world desperately needs at this point. Having said that, I'll give it three days until Israel does some shit and undos all of this.
- parrellel 3mo agoReading through the proposal Iran put out, it sounds like Trump's surrendered? 1- Permanent and immediate cessation of war on all fronts, including Lebanon - You know Israel won't let that happen 2- America's commitment not to interfere in Iran's internal affairs and to respect the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran. - No regime change 3- Complete removal of the naval blockade within 30 days - Iran gets its oil money back. 4- America's commitment to the withdrawal of its forces from around Iran - We leave altogether 5- Reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days with Iranian arrangements - Iran gets to charge its "service" fees 6- Suspension of sanctions on the sale of oil, petrochemical products and derivatives and Iran's full access to its financial resources. - Oil money again 7- Necessity of presenting plans for the reconstruction of Iran in the amount of at least 300 billion dollars by the US and its allies - We rebuild freakin Iran. FFS. I think I'm done reading before we give them American Samoa and a puppy.
- kelnos 3mo ago> We rebuild freakin Iran. Honestly I think that's "Trump's win", and is probably all he cares about. Now he gets to funnel all these reconstruction contracts to his buddies, prioritizing anyone who gives him a "donation".
- OutOfHere 3mo agoAs an American citizen, I find it completely unacceptable that the US will pay $300B to rebuild a foreign country when it doesn't have funds for food and healthcare benefits for its deserving citizens. Moreover, for the longest time, Trump criticized Obama for giving $1.7B to Iran, and now he wants to give so much more.
- Hikikomori 3mo agoHow about being outraged spending even more bombing it in the first place?
- OutOfHere 3mo agoYes. Bombing was justifiable only on the nuclear sites and facilities, nowhere else.
- spwa4 3mo agoWell, Iran is angry: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/14/iranian-hardliners-in-vociferous-push-to-reject-proposed-peace-deal-with-us https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/14/iranian-hardli... Israel is angry: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/14/world/middleeast/israel-us-iran-deal.html?unlocked_article_code=1.qFA.8lTK.tSR1vdLM9584&smid=nytcore-ios-share https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/14/world/middleeast/israel-u... Let's hope that means the deal will last.
- tim333 3mo agoBabylon Bee: >Trump Sets New World Record By Winning War With Iran 27 Times In One Year https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-sets-new-world-record-by-winning-war-with-iran-27-times-in-one-year https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-sets-new-world-record-by-w... It's been a bit of a mess really.