Question….who’s lying

Iran or Trump? Who believes that a deal is being negotiated? Iran denies being in discussions to negotiate a deal.

A regime that hangs people for protesting versus Trump.

Denise, in apartheid, people were killed for descent too.

...if the lightbulb ain't coming on yet then it's broken.

Lemmie guess, trust Iran ahead of Trump but defos don't trust the apartheid government ahead of anyone.

Jiffy bags are less transparent than you.

Well Denise, who do you believe in this war ..... Iran or Trump ...... easy question

I have made my opinion very clear .. how about you do the same here

"A regime that hangs people for protesting versus Trump."

Is hanging that much worse than shooting a guy 8 times after you've disarmed him?

The OP is poorly worded.

Negotiation is an ongoing process between the US and Iran and has never stopped. Remember, peeps, it is very likely that the US used negotiations in a treacherous move to conceal their surprise attack: a couple of days before the aggression, the negotiator in chief reported that the negotiations were excellent and close to completion. It is very likely the US lied in order to deceive Iran.

That reminded, negotiations never ceased: both sides have always been negotiating to open or close communications channel for example. They keep in touch.

The deal that is supposed to be negotiated is what determines the lie:

Trump issued an ultimatum that trapped him as Iran did not cave it. Typical Trump who acts the same when he loses control over a situation: he fabricated an alternate situation to keep appearing as the one in charge. And this is when his lie happens: the negotiation is close to an end, regime change is on the menu and will happen fast, strait is going to be re opened quickly etc In all likelihood, this negotiation does not exist, there is no negotiation like this one close to completion.

On the other hand, Iran probably lies by omission: they stated they are not negotiating without mentioning not negotiating this very deal. Iran in all likelihood is negotiating a deal but not this one.

Both sides lie: Trump in a straightforward manner, Iran by omission. Iran has been dragged into a lie by the open lie made by Trump. They can not say they are negotiating with Trump but a different deal so it is better for them to lie and to claim they are not negotiating.

Okay, thanks for another post I'll never read , Blo

Must be a difficult question ......

"Iran or Trump? Who believes that a deal is being negotiated? Iran denies being in discussions to negotiate a deal."

Can't say I've heard too many lies from the Iranians during this war while Bozo has lied non-stop.

He lied about his reasons for starting the war, he lied about winning the war, he lied last year when he said Iran's nuclear capability had been "obliterated" (his new favourite word), he lied when he claimed the US had an "unlimited supply" of weapons, he lied when he claimed Iran were weeks away from having a nuke, he lied about killing all Iran's leadership, he lied about no-one knowing Iran would attack US allies in the Middle East, he lied about a former US president saying he wished he'd done what Bozo did, he lied about US media outlets promoting fake AI videos, he lied about not needing other countries ships, he lied when he blamed Iran for the missile on the girls school, he lied about not knowing about the girls school . . . and now he's lying about being in talks with Iran about ending the war. Pretty much everything he's said about this war has been a lie.

Anyone who chooses to believe anything coming out of the White House is either brainwashed, stupid or isn't following events very closely.

The actual Question from Denny is:

Who believes that a deal is being negotiated?

Instead, it's forced into a loyalty test: either you believe Trump or you believe Iran

Exactly Rooi...if a war is started on excuses, lies, and “we thought they might attack”, then why the hell should anyone trust the side that started it??

That is just common sense.

You do not have to trust Iran blindly. You also do not have to be stupid enough to swallow every word from the people who pushed for this war from day one.

Once you have hospitals hit, schools hit, homes flattened, civilians dying and people starving, then this stupid little game of “who do you trust?” becomes a joke.

The real question is who wanted this war, who pushed it, and who benefits from it.

That is where the answer starts.

Iran or Trump? Who believes that a deal is being negotiated? Iran denies being in discussions to negotiate a deal.

Trump is lying on this...but by saying it, he hopes he can make it true...in that it's really an offer to Iran to come take part in negotiations, he's looking for a face saving way out, an off ramp that's hoping the Iranian's will give him.

Exactly the way I see it Stav. He's planting the seed for the next lie . . . the lie he's going to use to extricate himself from this mess.

"Is hanging that much worse than shooting a guy 8 times after you've disarmed him?"

You rate that as a reasonable comparison?

Here’s a consequential lie:

Iran has consistently claimed to limit its ballistic missile range to 2,000 kilometers (roughly 1,240 miles), claiming they are for self-defense. The lie was repeated at the beginning of the conflict.

But its missiles hit Diego Garcia last week 2500 miles away. So the statement they only had missiles for defense was a lie designed to deflect from their effort to have a deliverable nuclear bomb.

but by saying it, he hopes he can make it true...in that it's really an offer to Iran to come take part in negotiations, he's looking for a face saving way out, an off ramp that's hoping the Iranian's will give him.

It is so improbable. Iran has never shown any sign they were not willing to negotiate. So they are already prone to negotiation. On the other hand, the US used a negotiation process to hide their aggression. And the terms are so unlikely to be accepted: Trump is hinted at a a regime change. Current Iranian leadership stepping down...

The move may be to re insure the markets and maybe profit from it, funds moving before the announcement are reported.

Iran has consistently claimed to limit its ballistic missile range to 2,000 kilometers (roughly 1,240 miles), claiming they are for self-defense. The lie was repeated at the beginning of the conflict.

That's misleading. Iran said they put a cap of 2,000KM on their ballistic missiles as a gesture of good will towards Europe (an indication that it wasn't a threat to Europe) but the cap was a political one, not a technical one and openly stated they had the capacity to increase the range.

"That's misleading. Iran said they put a cap of 2,000KM on their ballistic missiles as a gesture of good will towards Europe (an indication that it wasn't a threat to Europe) but the cap was a political one, not a technical one and openly stated they had the capacity to increase the range."

...and you say that with a straight face?...it was BS.

From Chat

As of March 2026, Iran's official position remains that it has

intentionally capped its missile range at 2,000 kilometers (approximately 1,242 miles). Iranian officials have framed this limit as a deliberate strategic choice rather than a technical constraint, primarily to reassure European nations that they are not targets.

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty +3

Recent Official Statements

In late February and early March 2026, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchireiterated this policy in several interviews, including with NBC News:

Al Jazeera +1

1. The Intent: Araghchi stated, "We intentionally limited ourselves to below 2,000km of range because we don't want to be felt as a threat by anybody else in the world".
2. The Motivation: He added that Iran has "no hostility against the United States people and all Europeans".
3. Denial of Expansion: He maintained there was no plan to increase this range, claiming there is "no evidence, no intelligence, nothing to indicate that Iran is developing long-range missiles".
4. Facebook +3

Contradictions and Evolving Rhetoric

Despite these diplomatic assurances, other Iranian voices and recent military actions have signaled a possible shift in this long-standing policy:

1. Ready to Extend: Brigadier General Mohammad Jafar Asadi recently stated that while Iran will not "initiate hostilities," it is "100% ready" with current capabilities and its missiles will "reach the necessary distance" to respond to attacks.
2. The Diego Garcia Incident: On March 21, 2026, reports emerged that Iran fired two ballistic missiles at the Diego Garcia military base in the Indian Ocean—a distance of roughly 4,000 kilometers, which is double the official cap.
3. Iranian Denial: Iranian officials, including spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei, have denied responsibility for the Diego Garcia strike, dismissing the reports as a "false flag".
4. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty +4

Military analysts suggest the 2,000 km limit was a political decision originally imposed by the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and that recent events indicate this self-imposed cap may no longer be in effect.

……

‘Capped’ but not capped. In other words a lie just as I originally stated,

Question to Claude AI Sonnet 4.6 :

Did Iran fire two Ballistic Missiles at army Base Diego Carcia In the Indian Ocean, roughly 4,000 KM away from Iran?

Apparently Iran fired two ballistic missiles at the joint US-UK base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, but neither struck the base. (CNN)

One missile failed in flight and a US warship fired an interceptor at the second. (The Hill)

Israel made the allegations, and there military chief claimed Iran used a two-stage ballistic missile with a range of 4,000km, and used it to argue that European capitals like Berlin, Paris and Rome are now within range. (Al Jazeera)

Iran flatly denied being behind the attack and called it a false flag operation, suggesting Israel might have been behind it. (Al Jazeera)

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte also said the alliance "cannot confirm" Israel's claim that the missiles were Iranian intercontinental ballistic missiles.

The US and UK say Iran did it, Iran denies it and calls it a false flag, and NATO won't confirm the Israeli version of events. ( Al Jazeera)

/// Iran has publicly committed to capping their missile range at 2000km. So a missile travelling 4000km to Diego Garcia does not add up on Iran's side.

But Israel has missiles with that kind of range. So who actually benefits from the world believing Iran just demonstrated a 4000km missile capability right in the middle of an argument about whether Iran is a threat, Huh??

https://x.com/i/status/2036578813640163562

Oóps

Israel shot the rocket at a US base, relying on the US, which presumably was uninformed, to shoot it down and prevent potential UK and US loss of life.

‘We can add that to the Iranian claim they put a non technical limit on the rockets at 1400 miles, which was supposedly going to be triggered in some mysterious fashion