Public sentiment towards the US-Iran nuclear deal proposal is predominantly negative and polarized. There's a strong skepticism regarding the intentions of the US and Israel, perceived as hypocritical given their own nuclear capabilities. Additionally, there's a lack of trust in Iran's intentions and the potential effectiveness of any deal. A significant divide exists with some expressing trust in Trump's leadership, overshadowing focus on the deal itself, while others criticize his handling of past agreements. Concerns over fairness, double standards, and the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East are frequently mentioned, with fears of potential escalation and military intervention looming large.

United States

Iran

Israel

Donald Trump

The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.

In an interview with Fox Business recorded on March 6, Trump said, "There are two ways Iran can be handled: militarily, or you make a deal" to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

"I've written them a letter saying, 'I hope you're going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it's going to be a terrible thing,'" Trump said.

"I would rather negotiate a deal. I'm not sure that everybody agrees with me, but we can make a deal that would be just as good as if you won militarily," Trump added.

"But the time is happening now. The time is coming up. Something's going to happen one way or the other."

Snippets of the interview were aired on March 7, but the full sit-down will be broadcast on March 9, Fox said.

In separate comments to reporters, Trump said: "We have a situation with Iran that, something's going to happen very soon. Very, very soon."

https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-trump-nuclear-khamenei-negotiations/33341412.html

 

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

So the party of peace has now threatened to invade Canada, Greenland, Gaza, and Iran all in the first 2 months.

Crushing it, guys. Doing great.

Sarcasm…in case that wasn’t blatantly obvious.

Edit: and Panama

TheWizard01

The reason we don't have a nuclear deal is Trump. He harpooned it in his first term.

If Trump can't get done what Obama did, he should just admit it. If it's something that needs to happen, he should just step down and let someone who can actually *be* a leader take over.

Either way, using military action in an attempt to overcome Trump's own personal failing would be a devastating tragedy.

cossiander

I don't think he had a great reason to renege on their first treaty, but Iran doesn't have a great reason to renegotiate that at this point with the current administration so it sounds like the GOP really just wants the world to burn.

baachou

Republicans are idiots who think they're geniuses. No one is impressed by Trump's bumbling ineptitude. No one thinks "oh no, a madman we can't handle." It's just that Trump is a fucking idiot and so are Republicans. America doesn't lead the free world anymore and we can't be trusted, to our own detriment.

We had a deal, and then we had Trump.

wonkalicious808

So, he wants us to simultaneously invade… Greenland, Panama, Mexico, Canada, and Iran?

Due_Satisfaction2167

Why would Iran agree anything with him? He's just going to claim the agreement means nothing a week after he signs.

Ok-Zookeepergame-698

I'd love for someone to ask Trump:

*We had a deal with Iran to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons - and by all accounts, it was working - but a previous administration cancelled it. Do you think that was a mistake?*

Threatening war unless a country makes a deal while also being responsible for sinking a deal that was already in place is peak Trump. An idiot posing as a fake strong man. At some point, some country is going to call his bluff and he'll either look like a chump or he'll go to war. Not great either way.

CaptainAwesome06

I cant think of a better way for him to lose all support. Go for it dude.

Dr_Scientist_

Will that be before, during, or after our invasions of Panama, Mexico, Canada, and Greenland?

StewTrue

Worked out super great in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Kerplonk

StonkSalty

I think Trump loves to hear himself talk and I think he, and his base, thinks that this type of manic diplomacy  makes them sound tough. I doubt it's deeper than that. At the same time his base has been bound and determined to touch the proverbial hot stove for decades at this point and they are finally unencumbered so who the hell knows what they will do.

historian_down

Yes we need one.  Especially since some narcissistic blowhard killed the last one we had.

EquivalentNarwhal8

This is incredibly stupid. There was a deal, and Trump ripped it up. I'm not sure why Iran would agree to another one.

As a Canadian, I think an invasion of Iran is a great idea because it'll distract Trump from trying to invade my country and waste American military resources, which I now see as a good thing in light of Trump's recent insanity.

Certainly-Not-A-Bot

Gee, it sure would've been nice if Trump hadn't ripped up the nuclear deal we literally had in hand just because he's an asshole.  But I'm sure he won't do anything - we were assured by all his supporters over and over that he was against war!

GabuEx

He wants to invade or start wars with Canada, Greenland and Mexico…and Iran? With a Secy of Defense too stupid to win a game of Risk?

Dull_Yellow_2641

Comparatively, Iran is a weak nation, but this would be a disaster at least as bad as Iraq and Afghanistan. What a disgusting human being. He can't negotiate one, because he's a shit negotiator, so he threatens force. That's all this is.

7figureipo

Fuck this warmongering douche bag. He just fucks everything up. He's such a giant piece of shit.

pete_68

Time to bust out the Marty McFly meme - 'I've seen this one! Its called IRAQ and it was claimed they had WMDs!'

fletcherkildren

Trump just wants to invade somebody somewhere.  He's throwing all kinds of shit out to see what polls the best.

It's part of the fascist playbook. Use fear of "the other" to justify military action.  Use military invasion as both an "I am protecting you from the great evil" propaganda campaign and reap the nationalist sentiment as adherents take pride in conquering weaker opponents being "a strong nation worth of respect."

It is then used to paint political opposition as un-patriotic and anti-American if they do not support the imperialism, furthering the grip of one party rule.

It's uncanny how many right wingers on Reddit keep telling me I don't know anything about fascism because what MAGA is doing is not fascism, it is the liberal left who are the fascists.  It seems they are convinced that fascism means big central government and since Musk is firing people that proves MAGA is not fascist.

Ignorance is killing America.

oldbastardbob

We had a nuclear deal with Iran and Trump tore it up.  We'll see what he manages to come up with, if anything - personally, I'm skeptical.  That said, if the situation calls for it I'm also not necessarily opposed to some sort of limited military action.  That certainly wouldn't mean an actual invasion, but it wouldn't *need* to include an invasion.  Preventing the Iranians from getting nuclear weapons is worth it.  Honestly, it probably wouldn't even be hard to get the Israelis to take the lead on this one.

CTR555

We already had a fucking deal. 

Israel has been very open about what they want. They've wanted to invade Iran, and they expected a Trump presidency to aid them in the war. 

I don't know what Iran will do. They'll likely try to negotiate, but in a way that saves them face too, considering, again, we already had a deal that basically the entire world signed on to. 

Best case scenario, we get some shitty deal with Iran, probably something about getting oil from them completely needlessly because Trump and his supporters like shit like that. Worst case, Trump and Israel keeps escalating and Iran doesn't back down, or Trump keeps pushing for war even if they do back down. 

At which point, we'll have a pretty major conflict in the middle East.

neotericnewt

Invade Iran please, bring back the draft to build the most beautiful army every!  All before the end of this fiscal year!

Aman_Syndai

Occupying a foreign country is a great way to make the government more financially efficient……………

MrBiggleswerth2

Trump is a fucking loser who's only tool in his box is making threats.

st0nedeye

I disagree with this tactic and am anti invasion of Iran. 

Next question please.

CtrlAltDepart

If Iran goes nuclear the entire middle east goes nuclear. They can't be allowed nukes.

Far_Introduction3083

Nothing like a war to get people's mind off their retirement savings going up in smoke, renewed inflation, and higher unemployment.

Kooky-Language-6095

I disagree with us invading anyone who isn't literally on the verge of attacking us.

elljawa

once again trump creating a problem by misunderstanding why s prior solution was implemented, demonizing it, getting the base to freak out, dismantling it, then having to come up with a more direct, inefficient, and stupid solution.  then booking 10% of the claimed solution as a win. 

rise and repeat.

x3r0h0ur

An invasion of Iran would be extremely different from the invasion of Iraq, but it sure would be a major undertaking. While such an invasion would be much shorter than the Iraq War, it would probably result in significantly more American casualties. It’d also cost a lot of money.

AstroBullivant

From the president of no wars.... Jesus Christ

FeralWookie

I don't like trump. But I'm not against military intervention in Iran.

Odd-Principle8147

I despise Trump but eventually invading Iran has been the plan of military/cia/govt since pre 9/11.  We’ve been strategically positioning bases in and around their country for a reason. This is what we do.  

STS986

If Iran is going to get nuclear weapons we have to stop it full stop. No matter what that can't be allowed. If we think they are going to get them all of NATO needs to go in and shut it down.


There is no other option they simply can't have them. 

Jswazy

AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&amp;A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.

**For all participants:**

* [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate

* [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2)
            
**For Nonsupporters/Undecided:**

* No top level comments

* All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position

**For Trump Supporters:**

* [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&amp;subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&amp;message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled

Helpful links for more info:

[Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines)


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*

No, the Iran Nuclear “Deal” was (and still is) largely toothless, and provided very little benefit to anybody involved. Specifically, it was structured under the assumption that Iran would, eventually, get nuclear weapons, and was intended to slow down, rather than prevent, Iran’s nuclear armaments.

Any deal must be easily enforced, and be built upon the assumption that Iran can never gain a nuclear arsenal. When dealing with powerful anti-American power (such as China, Iran, Russia, and even “allies” like Saudi Arabia), such dealings must be transparent and hardline.

SavingYakimaValley

l mean to be honest the deal always seemed meaningless to me so l dont think it really helped or hurt the US.

Unless you want to do regeim change in lran (which to be clear brings its own string of problem and as such l DO NOT support commiting to this) l dont se how any international body can ever meaningfully ""inspect"" iranian nuclear facilities given the constant potential for unknown covert sites where nuclear weapons could be being stored.

Further more l dont really se how durring the cold war or at latest the collapse of the USSR the lranians didn't get nukes. Members of our own intelligence community have been saying lran is "weeks away from getting a bomb" since the 2000s so in my honest opinion they probably have one already and aren't going to give it up.

"Deal" or no deal l dont think there's a difference.

MattCrispMan117

When it comes to Russia, the nation with the largest amount of nuclear weapons, trumps detractors say that negotiating with Russia is pointless because Russia will never honor its word, yet with Iran they have all the faith in the world.

Basically you have two untrustworthy adversaries yet they want to charge full head into conflict with the one that definitely has a LOT of nuclear weapons but they want to drag their feet and keep talking to the untrustworthy adversary who we can still defeat.

Makes zero sense beyond "Oppose anything the orange man does".

itsmediodio

No, because it was a terrible deal on top of not even being a legal one. Obama committed treason to get the deal.

Trumpdrainstheswamp

Caption under the very bad image of Trump: A 3D-printed miniature model of Donald Trump and the U.S. and Iran flags are seen in this illustration taken January 15, 2025. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo 

This is not great journalism. I searched for the actual NBC phone interview and only found the reporter talking about what Trump said when he called her.

mrhymer

I think Trump should have renegotiated the deal instead of flat out withdrawing from it. Now it’s harder to get the Iran towards to the negotiation table because they have lost trust in us that we would keep our end of the deal.

jankdangus

I would think oct 7th would easily prove trump was always right. The irony is that just not a year before? Biden unfroze billions of dollars for iran. I wonder how much of that money was used for oct 7th.

Iran is evil as fk. Irans nuclear facilities should be bombed yesterday.

G0TouchGrass420

No. North Korea and Russia are more trustworthy than Iran.

Lucky-Hunter-Dude

The ultimate Art of the Deal to me, would be tying the two current, major geopolitical conflicts (Gaza &amp; Ukraine) along with some minor ones (Armenia/Azerbaijan) where Russia and America can hopefully negotiate a deal that they both can't refuse. It's what Trump's been building up to his entire adult life, since the 80s. Russia bailed on Syria so they can certainly help Trump negotiate with Iran too.

OpinionSuppository

Barack Obama’s own State Department said: “The JCPOA is not a treaty or an executive agreement, and is not a signed document. The JCPOA reflects political commitments between Iran, the P5+1, and the EU.” 

The Iran “deal” insofar as it was on paper was a mess. But it was also a legal fiction. It was not approved by [Congress](https://ballotpedia.org/Iran_nuclear_agreement:_Congressional_review), and the Obama State Department’s position was that there was nothing *to* approve through Congress. 

It was nothing more than a sad attempt for Obama to make some kind of foreign policy legacy for himself, as his last 6 years in office passed without any notable achievements.

DidiGreglorius

No.  The left continues to try to let Iran build a nuke.  Obama gave them a literal pallet of cash and Biden gave them billions.  I am thankful that Trump has done what's needed to prevent Iran from getting a nuke

EverySingleMinute

Please use [Good Faith](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) and the [Principle of Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) when commenting. We are currently under an indefinite moratorium on gender issues, and anti-semitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/).


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*

I'm convinced that Israel would 100% go to war to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon. I wouldn't support our involvement though, this is ultimately a regional dispute and it's not even as if Israel is the only one in the region who has serious problems with Iran.

[deleted]

A while back, Iran made a concerted attempt to attack Israel with everything it had, failed spectacularly, and significantly depleted their offensive stockpiles in the attempt.  Iran has weak offense.

Israel flew F-35s and more past Iran's air defenses, wrecked a bunch of them, and conducted significant air strikes with impunity on missile production facilities that replenish the stockpile.  Iran has weak defense.

What all this means is that we probably can - especially with stealth aircraft - conduct fairly heavy airstrikes in Iran without precipitating a war.  A war requires two functioning belligerents, and by all appearances they couldn't really do anything in response that they aren't already doing.

Personally, barring intelligence I'm presently unaware of that gainsays the plan, I have no issue raining bunker busters on Natanz for a few hours and seeing what happens.

Grunt08

I didn't vote for war with Iran. 2024 was the first time I voted for a president who won, is this how it works?

kapuchinski

Bibi had wanted large strikes against Iranian nuclear sites for well over a decade. He can't do it alone. You need GBU-57 30 thousand-pound bunker busters out of B2’s to hit those targets, nothing Israel can carry on a F35 can penetrate them. The October strikes were set up to take out radars and missiles to do the groundwork for a future strike. Whether we see strikes, I don't know, I think there is a decent chance, and I would support it. No one is invading Iran on the ground. That is not happening.

Fignons_missing_8sec

This is one of the few areas of intervention I would support. Iran with nuclear weapons is an absolute disaster, though I wouldn't want to invade. Bomb their bases and seals, use the seals, or do whatever to destroy their nuclear potential, but no permanent boots on the ground.

MadGobot

How about we Don’t go to war and leave the region?

Helopilot1776

1) No, Iran is a paper tiger and doesn't have nukes.

2) We don't need a war to hobble Iran. Oil exports account for 40% of their exports and oil represents 21% of their GDP. All we need to do is enforce sanctions on their oil exports and they will be broke.

StedeBonnet1

They nave nukes?

I think the Israelies are perfectly capable of dismantling Iran's nuclear programme.


As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. 

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

 For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
 
 We are actively looking for new moderators.  If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
 

***


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Let me guess = destroy original deal, then "fix" and enact the same deal. And call himself a hero!

origamipapier1

Damn tfg for dropping us out of the Paris Agreement!

TheExaspera

Don Taco needs to start the Deal of the Art whatevers.

ranchoparksteve

I remember when Ukraine make a deal around nuclear weapons. Iran would be fools to take whatever the US was offering.

I don't think we will ever see another country give up the ability, or not reach for the ability when they are close ever again.

CryptographerKlutzy7

Step 1: We give Iran some newcuhluhr bombs

Step 2: Welcome to the Fabulous Trump Tower Tehran

markroth69

84thPrblm

The US proposed a new nuclear deal to Iran to halt uranium enrichment and form a regional nuclear power consortium. This diplomatic move aims to prevent nuclear weapon development amid escalating tensions and international concerns highlighted by an IAEA report.

US-Iran Nuclear Deal Proposal 2025

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want