What a mess.

Seriously why would gov use pgp? They would be the last group i would expect to use something like PGP.

And i dont just mean the war, some estimates say iran has spent 2 trillion dollars trying to get nukes. If they spent that on conventional defense they wouldnt have been invaded.

Unlike Israel, they signed the treaty in question though.

More to the point though, just because something is technically "legal" doesn't mean other countries aren't allowed to be mad about it. Any sort of massing weapons or weapons of mass destruction development program is going to make other countries nervous, especially when those countries have a history of threatening mass destruction on their neighbours.

There is no cheap & fast military solution. There are certainly military solutions if you are ok with it taking a while or costing a lot of lives.

> Iran has capability to hit back

They have demonstrated they can make the surounding countries miserable. They arent capable of actually getting a military victory.

Which is why a deal is plausible. USA doesnt want to spend (in money and lives) what it would cost to open the strait. Iran demonstrates it can hit back enough to be annoying but not enough to force a victory. Sounds like neither side is exactly capable of "winning" (without us spending more than it wants), so a deal sounds plausible.

Its probably not even that. PR statements for public consumption rarely reflect bargaining positions behind closed doors.

They aren't illegal. The nuclear non proliferation treaty is an optional treaty. The nukes are only illegal if you sign it. Israel hasn't. Most countries sign the treaty because it comes with a lot of benefits, but you don't have to take the carrot.

Funding armed groups to essentially make war on your behalf does seem like a valid reason for the person being targeted to go to war.

As a general rule, if you shoot someone they will shoot back if capable.

Nonetheless international law isn't really worth the paper its written on. The bigger thing is there are a bunch of other countries dependent on the strait that might have something to say about it.

I think such an agreement is plausible. Trump really cares about oil prices, and i imagine Iranian leadership would really like to stop being bombed.

As far as the geopolitical consequences of all this, i think its still pretty unclear where the chips will fall, but whether a win or a loss for usa, i think the consequences of this war will be significant.

In fairness, that was from 1975. I don't particularly trust the NSA, but i dont think things they did half a century ago is a great way to extrapolate their current interests.

Perhaps these people just don't like you.

If you find a social interaction is entirely one sided, usually that is a sign you should take a moment to self reflect on what is going on.

And quite frankly noisey busy resturants are a subpar place to have that sort of experience. Most people who want to do that sort of thing go to a park or somewhere quiet with nature.