Vance Says Iran Must Cut Enrichment to End War | Drudge Retort

Thursday, October 08, 2026

Vance Says Iran Must Cut Enrichment to End War

US Vice President JD Vance said in an exclusive interview with Reuters that Iran must make a "meaningful" reduction in its nuclear enrichment capacity to satisfy US demands and end the countries' seven-month war, even as Washington was unsure how Tehran makes decisions in negotiations.

Posted by lamplighter at 05:33 PM | 16 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Obama's Iran Deal: "It's about very tough, hard-nosed negotiations which is what under President Obama, Secretary Clinton, Secretary Kerry, and a terrific team and thousands of people in our government, we were able to do in that deal ... to ensure that Iran would never have a nuclear weapon."

[image or embed]
-- PINO FOTUS (@pino-fotus.bsky.social) 2:43 PM Â· Mar 9, 2026

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article ...

... Vance, a longtime skeptic of US involvement in foreign wars, has taken a leading role in negotiating a settlement to the conflict and brokered a provisional peace agreement in June that quickly fell apart. The war has jolted global energy markets and become a political liability for US President Donald Trump and fellow Republicans ahead of November midterm elections.

Vance said on Monday after a campaign trip in Alaska that any agreement would require Iran to reduce its nuclear enrichment capacity, rather than offer assurances of future nuclear drawdowns.

"If you don't want a nuclear weapon, then why do you need 60% enriched fuel? And if you want to show commitment to not building a nuclear weapon, don't build highly enriched fuel. That's a very basic threshold issue," Vance said. ...

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-08 12:06 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#1 ... "If you don't want a nuclear weapon, then why do you need 60% enriched fuel? And if you want to show commitment to not building a nuclear weapon, don't build highly enriched fuel. That's a very basic threshold issue," Vance said. ...

I could not agree more.

But then I would also ask a follow-up question to VP Vance ...

Why did Pres Trump tear up the prior agreement with Iran (The JCPOA agreement was finalized in Vienna on 14 July 2015, between Iran and the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) -- China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States -- plus Federal Republic of Germany)[a] together with the European Union. Iran, the EU, the US and Russia and China -- en.wikipedia.org )?

That prior agreement limited Iran to a less than 6% or so enrichment level, and a massive inspection ability by the IAEA.

OK, so now, how is Pres Trump's current deal that he seems to be trying to put into place with Iran better or worse than the JCPOA?

#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-08 12:16 AM | Reply

Why the hell should they stop enriching after the US and Israel MURDERED THEIR ENTIRE LEADERSHIP INCLUDING THE AYATOLLAH KHAMENEI IN A SUCKER PUNCH ATTACK?

---- THAT.

If the US wants to play Hardball THAT'S EXACTLY what they Deserve.

#3 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-10-08 02:46 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If Iran had nukes, neither Israel nor the US would have launched the current war.

Is there a lesson here?

But what's the problem?

Trump said he destroyed the nuclear program nearly a year-and-a-half ago.

And then he said he destroyed it again and again and again a few more times more recently.

Love seeing a born leader in control of the situation, sirrrrrrrrr.

#4 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2026-10-08 06:03 AM | Reply

Iran should start using Super Enrichment. That'll show 'em.

#5 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-10-08 04:54 PM | Reply

Oh, and the Why is The Epstein Files

#6 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-10-08 04:55 PM | Reply

J. V. Pants doesn't have the cards.

#7 | Posted by cbob at 2026-10-08 09:31 PM | Reply

Vance doesn't have any professional negotiators either. Just him and an entourage of grifters lobbying off Trump's name for their own personal gain.

25 days to midterms and Trump is sweating blood.

#8 | Posted by Twinpac at 2026-10-09 04:41 AM | Reply

Bottom line, times two...
Both Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear weapons of mass destruction, and the US, which has thousands, cannot tell any other country not to have the same weapons. Israel introduced those nightmare weapons into the insane asylum called the Middle East, and then convinced Trump to go along with murders of 40 of the top Iranian leadership who were meeting at our insistence to craft another agreement. So now it appears that Iran is more unified than ever, with the hated clerics, against the West.
And now the Saudis want nukes...
Our foreign policy is designed by stupidity itself.

#9 | Posted by Hughmass at 2026-10-09 06:34 AM | Reply

It was honestly really stupid of Iran to not build nukes.

Would likely have prevented the attacks.

#10 | Posted by DarkVader at 2026-10-09 07:46 AM | Reply

I'm a fan of us avoiding foreign entanglements (obviously with nuances), but I'm not a fan of Iran.

If we did avoid foreign entanglements (including propping up a belligerent and genocidal Israel), Iran probably wouldn't be pursuing a nuke in the first place.

I can understand exactly why Iran wants a nuke, especially being so close to a belligerent and genocidal Israel.

#11 | Posted by horstngraben at 2026-10-09 10:35 AM | Reply

Israel is surrounded by Muslim countries. Israel's nuclear attack on Iran would be suicide. This proxy war was instigated by Israel appealing to Trump's ego. We all know the rest of the story. Venezuela rolled over. Iran didn't. Netanyahu has left stupid Trump holding the bag. He can't move forward and he can't move back. And his MAGA base has turned against him.

Cry me a river.

Trump might pull a Nixon and resign before he gets impeached. Then we'll be stuck with Peter Thiel's boy toy, J.D. Vance. Not good but at least manageable with a Democrat controlled Congress.

#12 | Posted by Twinpac at 2026-10-09 03:02 PM | Reply

Trump might pull a Nixon and resign before he gets impeached. Then we'll be stuck with Peter Thiel's boy toy, J.D. Vance. Not good but at least manageable with a Democrat controlled Congress.

#12 | Posted by Twinpac

Trump won't resign. If Trump resigns he would get called before Congress to testify about the Epstein files within a week. Republicans made it clear that former presidents are fair game (Bill Clinton was called to testify about Epstein in front of Congress).

Trump will stay in office as long as he possibly can, because him being a sitting President is the only thing keeping him from being compelled to testify about his relationship with Epstein.

#13 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2026-10-09 06:10 PM | Reply

Funny thaaaaaang... we never held Israel to the same standard.

#14 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2026-10-09 06:21 PM | Reply

If he resigns rather than becoming Lame Duck Donald, he might go to Israel where they love him and won't extradite him.

Or to Russia With Love. Dacha Don.

#15 | Posted by Corky at 2026-10-09 06:29 PM | Reply

GTBRITISHSKULL

That's always a possibility, of course, but I was assuming one of Vance's first acts would be a full blanket pardon for all Trump's criminal activity and let the chips fall where they may on civil cases.

Even if Trump didn't resign, he's still subject to subpoenas which I anticipate will be coming in at a rapid pace after the midterms.

I agree, however, that Trump's ego would never let him consider resigning. Trump is more a double-down person which usually gets him in deeper trouble.

He's not the brightest porchlight in town.

#16 | Posted by Twinpac at 2026-10-09 06:52 PM | Reply

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy