The reason is I often aren't able to respond to comments for some time and the unanswered comment can scare people who come to this post for help on something else
Also even when answered the comment may scare them because they see it first.
It works much better to put comments on other topics on a special post for them.
It is absolutely fine to digress and go off topic in conversations here - this is specifically about things you want help with that might scare people.
PLEASE DON’T TELL A SCARED PERSON THAT THE THING THEY ARE SCARED OF IS TRUE WITHOUT A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE OR IF YOU ARE A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE YOURSELF - AND RESPOND WITH CARE
This is not like a typical post on substack. It is specifically to help people who are very scared with voluntary fact checking. Please no politically motivated exaggerations here. And please be careful, be aware of the context.
We have a rule in the Facebook group and it is the same here.
If you are scared and need help it is absolutely fine to comment about anything to do with the topic of the post that scares you.
But if you are not scared or don’t want help with my voluntary fact checking please don’t comment with any scary material.
If you respond to scared people here please be careful with your sources. Don’t tell them that something they are scared of is true without excellent reliable sources, or if you are a reliable source yourself.
It also matters a lot exactly HOW you respond. E.g. if someone is in an area with a potential for earthquakes there’s a big difference between a reply that talks about the largest earthquake that’s possible there even when based on reliable sources, and says nothing about how to protect themselves and the same reply with a summary and link to measures to take to protect yourself in an earthquake.
I've heard that neither Iran and Israel had already informed of the ceasefire proposal, and they will keep continue fighting. Then all of the sudden there are reports that Iran had finally agreed to a ceasefire shortly afterwards. Which one is true? What the hell is even going on anymore?
On one hand i glad that there were finally a peaceful resolution of this conflict, but on the other hand Trump is known for his deception and can use this as a way to deceive them into another false sense of security like before.
I'm skeptic of his movements, but i only hope that they kept their word and a peaceful resolution can be met for both sides.
It came together very quickly. So quickly that many in the US administration and likely many in Iran and Israel didn't know about it at the time.
However the Prime Minister of Qatar confirmed that Iran knew about it and agreed to it.
Reuters says that Trump agreed the ceasefire with Netanyahu and Vance and his team with Iran. Israel agreed to it on condition that Iran did no more attacks. Iran agreed to do no more attacks. That was it then done.
QUOTE STARTS
President Donald Trump brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Iran through talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday while his team, including Vice President JD Vance, held talks with Tehran, a senior White House official said.
The official, providing details of the ceasefire on condition of anonymity, said Israel agreed to it so long as Iran does not launch fresh attacks. Iran signaled that no further attacks would take place, the official said.
But it seemed likely already because of the symbolic way that Iran attacked the Qatar base. I've edited the intro to say so. It's like a language. As soon as I read that Iran warned the US and Qatar in advance I thought "Ah Iran wants an immediate ceasefire". So then it was up to Israel and Trump got this deal across where Israel gets 12 hours to accomplish whatever else they want to do. Israel warned Tehran to evacuate large areas of the city so they can attack military targets in those areas and they have 12 hours of bombing. They can't do that much in 12 hours because they can't fly their very big bombs to Iran. And then it's over.
It is a very unusual ceasefire, probably the first ever where one side agrees to stop fighting before the other and it's announced in advance. But in these very unusual circumstances it makes perfect sense.
It's well understandable that people would think it odd. But it does seem genuine and the mainastream news are reporting it as genuine.
Looks like they’re start bombing each other again after one another claimed that they violated it, i presume that some commanders were too stubborn to accept the terms. Hope that they stop fighting soon.
More likely a commander got the timing wrong or was confused about the terms or was out of communication.
That is normal. Israel say Iran violated the ceasefire with a single missile strike. Iran deny it happened.
Very likely it was just some commander who didn't get the message to stop in time or got confused about when the ceasefire started.
Even with 6 hours before the ceasefire remember that Iran was under attack and there might well be commanders ordered to keep silent to avoid detection.
The Ayatollah has supreme command of the army. The foreign minister has no say in it if the Ayatollah said yes to the ceasefire.
What happened is that Iran's foreign minister has posted a confusing tweet where he says Iran will behave as though there is a ceasefire agreement although he claims that there isn't any agreement.
Since the PM of Qatar said they HAD agreed a ceasefire - I think it is just face saving words will see. In any case whether there is an agreement or not, if Iran behaves as if there is an agreement it amounts to the same thing doesn't it ...
BLOG: Conflict between Israel and Iran seems about to end with ceasefire
— announced by Trump
— Qatari Prime Minister confirms that Iran agreed to it
— just after its symbolic strike on a US base in Qatar
As of now, there is NO "agreement" on any ceasefire or cessation of military operations. However, provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4 am Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards.
The final decision on the cessation of our military operations will be made later.
In other words, he says there is no agreement YET but if Israel keeps to its side of the bargain Iran will on its side and at that point there WILL be a ceasefire.
I think he is just underlining that the ceasefire is conditional on both parties complying with it.
Which ceasefires always are.
The PM of Qatar said he arranged a ceasefire with Iran. So it is just face saving words by the Iranian foreign minister or he didn't get the message..
Let's hope that they're doing it for real this time. Any more fighting will only bring the region into further chaos, and the world can't afford another post-Iraq war situation right now.
Countless propaganda and fearmongering accounts on twitter were already pushing the narrative that the only way for the war to end is to dethrone/assassinate Khomeini and topple the Islamic regime, which in my opinion would only bring disaster in the same way that the middle east had suffered during thr years after Saddam was deposed since the US didn't bother to help them recuperate from post war relief effort. Given that they're couldn't care less of Iranian people, thry probably wouldn't bother to give a damn if they were to depose the Iranian islamic regime for real.
Absolutely agree. The Iranians need reform from within and a peaceful resolution and end to fighting is the way to reduce the power of the IRGC - in a country at war the military get more authority.
Also assassinating the Ayatollah wouldn't work. His successor would have the same power and he has appointed three people for his successor for the Iranian government to choose between if he dies or is killed.
QUOTE STARTS
Khamenei’s succession is a tense issue that would otherwise be decided in monthslong deliberations by Iran’s Assembly of Experts, according to Iranian officials cited by The Times. The clerical body that will now have to choose from the supreme leader’s three nominees should he die.
The officials said Khamenei, 86, knows the US or Israel could try to assassinate him, views such a death as martyrdom and wants a clean transition of power after his death, both to safeguard his legacy and to ensure Iran doesn’t get bogged down in messy battles of succession while at war.
The report did not elaborate on the identities of Khamenei’s three nominees for the next supreme leader. However, the officials said Khamenei’s son Mojtaba was not among them.
The Ayatollah is only their second leader since Iran formed.
He controls all three branches of government, legislators, judiciary (the special clerical court) and the executive, and control of the army.
Everything has to go through him. He is one of the few absolute monarchs left in the world. Appointed for life.
Iran can have regime change. But it would happen from within not imposed from outside.
As for the idea of the US taking over on the ground, Iran is still a very formidable country to invade. It is protected by vast deserts and high mountains, the highest mountain 5,609 meters high.
It's not high compared to say the Alps but it is still high and snow covered
They have caves, tunnels etc. It would be a country fighting for its survival and the Israelis with their 12 day campaign were only targeting ballistic missile launchers for their missiles able to fire at least 1000 km to reach Israel. Even then they didn't get rid of them all, the Iranians were still firing them until the last minute.
The Iranians were likely sending a message to Israel that they weren't defeated by those strikes.
They must have enormous stockpiles scattered throughout the country for defence of smaller missiles if there was any attempt at invading the country on the ground.
It would be a far more formidable adversary than Hamas and a huge country.
Iran is slightly bigger than France + Germany + Italy + United Kingdom + Iceland
PLEASE DON'T COMMENT ON THIS POST WITH POTENTIALLY SCARY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OTHER TOPIC:
INSTEAD PLEASE COMMENT ON THE SPECIAL SEPARATE POST I SET UP HERE: https://robertinventor.substack.com/p/post-to-comment-on-with-off-topic-940
The reason is I often aren't able to respond to comments for some time and the unanswered comment can scare people who come to this post for help on something else
Also even when answered the comment may scare them because they see it first.
It works much better to put comments on other topics on a special post for them.
It is absolutely fine to digress and go off topic in conversations here - this is specifically about things you want help with that might scare people.
PLEASE DON’T TELL A SCARED PERSON THAT THE THING THEY ARE SCARED OF IS TRUE WITHOUT A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE OR IF YOU ARE A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE YOURSELF - AND RESPOND WITH CARE
This is not like a typical post on substack. It is specifically to help people who are very scared with voluntary fact checking. Please no politically motivated exaggerations here. And please be careful, be aware of the context.
We have a rule in the Facebook group and it is the same here.
If you are scared and need help it is absolutely fine to comment about anything to do with the topic of the post that scares you.
But if you are not scared or don’t want help with my voluntary fact checking please don’t comment with any scary material.
If you respond to scared people here please be careful with your sources. Don’t tell them that something they are scared of is true without excellent reliable sources, or if you are a reliable source yourself.
It also matters a lot exactly HOW you respond. E.g. if someone is in an area with a potential for earthquakes there’s a big difference between a reply that talks about the largest earthquake that’s possible there even when based on reliable sources, and says nothing about how to protect themselves and the same reply with a summary and link to measures to take to protect yourself in an earthquake.
Thanks!
I've heard that neither Iran and Israel had already informed of the ceasefire proposal, and they will keep continue fighting. Then all of the sudden there are reports that Iran had finally agreed to a ceasefire shortly afterwards. Which one is true? What the hell is even going on anymore?
On one hand i glad that there were finally a peaceful resolution of this conflict, but on the other hand Trump is known for his deception and can use this as a way to deceive them into another false sense of security like before.
I'm skeptic of his movements, but i only hope that they kept their word and a peaceful resolution can be met for both sides.
It came together very quickly. So quickly that many in the US administration and likely many in Iran and Israel didn't know about it at the time.
However the Prime Minister of Qatar confirmed that Iran knew about it and agreed to it.
Reuters says that Trump agreed the ceasefire with Netanyahu and Vance and his team with Iran. Israel agreed to it on condition that Iran did no more attacks. Iran agreed to do no more attacks. That was it then done.
QUOTE STARTS
President Donald Trump brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Iran through talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday while his team, including Vice President JD Vance, held talks with Tehran, a senior White House official said.
The official, providing details of the ceasefire on condition of anonymity, said Israel agreed to it so long as Iran does not launch fresh attacks. Iran signaled that no further attacks would take place, the official said.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-brokered-ceasefire-agreement-contact-with-israel-iran-white-house-official-2025-06-23/
But it seemed likely already because of the symbolic way that Iran attacked the Qatar base. I've edited the intro to say so. It's like a language. As soon as I read that Iran warned the US and Qatar in advance I thought "Ah Iran wants an immediate ceasefire". So then it was up to Israel and Trump got this deal across where Israel gets 12 hours to accomplish whatever else they want to do. Israel warned Tehran to evacuate large areas of the city so they can attack military targets in those areas and they have 12 hours of bombing. They can't do that much in 12 hours because they can't fly their very big bombs to Iran. And then it's over.
It is a very unusual ceasefire, probably the first ever where one side agrees to stop fighting before the other and it's announced in advance. But in these very unusual circumstances it makes perfect sense.
It's well understandable that people would think it odd. But it does seem genuine and the mainastream news are reporting it as genuine.
Looks like they’re start bombing each other again after one another claimed that they violated it, i presume that some commanders were too stubborn to accept the terms. Hope that they stop fighting soon.
More likely a commander got the timing wrong or was confused about the terms or was out of communication.
That is normal. Israel say Iran violated the ceasefire with a single missile strike. Iran deny it happened.
Very likely it was just some commander who didn't get the message to stop in time or got confused about when the ceasefire started.
Even with 6 hours before the ceasefire remember that Iran was under attack and there might well be commanders ordered to keep silent to avoid detection.
looks like Iran's own foreign minister still not into it
https://x.com/araghchi/status/1937311435882922420
The Ayatollah has supreme command of the army. The foreign minister has no say in it if the Ayatollah said yes to the ceasefire.
What happened is that Iran's foreign minister has posted a confusing tweet where he says Iran will behave as though there is a ceasefire agreement although he claims that there isn't any agreement.
Since the PM of Qatar said they HAD agreed a ceasefire - I think it is just face saving words will see. In any case whether there is an agreement or not, if Iran behaves as if there is an agreement it amounts to the same thing doesn't it ...
BLOG: Conflict between Israel and Iran seems about to end with ceasefire
— announced by Trump
— Qatari Prime Minister confirms that Iran agreed to it
— just after its symbolic strike on a US base in Qatar
READ HERE:
https://robertinventor.substack.com/p/conflict-between-israel-and-iran
This is his confusing tweet:
QUOTE STARTS
As of now, there is NO "agreement" on any ceasefire or cessation of military operations. However, provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4 am Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards.
The final decision on the cessation of our military operations will be made later.
https://x.com/araghchi/status/1937311435882922420
In other words, he says there is no agreement YET but if Israel keeps to its side of the bargain Iran will on its side and at that point there WILL be a ceasefire.
I think he is just underlining that the ceasefire is conditional on both parties complying with it.
Which ceasefires always are.
The PM of Qatar said he arranged a ceasefire with Iran. So it is just face saving words by the Iranian foreign minister or he didn't get the message..
Let's hope that they're doing it for real this time. Any more fighting will only bring the region into further chaos, and the world can't afford another post-Iraq war situation right now.
Countless propaganda and fearmongering accounts on twitter were already pushing the narrative that the only way for the war to end is to dethrone/assassinate Khomeini and topple the Islamic regime, which in my opinion would only bring disaster in the same way that the middle east had suffered during thr years after Saddam was deposed since the US didn't bother to help them recuperate from post war relief effort. Given that they're couldn't care less of Iranian people, thry probably wouldn't bother to give a damn if they were to depose the Iranian islamic regime for real.
Absolutely agree. The Iranians need reform from within and a peaceful resolution and end to fighting is the way to reduce the power of the IRGC - in a country at war the military get more authority.
Also assassinating the Ayatollah wouldn't work. His successor would have the same power and he has appointed three people for his successor for the Iranian government to choose between if he dies or is killed.
QUOTE STARTS
Khamenei’s succession is a tense issue that would otherwise be decided in monthslong deliberations by Iran’s Assembly of Experts, according to Iranian officials cited by The Times. The clerical body that will now have to choose from the supreme leader’s three nominees should he die.
The officials said Khamenei, 86, knows the US or Israel could try to assassinate him, views such a death as martyrdom and wants a clean transition of power after his death, both to safeguard his legacy and to ensure Iran doesn’t get bogged down in messy battles of succession while at war.
The report did not elaborate on the identities of Khamenei’s three nominees for the next supreme leader. However, the officials said Khamenei’s son Mojtaba was not among them.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/khamenei-said-to-pick-three-potential-successors-as-he-hides-in-bunker/
The Ayatollah is only their second leader since Iran formed.
He controls all three branches of government, legislators, judiciary (the special clerical court) and the executive, and control of the army.
Everything has to go through him. He is one of the few absolute monarchs left in the world. Appointed for life.
Iran can have regime change. But it would happen from within not imposed from outside.
As for the idea of the US taking over on the ground, Iran is still a very formidable country to invade. It is protected by vast deserts and high mountains, the highest mountain 5,609 meters high.
It's not high compared to say the Alps but it is still high and snow covered
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Damavand#:~:text=Mount%20Damavand%20(Persian%3A%20%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%86%D8%AF%20%5B,5%2C609%20metres%20(18%2C402%20ft).
They have caves, tunnels etc. It would be a country fighting for its survival and the Israelis with their 12 day campaign were only targeting ballistic missile launchers for their missiles able to fire at least 1000 km to reach Israel. Even then they didn't get rid of them all, the Iranians were still firing them until the last minute.
The Iranians were likely sending a message to Israel that they weren't defeated by those strikes.
They must have enormous stockpiles scattered throughout the country for defence of smaller missiles if there was any attempt at invading the country on the ground.
It would be a far more formidable adversary than Hamas and a huge country.
Iran is slightly bigger than France + Germany + Italy + United Kingdom + Iceland
Iran 1,648,195
Iraq is slightly larger than Germany
https://thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTI3MzQ1NjI.MTI0MzI5Mjg*MjI2NzkzMzE(MjE5NzYyMDY~!FR*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)MTA~!GB*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)MTE~!DE*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)MTI~!IT*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)MA~!IR*MjYzODAzNg.MTIyNDI5NDU)MQ~!IS*MA.MTgwMDAwMDA)Mg~!IQ*MjI5Ng.MjU0ODY2OTE)Mw
France 640,427
Germany 357,581
Italy 302,068
United Kingdom 244,376
Iceland 103,000
1,648,195 - (640,427 + 357,581 + 302,068 + 244,376 + 103,000)
And it is better equipped than Iraq was.
US or Israel or anyone with modern fighter jets would take it over in a few hours. But it would be far harder to invade on the ground.
4,524 times larger than Gaza Strip.
https://mapfight.xyz/map/gaza/#ir
It would be a second Vietnam war and one with almost nobody sympathetic to the West.
Many there want regime change - but not conquest by the West.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_area
So no that won't happen.