Tangle - What's next in Iran?

Episode Date: May 12, 2026

Over the past week, the United States and Iran have exchanged communications over plans to end the war between the countries, though talks have yet to produce a breakthrough. On Monday, President Donald Trump said the pause in fighting is on “life support,” calling Iran’s most recent response to a U.S. peace proposal unacceptable. Separately, the Strait of Hormuz remains mostly closed to commercial traffic, with the U.S. and Iran exchanging fire in the waterway last week. Help us reach 100,000.The Tangle Instagram has grown into a valuable source for breaking news and political analysis that tens of thousands of followers rely on. Soon, that number will tip into six figures (shoutout Russell Nystrom, our social media editor!). Unlike many other news organizations or influencers, we don’t buy followers. We grow the channel organically — and we’re currently sitting at approximately 91,000 followers, with an internal goal of reaching 100,000 by the start of summer. So… if you haven’t already — and are looking for a dependable breaking-news source to complement the newsletter’s in-depth analysis — please consider giving us a follow!Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠ and today’s “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: How do you think negotiations between the U.S. and Iran are going? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was written by: Isaac Saul and audio edited and mixed by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Morning, good afternoon and good evening and welcome to the Tangle podcast, a place we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host today, Isaac Saul. I'm going to be joined by senior editor Will Kback on the pod, and we're going to be covering the latest in Iran. That's today's main story.

It is Tuesday, May 12th. a beautiful day here in New Jersey. Before we jump in to today's main topic, a quick plug, our Tangle Instagram channel is about 10,000 followers. It is grown into this really awesome, valuable source for breaking news and political analysis. And our social media editor, Russell Nystrom, has put so much work into it. And we're really close. We're at 91,000 followers. He's been chasing this 100,000 follower benchmark for a long time. We've been, don't buy followers, we don't pay for followers, we've done this all organically through growing the Tangle community. So if you're a social media user, if you're on Instagram, if you're

looking for a way to improve your news consumption when you open your social media apps, I believe Tangle is doing some good stuff there. And I encourage you to go check it out. It's a totally different platform than our newsletter or podcast. We do a lot of breaking news, video clips, clips from the show that are video, all sorts of fun stuff. It is worth the follow. And shout out to Russell, who's been driving that. All right, with that, I'm going to hand it over to Will for today's main topic, and I'll be back for my take. Thanks, Isaac.

All right, here are today's quick hits. Number one, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the Consumer Price Index rose 0.6% on a monthly basis and 3.8% from the year prior. The annual rate increase is the highest since May 2023, with energy prices as a significant driver. Number two, the Supreme Court overturned a lower court order that had blocked Alabama from using a congressional map adopted in 2023 because it violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The court did not explain its ruling, which follows an April 29th decision that narrowed the application of Section 2. The court's three Democrat-appointed justices dissented. Number three, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito extended the administrative stay on a federal appeals court's ruling, barring mail-order distribution of Mitha Preston, a drug used in medication abortions. The pause will now remain in place until May 14th. Number four, 18 Americans who were on board a cruise ship that experienced a hauntavirus outbreak arrived back in the United States, and most were taken to a facility in Nebraska for observation and treatment.

Two other passengers were taken to a facility in Atlanta, Georgia. where one is receiving care in a biocontainment unit for mild symptoms. And finally, number five, the family of a man killed in a shooting at Florida State University in 2025 sued OpenAI, alleging that the company's artificial intelligence chatbot, chat GPT, provided, quote, input and information to the suspected shooter and acted as a co-conspirator. Open AI denied the charges. Peace talks with Iran appear to be at an impact. This afternoon, President Trump slammed Iran's response to the latest U.S. ceasefire proposal and drone attacks continuing across the Gulf region.

President Trump posted on his social media site Sunday about Iran's response to the U.S. peace deal, saying he doesn't like it and it's totally unacceptable, but not explaining why. Over the past week, the United States and Iran have exchanged communications over plans to end the war between the countries, though talks have yet to produce a breakthrough. On Monday, President Donald Trump said the pause in fighting is on, quote, life support, calling Iran's most recent response to a US peace proposal unacceptable. Separally, the Strait of Hormuzz remains mostly closed to commercial traffic, with the U.S. and Iran exchanging fire in the waterway last week. In April, President Trump announced a two-week ceasefire, which both sides say is still an effect today. During that time, however, attacks have continued, primarily concentrated in the strait,

where the U.S. Navy has imposed a blockade against Iranian ports. Furthermore, on Sunday, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar reported drone attacks believed to be from Iran. Last week, the United States and Iran reportedly discussed a one-page plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and continue the ceasefire for at least 30 days. However, the future of Iran's nuclear program remains a sticking point. Iranian officials claim the U.S. wants the country to give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, as well as closing three nuclear facilities and suspending enrichment for 20 years.

The official said Iran has countered with a proposal to dilute some of the uranium, transfer the rest to a third country, and suspend enrichment for 10 to 15 years. Iran formally responded to the one-page plan on Sunday. The text of that communication has not been made public, but Iranian state media reported that the country demanded an end to the U.S. blockade of the Persian Gulf, an end to U.S. sanctions, and an end to the fighting. President Trump responded critically, posting on truth's social, quote, I have just read the response from Iran's so-called representatives.

I don't like it, totally unacceptable. On Monday, he again criticized the Iranian response as, quote, a piece of garbage. As the discussions have stalled, gas prices have risen, with a national average for a regular gallon of gas, reaching $4.50 on Monday, an increase of over 50% since the war began. President Trump told CBS news that he supports suspending the federal gas tax, quote, for a period of time to lessen the cost burden on Americans. Quote, we're going to take off the gas tax for a period of time, and when gas goes down, we'll let it phase back in, Trump said on Monday. Pausing the tax would likely require an act of Congress.

Today we'll share views from the right, left, and Middle East writers on the latest in the conflict, followed by executive editor Isaac Saul's take. We'll be right back after this quick break. Here's what the right is saying. The right is mixed on the war's trajectory, with some urging Trump to wind down operations. Others say it's time for Congress to authorize the war. In American greatness, Fred Fleets argued, Trump should end the Iran war now with an ultimatum.

President Trump delivered on his promise of a short, decisive action without U.S. boots on the ground rather than another endless quagmire. Now is the time to, to declare victory, exit on our terms, and lock in the gains. U.S. and Iranian representatives are reportedly trying to negotiate a one-page memorandum aimed at ending hostilities and launching yet another round of negotiations. I'm deeply skeptical that this is the right approach.

I believe the best way forward is not another round of negotiations with a shattered regime, but a clear and uncompromising American ultimatum. In his ultimatum, President Trump should declare that Iran must immediately cease all threats to the Strait of Hormuz and guarantee safe passage for commercial shipping. In exchange, the U.S. will halt military operations against Iran. Any failure by Iran to comply will result in the immediate resumption of the war. This ultimatum must also state unequivocally that the United States will never tolerate Iran restarting its nuclear weapons program, nor will America ever allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. Any attempt to do so will be met with

overwhelming military force. In National Review, Andrew C. McCarthy said Congress should authorize military force against Iran. It's past time for Congress to assert its constitutional power and authorized force, at least to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. No matter what one thinks of how we got here, Iran cannot be allowed to annex a vital global trade group whose closure is hurting Americans. This should not be hard for the Republican majority, which wants to be seen as backing the president and being tough on Iran. Democrats should support it because it is essential to national security and economic stability. The partisan political temptation, of course, is to let Trump keep flailing away with inconsistent, incoherent justifications for an unpopular war. Yet, no matter how we got

to this point, the nation cannot afford to allow Iran an implacable American enemy to control a vital international waterway as if it were sovereign Iranian territory. The public has already made up its mind about the president's performance, but it might reward congressional statesmanship in dealing with what, undeniably, is a security challenge from a committed American enemy. Here's what the left is saying. The left views the war as a disaster, arguing the U.S. is achieving none of its objectives. Some worry about how Trump will respond as the conflict continues to spiral. In the American prospect, David Dayn wrote, there is no end to the war with Iran.

Every day we wake up to talk of a peace deal, and every day an oil trader makes money off it. There's so much peace breaking out that the U.S. initiated military strikes on Thursday aimed at Iran's ports, around a fire that was somehow deemed too low level to break the ceasefire. But sure, we'll get to peace someday soon. The Iranian leadership is biting its time before making its next move, and why wouldn't they?

It's become public that President's president's. Trump desperately wants a deal completed before his summit in China on May 14th and 15th. Every day closer to that gives the Iranians more leverage to set terms. The U.S. and Israel say they wanted to eradicate Iran's nuclear program and change its regime. The regime is now composed of more hardliners than before, and Iran's nuclear capability has not budged since last summer. Now the two sides are negotiating the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before the conflict and the terms of Iran's nuclear program, which they were negotiating before the conflict.

All this war has done is killed thousands of people, opened a new front for Israel and Lebanon, and damaged most U.S. military sites and most energy production facilities in the region. In The Guardian, Robert Rish suggested Trump's looming defeat in Iran is a personal and political crisis. Iran is unlikely to give in. It can withstand the economic pressure of a blockade better than Donald Trump can withstand the political pressure that comes with rising gas prices, soon to be followed by rising food prices. Trump's ego cannot accept a humiliating loss, as we saw after the 2020 election. His need to bully, dominate, and gain submission is so hardwired inside his insecure head that the defeats he's now facing to Iran and to Democrats are already setting off explosions.

Regardless of what happens in Iran, he'll claim victory. That will be difficult to do convincing, increasingly, when gas prices remain more than $4 a gallon. But he'll undoubtedly try. What if Democrats win control of one or both chambers of Congress in the midterms, and he claims they lost or cheated? The nation barely survived the last time Trump's fragile ego faced a major loss. We'll also have to cope with Trump as a lame duck president who can no longer dominate and gain submission as he did before.

Will he try to remain president beyond the second term to avoid this? Now here's what Middle East writers are. saying. Some writers in the Middle East suggest Iran's internal challenges loom large as the war persists. Others say the U.S. must consult Gulf allies to achieve a lasting peace deal. In Wynette, Raz Zimitt said, the war may end, but Iran's internal crisis is just beginning. Whether the talks between Iran and the United States lead to a permanent ceasefire and the end of the war, or collapse into renewed fighting, it's clear that the Islamic Republic will not emerge from the United States, the current conflict unchanged. The regime faces a deep and ongoing legitimacy crisis, stemming from

a widening gap between the authorities and the public, particularly younger generations, alongside a worsening economic crisis and growing shortages of water and electricity. For now, the leadership in Tehran is focused primarily on survival, preparing for the possibility of renewed war and efforts to bring the conflict to a definitive end. Once the war ends, however, it will have to direct most of its efforts toward rebuilding the country. Even if regime change does not currently appear likely, the end of the war would force Iran's new leadership to confront the realities of daily life, and it remains doubtful whether it has solutions to the country's deepening crises.

In Arab news, Osama al-Sharif argued, only a win-win formula can break U.S. Iran gridlock. Trump has rejected all Iranian overtures, dismissing them as unacceptable. While the full details remain undisclosed, it is understood that Tehran is using the Strait of Hormuzkard as a bargaining chip for a comprehensive settlement. Washington's conditions, by contrast, remain as maximalist as they were on the eve of the war. These are not American conditions alone. They are, in substance, Benjamin Netanyahu's conditions.

The Israeli prime minister is the only foreign leader who has been treated as a full and equal partner in this war. And it is here that Washington is committing a grave strategic error. America's Gulf allies were neither consulted nor informed before the war on Iran was launched. Yet they are the ones who have absorbed multi-billion dollar losses to their energy and civilian infrastructure. Washington would do well to consult its golf partners before deciding its next move. Short of a return to full-scale military confrontation, the two sides must come to terms with a simple reality. Only a formula in which both sides can claim a measure of victory will end the crisis. All right, now I'm going to pass it back over to Isaac for his take, and then I'll be back to do the

reader question and the rest of the edition. Isaac, over to you. All right, that is it for with the left and the right, and some writers from the Middle East are saying, which brings us to my take. I'm going to do a little timeline here, guys. On April 1st, President Trump gave a national address announcing that the war in Iran was nearing completion shortly, and we were, quote, on track to complete our military objectives. On April 3rd, Iran shot down two U.S. military aircraft setting off a search and rescue operation for the pilots on board. On April 5th, Trump threatened the crazy bastards in Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz before his deadline.

April 7th, Trump posted on truth social that a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back. That same evening, he announced a ceasefire with Iran, saying he'd received the 10-point plan he believed to be workable towards a peace agreement. April 8th, the president said it was a big day for world peace and that the U.S. Navy would safeguard traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Later that day, Trump threatened that U.S. military forces would stay in place around Iran until the two sides reached a real agreement. April 12th, Trump said most points were agreed to for a potential deal but added that any Iranian who fires at the U.S. will be blown to hell and then announced a naval blockade. April 17th, an Iranian official declared the Strait of Hormuz completely open

for the remaining period of the ceasefire, and Trump said the strait was completely open and ready for business, but said the U.S. blockade would remain. Less than 24 hours later, Iran resumed its blockade of the waterway and seized two commercial vessels. April 19th, the U.S. attacked in Iranian cargo ship that tried to avoid its blockade of the Iranian coast. April 21st, Trump announced an extension of the ceasefire while keeping the blockade in place. April 22nd, Trump gave Iran three or five days to offer a peace deal before resuming attacks. April 25th, Trump canceled a planned envoy to Islamabad. May 1st, Trump, in a letter to Congress, claimed hostilities with Iran had terminated.

On the same day, Trump rejected Iran's latest proposal to end the war. May 3rd, the administration announced Project Freedom to force the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. May 5th, Trump announced Project Freedom will be paused for a very short period of time. May 6th, Trump said Iran wanted to make a deal badly, citing very good talks over the past 24 hours. He also called Iran difficult to negotiate with, but said that we were doing unbelievably well in the, quote, unquote, skirmish. May 7, Iran attacked three U.S. destroyers transiting the strait. The president said they trifled with us and we blew them away. He also claimed the ceasefire was still in effect.

May 10th, Trump announced on Truth Social that he had received Iran's counterproposal to end the war, but called it totally unacceptable. May 11th, five days after saying very good talks were happening, Trump said the ceasefire was the weakest right now after reading that piece of garbage they sent us, end quote. When you zoom out and look at even just those last six weeks together, a few things become pretty obvious. First, the messaging and characterization of the war changes so much day-to-day that it isn't valuable to follow every little update, tea leaf reading, and truth social posts about the war. The president is not a reliable narrator.

Iranian representatives are even less reliable narrators and increasingly prone to trolling. The leaks about some breakthrough in negotiations never seem to precede actual breakthroughs. The conflict has reportedly neared its conclusion and resumed, or if the Strait of Hormuz has been open for transit and then closed at least a half dozen times. Reality is determined by on-the-ground reports of strikes, traffic in the strait, and the state of regional stability, not the president's social media posts. Second, we don't have a genuine negotiating partner. Warring factions inside the Iranian government have made talks incredibly complicated and fraught, which is one of the downsides of killing several of the people you were negotiating with as the U.S. and Israel have done throughout the

conflict. Trump's decisions demonstrate this. In late April, he extended peace talks to give Iran time to resolve its infighting and unify behind a counterproposal. That has not seemed to happen. And it might even seem like we are talking to one group about an agreement while another group actively undermines that progress because we are. Third and finally, the United States might be winning a conventional military battle, but it is losing the geopolitical war. Killing Iran's leaders and destroying much of their military infrastructure does not by itself constitute a victory. I was struck by Robert Kagan's piece in the Atlantic this week titled Checkmate in Iran, in which he essentially argues that the United States has suffered a devastating loss

whose consequences will not be easily undone. This was a gobsmacking message considering the messenger. Kagan is the neocon of neocons, one of the most influential proponents of U.S. interventionism in American history. To read Robert Kagan, declare the loss of the war and the arrival of a new post-American dominance in the Gulf was a genuine stop-me-in-my-and-my-track's moment. Kagan defined losing as Iran maintaining control of the Strait of Ormuz, which it can now use to threaten global energy flows anytime its interests are challenged and assert leverage over Israel, Gulf adversaries, and the United States. Iran could, for example, respond to threats against its proxies like Hezbollah by simply shutting down the strait,

thus exerting new pressure on the U.S. and Israel to leave Iran's allies alone. Under these conditions, Kagan argues, Iran will become a more important global power as more nations need to appease its leadership to keep their own access to fuel. All of this seems pretty conceivable, if not totally straightforward and obvious to me. Trump is already trying to convince the American public that the war is over and we've moved on to Project Freedom, which is a mission to undo a problem we didn't have before the war started. But is Operation Epic Fury over? Did we do it? If we're being generous in accepting the idea that the administration's goals have always been clear, I think those objectives are, obliterate Iran's

ballistic missile arsenal and production capability, annihilate its Navy, sever its support for terrorist proxies, and ensure Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon. Rubio also once added destroying their Air Force. All four of these goals are incomplete, though we've made significant progress on destroying Iran's Navy and degrading its ballistic missile arsenal. Now we moved on to a new unrelated goal, reopening the strait in Project Freedom, solving a problem we didn't have before Epic Fury. I continue to worry about the prospect of an ambient war that goes on in the background, costing us billions of dollars shedding American and Iranian blood alike. and disrupting the United States economy for months or years on end.

But what do we do next? I truly don't know. If the war is over, then I don't know exactly what we're doing right now. And if the war isn't over, then I don't know exactly what will end it. I also don't know how we get out of Iran without us admitting defeat or becoming a quagmire. All I know is I won't be relying on this administration, the Iranians or anonymous leaks, to figure it out. We'll be right back after this quick break.

All right, that is it for my take. I'm going to pass it back to Will Kayback for your questions answered and the rest of the pod. Hope you guys enjoy and see you tomorrow. Have a good one. Peace. Thanks, Isaac. All right, here is today's listener question and it comes from Laura in Gurney, Illinois. Laura asks, with all these voting-related cases before the Supreme Court,

I keep wondering why we can't just use online voting. in a world where we can use ID verification and photos on our phone to verify identity, use encrypted pass keys and sign-ins to access bank accounts and other financially sensitive information, why can't every American vote online? What am I missing? Can you explain why we aren't moving toward paperless voting practices? Here's our response. The answer, in a nutshell, is security.

Voting with paper ballots has fewer vulnerabilities than Internet return ballots and comes with an easy-to-follow paper trail that makes auditing possible. Unlike most other online activities, voting requires your identity to be verified and your ballot to be kept secret. Additionally, the tolerance for error is zero. Our current system does pretty well at preventing voter fraud and errors. That's due in large part to the paper ballot system that has built-in redundancies in every step from the time the ballot is assigned to the voter to the time that it is counted.

To cite just one example, only the same. only one ballot can be printed per person. Any additional ballots printed, if you made a mistake before casting it and won a new one, must be signed off on by election officials and documented, and the original ballot must be marked as invalid so that it cannot be counted. Of course, it's not a perfect system, but it's at least traceable. Replicating the same kind of audit trail online is difficult, if not impossible, because of the layers of security that would need to be implemented to keep the ballot secret. The internet also introduced. vulnerabilities that are unique to the digital environment, like the susceptibility to cyber attacks.

The American Association of the Advancement of Science declared that, quote, internet voting is not a secure solution in any form, nor will it be in the foreseeable future, end quote. Additionally, in 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology found that, quote, electronic ballot return, the digital return of a voted ballot by the voter, creates significant security risks to the confidentiality of the ballot and voter data, integrity of the voted ballot, and availability of the system. We view electronic ballot return as high risk, end quote. With all this said, 34 states and U.S. territories currently allow internet voting in limited specific instances, usually for military personnel and less often for people living with

disabilities. That does not mean it's a secure best practice. In the end, there must be a balance between voting access and security. And as of now, paper ballots, whether cast in person or by mail, are our best option. Finally, here's today's Have a Nice Day story. Four decades after the nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, much of the land surrounding the site remains unsafe for human habitation. The lack of human presence in this, quote, exclusion zone has caused it to explode with other residents. Wolves, moose, deer, and lynx are just some of the species whose populations have rebounded. Wild Pravalski's horses, introduced in 1998, are also adapting to the area,

which has not been associated with widespread animal die-offs despite persistent radiation. Quote, for those of us in conservation and ecology, it's kind of a wonder, the zone's lead nature scientists said. This land was once heavily used, agriculture cities, infrastructure. But nature has effectively performed a factory reset. The Associated Press has the story and we'll drop a link to it in today's show notes. All right, that's it for today's edition. Thanks for listening as always and we'll be back with you tomorrow. Until then, peace. Our executive editor and founder is me, Isaac Saul, and our executive producer is John Wall. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by

managing editor Ari Weitzman with senior editor Will Kayback and associate editors Audrey Moorhead, Lindsay Canuth, and Bailey Saul. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website at retangle.com.