They were never interested in negotiating in the first place. That's why they set ridiculous terms like limiting the ballistic missile program. It's all a show to make it seem like they tried to be diplomatic. Only question is how Iran's response is going to look like this time.
I don't know, it doesn't seem like hyperbole to me, actually quite the opposite. Assuming a conservative rate of 100 missiles per month, that would be 1200 a year. Just 20 years would be 24,000. And unless they can expire, they'd likely be storing them safely underground. Keep in mind that we also don't know if they have underground missile factories and how much they can produce and what they can produce, though I strongly doubt they don't have at least 5 underground factories spread throughout the country. Moreover, this number is likely for just their basic missiles.
Iran has known for many decades that Shitrael wants to destroy it. It would be strategically unwise to not prepare for that and even more unwise to not over-prepare, especially when factoring in the west powers that give their rabid project unlimited support and the fact that they may directly attack Iran too, as we've seen so far. Additionally, they would have factored in how many missiles and/or drones it takes to pierce air defenses and actually land a successful hit. Something like 5-10% success rate would not be unreasonable, even 1% wouldn't. However, that's assuming air defenses cannot be disabled. But as we've seen, they've successfully eliminated a lot of them, hence the smaller waves in the past few days and thus the conservation of more missiles.
There are all kinds of scenarios that could play out. Having a massive arsenal of missiles greatly increases the number of possible strategies.
Also, as Iran does not have nukes, that leaves them without an equivalent Samson option. Though, in Iran's case it would likely be to ensure their enemies are also eliminated should they face the possibility of defeat. This in contrast to the real terrorists, who want to indiscriminately destroy the entire world should their power be threatened, including all living things on this planet.
It is much better to vastly overestimate your enemy rather than underestimate them. The former is sagacity while the latter is hubris.
I doubt this very much. Not that they won't claim to concede, but that they will never keep their word. They'll likely only ceasefire until they can either resupply or come up with a different strategy. Then they'll attack again.
They have proven to the world that they absolutely cannot be trusted. Their word means nothing.