Meanwhile, Iran war

Given pallets of $Billions were never justified. October 7th is one of the example of it.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, I do not think that there should have been a cash release as it was done. If they were to release frozen funds, it should have been done in a way that we could control how it was being spent.

If DJT is going to release frozen funds as part of a deal now, it also should have controls on how it can be spent.

Why were their assets frozen in the first place?

  • The Iranian Hostage situation

What caused the Iranian Hostage situation?

  • The United States overthrew their government for trying to completely nationalize their oil industry, and Iran took it back

What gives the US the right to determine how Iran spends their frozen assets? It’s their assets.

1 Like

What gave the Iranian’s the right to take Americans hostage?

1 Like

What gives us the right to overthrow another’s country’s government?

We can both play the ethics game all day - I’m merely stating the facts.

Ask Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Imperial Japan the same questions.

We’ve been overthrowing governments all the way back to the early 1800s.

See here:

Ever heard the USMC song “From the Halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli.”

The ending refers to the first ever foreign “regime change” attempt in US history.

1 Like

Nazi Germany and Imperialist Japan is equal to Iran wanting to have a state-owned oil industry?

Don’t forget. We were once allies with Iran.

→ Until they wanted to nationalize their oil industry.

Again, I’ve met Iranian-Americans who describe the Mossadegh overthrow as a “popular uprising” with the CIA role as minimal.

Just sayin’!

Anyway, US led regime change overseas has a history going all the way back to 1805.

What makes you think he would do that?
There won’t be a deal without this dictatorship giving up their nuclear “powder” and renouncing on their nuclear ambition and ballistic missile programs.

Don’t use the Irak and Afghan war. That is the worst example you can bring up.
If we can supply Iranians withvarms that will be the best way tobhelp them to overthrow this dictatorship. Let them get these p.o.s’s.

1 Like

To be clear, I was meaning to communicate what I would do, not what I expect to actually happen, and certainly not what this admin will do.

Couple of anecdotes vs piles of documented evidence. I know which one I’m taking every day of the week. And it ain’t vibes

3 Likes

I’m sure this is going to play well during election season: $300 billion, plus the dollar amount that we spent in military actions, and 13 American lives.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/emerging-us-iran-mou-said-to-reference-possible-300b-postwar-investment-fund-to-aid-tehrans-reconstruction/

No one doubts that the CIA was involved.

BUT
OTOH
they wouldn’t have had any success were it not for the fact that there were LOTS of Iranians happy to help overthrow him.

Had he been more popular, he might not have had enough opposition to topple him.

Just sayin’!

From the article


The two sources put the fund at $300 billion, though other officials involved in mediation would not confirm the amount, according to the report.

Two diplomats briefed on the latest draft called it “an international ‘investment fund,’ which the United States would help facilitate in the event of a final deal,”

So another slush fund for our paragon of ethics and good behavior

1 Like
  1. why do you keep saying “Irak?”

It’s IRAQ with a Q on the end. In Arabic and Persian script, the last letter of that country’s name is written with the letter “qaaf,” which is a hard “Q” sound like in “Quebec.” NOT the letter “kaaf” which is a K sound. GET IT RIGHT!!! Trust me on this as a guy that spent nine months in language school learning that script.

I believe you’ve been corrected on this before. It’s sorta like your use of UTA to refer to UT-Austin; that’s the abbrevation for UT-ARLINGTON. Why do you keep making these same mistakes? If you mean UT-Austin, write “UT,” NOT “UTA” which refers to something else.

  1. I didn’t even bring up Iraq and Afghanistan, so I’m not sure why you did. But yes, in the case of Afghanistan, the Taliban needed to be overthrown for harboring OBL after 9/11. Too bad we couldn’t keep them out of power and ultimately lost the war. As for Iraq, debatable, but given that Iraq today is the most functioning democracy in the Arab world, I have a hard time second guessing the move.

  2. We’ve been changing regimes abroad since 1805. See the Tripoli example that I provided. Often we have been quite successful with it.

  3. We will fight to overthrow any regime when it is in our national interests to do so.

  4. As for HOW we overthrow them, there are many different instruments of national power (diplomatic, informational, military, economic). Which techniques are appropriate should be evaluated on a case by case basis. No two cases are alike.

I said “if he does it”. I didn’t say I think he would, I also didn’t say I think he won’t.

However, it is a possibility that something like that would be part of any deal. Currently there’s reports of a potential $300B investment fund for rebuilding being on the table. Though until an actual deal is on paper & signed, we don’t know for sure what will be in it. That is assuming we have some sort of “permanent” deal at all and not just a MOU working towards further negotiations.

As you’ve stated, none of us know for sure what will or won’t be in the deal or on the table. So none of us can truly rule anything out.

:thinking: Says who?

1 Like

Its just like WW2, its just like 1805

Again, regime change is as American as apple pie.

LONG history.