The War situation between Iran and Israel

The fact is that Iran played the fool with the USA about prevention of the country to develop nuclear arms and the treaty theya ctually siged was garbage. The West and Obama got misled by the Ayatollah regime - all they diod they moce enrichment programs into army camps which were not inspected by internaional observes. So Iran kept n its program to development f nuclear bombs.

The Trump dministration in 2018 put a freeze on trade with Iran by freezing the olars used and got by Iran for oil exports and other trade by Iranians, Bien tried o get the Iranians by unfreezing the dollars held frozen by the banking sectorr and on numerous occassions unfroze hudreds of billions in funds. So Iran got plenmty of money to expedite its arms manuafactutring and funding money fior Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthi's - but more importantly for nuclear research and development.

The Iranians put out an order for Trump to be asassinate - but Trump followed the diplomatic way throuh negotiations, He told the Iranian delega tion bluntly that there is no problem for using enrich ed Uranium to generate electricity - and in return the U SA will lift sanctions on Iranian exports. Teyw ere obviously tried to do the obvious - to enhance he development of nuclear arms while negotitions are bei g delayed,

The conry feain g most Iran having nulcear arms is Israel - so after warning Trump onm what they are going to do - the Israelish attacked Iran using rockets as well as drones and bombing of Iranian nucear researh faciliies and the Iranian leadership. The targets were also key elements of the Ayatollah regime.

In return the Iranians aimed thundreds of rocket attacks on Isreael and the SA helped Israel to tave off the Iranian rocket attacks and put the uSA forcxes in the Middle East, In order to isolate Iran the U SA signed treties ith most Arab me countries and start negotiations with the enw Syram Regime and with Turkey - the latter country ahing by some distance the strong est army in the ME and after Russia in Europe.

So some Iranian rockets got through and resulted in the death of 6 Israeli's but the bombing o Iramnn nuclear facilities and leadeship is continuing. The problem the USA face is not an Iranian attack - but rathrr internal terrorism by thousands of Muslims with links to terrorism into the USA by both the Obama and especially the Biden Regimes.

.

. .

Can we finally put this their wouldn't have been a war if Trump was President nonsense to bed now?

DumbMike worships its master, Trump.

The USA is not directly involved in the war and no food soldiers will be used as invaders, Because Trump refuse to accept that Iran finally develop nuclear arms and put it into use against Israel and other coutries must suffer from serious delusions levels.

So Stav and SB

Tell us wat you will do under such circumstances and dont use AI since the system is based on media reports. So tell us what you yourself would do in this case?

I dont support either side. The Arabs are worse, but Israel has done a good Hamas impersonation.

Israel is smarter and technologically superior, but they are vastly outnumbered in the Middle East. Is this something they can win alone? I doubt it.

I supported Israel 100% after Arabs took hostages, but it is unclear what the end goal of Netanyahu is.

The end goal? To deny Iran nuclear weapons, The legitimacy of such an action can be debated endlessly….Israel has been attacked several times, how would that have looked if the Arabs had nuclear weapons. After the holocaust the Israelis don’t debate the niceties, they act to protect themselves.

The WSJ believes this is in the West’s interest because a nuclear exchange in the ME would be a disaster for the world. It’s not a moral argument, it’s eliminating a small probability of a catastrophic event.

I dont support either side. The Arabs are worse, but Israel has done a good Hamas impersonation.

Neither do I, the Iranian regime is a brutal theocracy that violently supresses its own people, funds and supports terrorist organisation and has provided Russia with weapons to attack Ukraine. If a consequences of Israel's attacks are the downfall of the present Iranian regime that would be great thing.

Israel is a pretty much a rogue state under the Netanyahu regime and at this point is almost certainly committing genocide in Gaza far exceeding Hamas atrocities of October 7th.

Israel is smarter and technologically superior, but they are vastly outnumbered in the Middle East. Is this something they can win alone? I doubt it.

The problem is for Israel that while they are indeed superior in terms of intelligence and military capability, their consistent belligerent attitude will not lead to long term sustainable peace, it will just lead to preputial conflict with their neighbours.

I supported Israel 100% after Arabs took hostages, but it is unclear what the end goal of Netanyahu is.

I would of supported Israel responding to Hamas too but it was al too predictable they would go too far. As for Netanyahu's goal. It's to stay out of prison. And if you look at polling taken from the Israel public that's what most of them believe as well. He's a canny operator though. With Iran's proxies in the region severely weakened, Russia pre-occupied with Ukraine to be able to assist Iran, Iran's air defences weakened from Israel's previous strike, and an incompetent nincompoop in the White House he can just ignore I guess he felt now the the most opportune moment to launch his strikes.

Hard to predict what will happen.

The end goal? To deny Iran nuclear weapons, The legitimacy of such an action can be debated endlessly….Israel has been attacked several times, how would that have looked if the Arabs had nuclear weapons.

Israel has also been the aggressor several times. From Iran's viewpoint if they have nukes Israel wouldn't dare attack them. Conversely what would Iran get if they launched a nuclear strike on Israel, only their own destruction from either Israel's retaliatory strikes or America's.

After the holocaust the Israelis don’t debate the niceties, they act to protect themselves.

Absolutely this, because of the persecution they have experienced throughout the years, they take no chances.

With Netanyahu, I was referring collectively to what is going on in Palestine (e.g. Ethnic cleansing). There does not seem to be a stated goal, but the actions point to this. A Palestine, without Palestinians.

Yes, the Middle East with nukes would be a liability to the world, worse than Russia having nukes.

However, Israel has to continue living in the Middle East. Is it wise to take on Iran after the ethnic cleansing of Palestine? It could further unite the Middle East against Israel. They can't win alone, and that means Western countries joining the war to protect Israel.

If we remove the Iranian regime, it could help prevent them from getting nukes. However, it could also encourage them even more to develop nukes in the future. It is a dammed if you do, and dammed if you don't scenario.

S B

Nice observation - lets put it bluntly part of the probkem in the ME is Israel. They shold forget about Govrning Gaza and some parts of the West Bank area to Jordan and some compomise as to the area to be taken ove by Jordan needs to be agreed upon.

Trump has convined the Arab states to sign co-operation agreements with the USA and also Turkey,- while Pakistan has its own problems - so that leaves Iran as the most disrupting country in the ME woth vast support terrorist organizations worldwide,

In tis rather serious situation Israel is determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear.arms. The USA will not attack Iran themselves - but other than Iran itself and iys nuclear arms development where the USA wil suoirt te Tsrael attack s dorectly on Iran is not at present on the cards,

However, the USA has another internal prroblem amnd that is an estimated 50 000 Muslims woth linkess to terroist organizations and has been distributed throughout the USA. So instead of a direct attack by Iran domestic terrorist attacks are a certainty. That result from an internal political problem where the Demorats encouraged protest meetings - mostly peaceful until it became riots, like the case is in Los Angeles at present. That is where domestic terorism kicks in. It happeed during 2020 where major areas in the inner sotoes were totally destroyed and not rebuild yet,

Yes, the Middle East with nukes would be a liability to the world, worse than Russia having nukes.

I'm not so sure. I don't actually consider Russian Nukes to be a major issue, because I don't believe Putin is suicidal.

Now you could argue the more fundamentalist Islamist regimes might be more inclined to die for their cause, but I'm not sure even the Iranian's are that mass suicidal. There is already reports that they are putting out peace feelers through diplomats in Cyprus. Look at their previous response to Israel's attack's last year, they even notified the west they where going to launch an attack knowing full well the vast majority of the missiles and drones would be shot down. It was a calibrated response because they didn't want to bring the full wrath of the US down on them, that doesn't look like a regime that's suicidal to me.

However, Israel has to continue living in the Middle East. Is it wise to take on Iran after the ethnic cleansing of Palestine? It could further unite the Middle East against Israel. They can't win alone, and that means Western countries joining the war to protect Israel.

Hard to say how this will pan out. The Saudi's have no love for Iran and had warming relations with Israel but they now seem to view Israel as the greater threat to regional stability. The Turks are furious with Israel as well.

Looking at the wider picture, taking out the Iranian regime, might help Ukraine in that it cuts off supplies of drones to Russia. It could also cause oil prices to spike helping Russia. It could trigger another refugee wave into Europe. Are the Iranian's going start attacking shipping. As for western countries coming to Israel's aid, I prefer if we stayed out of this.

Must be absolutely galling for Ukraine who are a fighting a war for their very existence that was forced on them while strictly obeying rules and limits imposed on them from their western partners and who have repeatedly requested the west send planes to shoot down Russian missiles, to see the west rush planes to help Israel who have rode rough shod over international opinion and shoot down missiles in its defence in a war Israel chose to start.

If we remove the Iranian regime, it could help prevent them from getting nukes. However, it could also encourage them even more to develop nukes in the future. It is a dammed if you do, and dammed if you don't scenario.

The Iran nuclear facilities are 80 metre's below the ground with one site being even deeper underground. Apparently without American assistance the Israel weapons can only penetrate 6 metres down. The American weapons can apparently go 60 metres down. I'm not sure if the Israel's can actual take out Iran's nuclear capacity. They can certainly slow it and maybe topple the Iranian's by constantly killing it's leadership.

I was thinking the same thing -re: Muslims living in the West. There were suicide bombers the last time the West attacked the Middle East during the Saddam Hussein era.

About 5 years ago, Iran shot down its own passenger airliner just a few months after one of its military vessels destroyed another of its own military boats. At the time, they were under pressure, about America attacking them, so could they even send a nuke by accident?

Must be absolutely galling for Ukraine who are a fighting a war for their very existence that was forced on them while strictly obeying rules and limits imposed on them from their western partners and who have repeatedly requested the west send planes to shoot down Russian missiles, to see the west rush planes to help Israel who have rode rough shod over international opinion and shoot down missiles in its defence in a war Israel chose to start.

Agreed, but I think the West would be more reluctant to help Israel if Iran had nukes. I am sure NATO would have stepped in ages ago within Ukraine, had Putin had no nukes.

Interestig to read th above - while ignoring the real situation. That is the role Trump play in the whole scenario. He went to the ME and signed agreements with them in a move to isolate the Ayatollah regime. He from the start liaise with Turkey and on Turkey's insustance met with the new leader in Damascus.

Trump is not iterested in satrting wars - but Trump, Rubio and Hegseth was informed by the Israeli's of ther pending attacks and they know exactrly what was coming. Trump acted to ensure that Iran is isolated and that was his main objective ar present. In future I believe he wants to see Gaza and part of the West Bank becoming part of Jordan.

What is happening is he wnts terrorit organiarions like Hezbollah and Hamas out of Lebanon and Gaza so that reconstruction of Gaza can commence,

Unlike the barain-deficient dolt that wa sin the WH before him - who unfroze over $200 billion for Iran to use to support terrorism and enhance nuclear arms development - he wants to take positive action to stabilize the Middle East. Unlike what the Biden idiotic regime did, The US Government structure was brazenly corrupt and sold the country dwown the drain.

The problem the USA face internally is worse, There are an estimated 50 000 Muslims with links to terrorist organization allowed into the country throug the Biden Open Boarder policy and the support of te D e,ocrats of those terrorists and criminals tos tay in the USA is suicidal.

. .

Israel acts while the UK agonizes over grooming gangs….what happened to a once resolute nation.

You want the UK to start bombing parts of the UK with Asian communities or something?

It appears as though everyone must know leave Tehran...

Trump: "Iran should have signed the "deal" I told them to sign. What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!" Trump wrote.

That's 8.7 million people, or 14.7 in the metro area.

So it appears Trump is in league with Netenyaho... He must have been aware of the plans all along, and it looks like a proxy war with the US - as Trump has made it clear that Iran can't have nuclear weapons, and these very sites have been bombed.

He must have been aware of the plans all along,

100% If you go by the 20,000 patriot defence missiles which were suppose to go to Ukraine but then last week it was diverted to Israel.

Yes, the Trump admin was aware and is in support of the Israeli effort vs Iran...hopefully there is a reasonable plan behind this serious escalation of the situation. Very troublesome turn of events...hopefully not the beginning of a new prolonged war in the region.

Yeah the American's clearly knew it was going to happen but it doesn't look like they wanted it to happen, but now that it has it will support Israel diplomatically and protect it from Iran's missiles but I don't think they will get involved unless Iran attacks them directly, which I don't think they will because Israel seems to be more than a match for them at the moment, never mind the US.

I see there is reports that US intelligence assessments stating Iran was not actively pursing nuclear weapons and was three years from being able to delivery one.

Stav, are you sure that America did not want this to happen?

(Or in effect, Trump did not want this to happen, given that Democracy ended in the US.)

If Trump is saying in the Media that Iran must never have a weapon, and that they should have agreed to the nuclear deal, and that Trump just told everyone to leave Tehran - this does not suggest that Trump was not only aware of the Israeli attack, but also endorses the attack with American support.

If not endorsing, he is certainly not trying to prevent Israel from attacking Iran...IMO, the Trump administration is endorsing and actively supporting the Israeli mission in Iran...I'm surprised Trump held Israel back for so long...they've been itching to tackle Iran for a long time.

"I see there is reports that US intelligence assessments stating Iran was not actively pursing nuclear weapons and was three years from being able to delivery one."

I'm struggling to believe this...the not actively pursuing portiion...

Stav, are you sure that America did not want this to happen?

(Or in effect, Trump did not want this to happen, given that Democracy ended in the US.)

Well there is definitely people in the administration and neo-con's outside of the administration that wanted it to happen, but I think in general Trump's not really interested in getting involved in wars. It's not that cares about people or saving lives in general after all I recall the rate of US bombing operations increased under Trump compared to Obama (not sure where Biden stood on that, just know the first year of his term had a lower rate of approved bombing operations compared to Trump). Trump promised his base he keep the US out of foreign wars, he want's a noble peace prize and he think's wars are generally bad for business. He was negotiating with Iran and did appear quite annoyed that Israel scuppered his talks with Iran. A war fundamentally undermines Trump's image as a deal maker and his argument's that wars wouldn't break out if he was President.

If Trump is saying in the Media that Iran must never have a weapon, and that they should have agreed to the nuclear deal, and that Trump just told everyone to leave Tehran - this does not suggest that Trump was not only aware of the Israeli attack, but also endorses the attack with American support.

No it's that Netanyahu has played him like a fiddle. He figured that regardless of how Trump felt he would have no choice but to row in behind Israel. Politically it would be impossible for Trump to abandon Israel or even remain neutral. So Trump is playing and trying to spin the only card he could play.

If not endorsing, he is certainly not trying to prevent Israel from attacking Iran...IMO, the Trump administration is endorsing and actively supporting the Israeli mission in Iran...I'm surprised Trump held Israel back for so long...they've been itching to tackle Iran for a long time.

Held back...are you joking me. Israel has been taking about hitting Iran for decades and within 5 months of Trump becoming President they launch an attack. After Trump assisted in getting Biden's Gaza ceasefire deal over the line, it fell apart a month or so later when Israel reigned on their part of the deal and went back to battering the shit out of Gaza, with nary a word from Trump (though you sort of get the sense he's not particular happy with what Israel is doing in Gaza). Israel have effective cart blanche to do what they want.

I'm struggling to believe this...the not actively pursuing portiion...

Well very hard to know either way. I don't trust either Iran or Israel on the topic.

‘Rained’ on their parade….just trying to help. Regime change in Iran would be a huge boon to the world. My guess is the Saudis would love to see the back of the Mullahs, so would the majority of the Iranian people. And yet the little men in suits are agonizing about denying people who live an alternative existence…the bomb.

Confused is an understatement.

Regime change in Iran would be a huge boon to the world. My guess is the Saudis would love to see the back of the Mullahs, so would the majority of the Iranian people. And yet the little men in suits are agonizing about denying people who live an alternative existence…the bomb.

Confused is an understatement.

Ah yes that's the only thing they are agonizing about.

Oh wait there is,

A) Is Iran definitely committed to building a nuclear bomb?.

B) Was the window for diplomacy closed.

C) Will Israel's attacks end up increasing the Iranian's population support for the regime.

D) If the Iranian regime is toppled can we be certain what comes after it will be better.

E) Could this lead to an increase in Islamic terrorism.

F) Could this lead to a migration crisis?

G) Could it cause oil prices to spike global

H) Will this destabilize the middle east.

I) Should the west really be coming to the aid of a state that is almost certainly committing genocide.

J) Does it help Israel's long term security or will it generate more hatred and terrorism directed against them.

One can go on and on. But it's far more complicated than bad men can't have bad weapons.

A) yes, no regime is stupid enough to repeat the Hussein mistake.

B) It’s never been open

C) Almost impossible to know, but if they tasted freedom they’d get over it.

D) Yes

E) Removing the primary bank for terrorism increase terrorism…nope

F) The opposite, many Iranians will go home.

G) Not as much as they would spike if nuclear weapons were used in the ME.

H) Removing the Iranian regime is the only way to stabilize the ME.

I)Given the West including Germany, Italy and France were complicit in genocide against the Jews, and others like Ireland watched but did nothing, they don’t have a leg to stand on.

J) Israel’s long term security is in good hands…their own.

There are always complications, but Iran with nuclear weapons and eventually with delivery systems dwarfs other complications..

Were a country's leadership as responsible/involved with funding and arranging terror attacks against Ireland as Iran are in the case of Israel, Stavie would be singing a different tune.

And then, of course, there is this...

Atefeh Rajabi Sahaaleh was executed at age 16 in 2004, after being repeatedly raped and accused of adultery and “crimes against chastity.” Her conviction relied on forced confessions, and she was publicly hanged despite being a juvenile

SB

Interesting comments above but the following is a joke in bad taste:-

(Or in effect, Trump did not want this to happen, given that Democracy ended in the US.)

The attack on Democracy was all out under he Biden Presidency and a number of examples were given. The present riots and protests are not Democratic at all since the aim is not an attempt to take or power by force - using violent means for the purpose.

I want to ask you a question though, When a Judge ruled that eople involved in human child trafficking and using children as sex slaves - do ou support that instuction or do you notsupport it. If u do't how come you suppot the LA riot promoted and fuinded by the DP.

.

A) yes, no regime is stupid enough to repeat the Hussein mistake.

Hussein's mistake was invading Kuwait, which lead to the Gulf War,, which lead to IAEA dismantling Iraq's nuclear weapon program. It's not the Hussein decided he didn't need nukes, he was forced to give them up after he lost the Gulf War. It's unknown what would have happened to Iraq's nuclear program (which America partially assisted with) had he not invaded Kuwait.

B) It’s never been open

Funny Obama got a deal, the Iranian's complied, then Trump scuppered it. But I'm curious so you think Trump's recent negotiations with Iran were a waste of time? Obama's deal would of expired this year anyway, but who knows what relations would be like had the American's upheld their side of the deal, maybe it would have lead to a renewal of the deal or lead to some other deal.

C) Almost impossible to know, but if they tasted freedom they’d get over it.

Precisely impossible to know.

D) Yes

Yes because ISIS were so much better than Saddam and Iraq ended up falling into Iran's sphere of influence.

E) Removing the primary bank for terrorism increase terrorism…nope

They are the main bank of terrorism in the middle east, not in Europe. ISIS are not aligned with Iran. Again how does this look to the Arab world. Israel backed by the west once again launching wars in the middle east.

F) The opposite, many Iranians will go home.

Iran has a diaspora around the world, not refugees as such. And Iran homes a few million refugees from other countries. Sure some of the diaspora might go home but from what I understand the Iranian diaspora in the US has done quite well for itself, not sure they would want to go back to a much lower standard of living.

G) Not as much as they would spike if nuclear weapons were used in the ME.

Assuming Iran is building a nuke (probably), there is conflicting reports on how soon Iran could actually have one (Israel is simply not a credible source, they have been calming for decades that Iran is x amount away from having a nuke ) and then there is the question would they actually use it or do they want it to just as a deterrent against attack. It seems likely that the window for diplomacy was not yet close given US intelligence reports.

H) Removing the Iranian regime is the only way to stabilize the ME.

Again impossible to predict how this plays out. Even if we get a relatively moderate Iranian government in its place that would only be part of the equation. Israel needs to come to accommodation with the Palestinian's that allows for a viable Palestinian state.

I)Given the West including Germany, Italy and France were complicit in genocide against the Jews, and others like Ireland watched but did nothing, they don’t have a leg to stand on.

So your argument is because other countries committed genocide in the past (and lobbying France in there is really dubious) modern genocide is to be permitted? I suppose when America is actively supplying the weapons enabling Israel to perpetrate genocide whataboutism is pretty appealing.

J) Israel’s long term security is in good hands…their own.

So good that October 7th didn't happen? How many wars has it been involved in at this point?

There are always complications, but Iran with nuclear weapons and eventually with delivery systems dwarfs other complications..

Pretty big complications. Look Israel's action could end up being a net benefit overall but history indicates it rarely works out that way. It's pretty easy for someone in the US to say these things because as Zelensky pointed out there is this big ocean between them and a potential problem. If there is a wave of refugees or a spike in terrorism it will be Europe not the US that will have to deal with it by dint of proximity (just like it did after previous American escapades in the ME).

Were a country's leadership as responsible/involved with funding and arranging terror attacks against Ireland as Iran are in the case of Israel, Stavie would be singing a different tune.

Possibly but then again Israel might not have so many enemies if it acted like a peaceful country that wasn't constantly oppressing and stealing its neighbours land.

And then, of course, there is this...

No one is defending the Iranian regime, what they do to their own population is barbaric and if it happens to fall and more moderate's come to power that would be good thing, and it's not an impossible outcome either. Just very hard to predict what's coming down the road.

Is it possible that Mozart is actually George W. Bush Jr?

"The Weapons of Mass Destruction"....

".

Although I also don't like the idea of the Middle East having WMD, but I am not sure that destroying their leaders is the best option

Saddam Hussein made 2 huge mistakes. The obvious one, invading Kuwait. And the one that destroyed him, leaving the impression out there that he had WMD when he didn’t.

That became the motivation for the Iraq war and the US administration believed it. Why? Because that’s what their intelligence was telling them. But more definitively because they went ahead.

Ask yourself this, what President would have commissioned this war knowing he would be proven wrong a few months later? That his whole Presidency would be measured by this mistake?

Iraq was planned as a war of occupation. After the successes of Japan and Germany, the abject failures of Vietnam and Iraq have hopefully convinced the US not to go that route again.

The best solution here is for Iran to give up their nuclear ambitions and make their nuclear activities totally for energy and totally transparent. But if there has to be an intervention I doubt it would go beyond destroying the. capacity to make a bomb and supporting emerging opposition to the Mullahs.

The Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Mozart

Saddam Hussein made 2 huge mistakes. The obvious one, invading Kuwait. And the one that destroyed him, leaving the impression out there that he had WMD when he didn’t.

The above was a lie sold by Mueller - you surely remember him - to the Senate. There enver was any weapos of mass destruction the Iraqi's had. Bush wanted the War and started it based on a lie, A UK scientist involved in the investigation of the isue ccommitted suicide afterwards because the allegation were changed by Blair to back up Bush.

The invaion of Kuwaait was 10 years before and Iraq was under sanctions in 2003 when he Second Irag War started, That is why the Iraq was not a threat - they turned the war into a fiasco that still has troops in Iraq, A never-ending war, Wh at actually happemd subsequently was equally stupid, The US tried to instal a friendly Government in Iraq - but it turned into a fiasco with Iran really wunning the show.

It could have been worse - in 2012 Obama decided to withdrew US solders and within the next 2 years ISIS caused enar to total capture of the country. In 2014 Obama sent 200 soldiers in to deal to train the Iraqi soldiers - but the training did not work out. Another failure since the Iraq army as in a rce to get bback to nowhere and like Biden did so successfully in Afgahnistan - leaving behind weaponry while fleeing in panic.

Trump sent in troops to cleam up the emss and in hree months ISIS lot the power t hey had in most of Iraq and their leadership ended up in Iran. , .

Stav

Just to correct you a bit on the Iraq issue, Read the folloing it might change your statement:-.

Yes, under Saddam Hussein, Iraq was actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program. While they did not succeed in building a nuclear bomb, they did invest heavily in developing the capability to produce one, including a program to enrich uranium. This program was a major concern for the international community, particularly Israel, and led to several attempts to disrupt it, including the 1981 Israeli air strike on Iraq's nuclear reactor (Operation Opera).

The fact is the Israeli's bombed out of existence the research center whre the bombs could have been produced. A replacement facility was neve built by Iraq.

Do you really think the agreement was honored by the Ayatollah Government and his Government. Not a chance in hell o that being the case. Fact is the Ayatollah's adherents used it as toilet paper, The Iran Government moved the research facilities into army camps which was not inspected by Inspectos - so they gave them another little Boost. In 1977 The Shah of Iran ordered fighter jets from USA Government and the Iran Govenment paid $400 million for the planes.

When the Shah was overthrown and Iranians stormed and occupied the US Embassy in Teheran - the $400 000 billion was frozen and remained so until the agreement you referred to was signed the money would be unfrozen and paid over to the Ayatollah Govnment. Somehow it was calculated that the amount of $400 billion became $1,8 nillion do;;arsand in his wisdom ordered that th full amount of money be provided and the banking system should not be used and the money was to be sent by plane to Teheran. After unloading the cotent the Iran Government signed a receipt that amount.

However, there was one little problem - the Iran Minister whos signed the receipt claimed that after the money was couned the actual amount received was $1,462 billion. Where the rest went noboy knows,

Just as an aside anither facual story. In September 2020 Kerry who was a huge Biden admirer and assistant visited Teheran and an agreement was reached that Teheran would interfere in the USA election by using media and internet through advertisements - as well as religious channels to promote Biden's candiday - while Biden would unfreeze US Dollars that would be paid to Iran - while the freing of $100's of billions frozen money was unfrozen.