Sep 12·edited Sep 12

the usa has a colourful history with iran, from 1953 onward at minimum.. i am not sure many americans know about it either, but regardless, if the usa was ever to get its cia head out of its ass, it would be better served.. instead the cia and intel agencies dictate the shots and the results remain unhelpful to either side... of course the assassination of soleimini was very unhelpful as are usa's demand the rest of the world to maintain its unilateral sanction regime against countries that the usa is incapable of dominating.. but fortunately change does happen, however slowly.. maybe one day the usa will wake up to see that they're reaping what they have sowed.. i'm not hopeful, but it is always possible..

Expand full comment

A WSJ article asked a cogent Question. Why do we allow Amcits to go to Iran? One of the dumbass hostages went to see his girlfriend. What happened to the American policy of never paying ransom? Certainly we don’t want to hurt the feelings of the mullahs in making hamburger out of Soliemani. He should have been allowed to quietly go about his business of killing My fellow soldiers.

Expand full comment

Is it ransom or is it Iranian money that we had frozen?

Expand full comment

Iran just does not trust the US to honor their side of the deal, so they want the transaction to happen first... Given how trustworthy Biden's administrations is on the global state, seems very reasonable.

How is that a ransom if the US is releasing Iran's money it froze in the first place? the prisoner exchange seems fair, and the deal will be honored by Iran...

Seems like a good step in the right direction for everybody....

Expand full comment

Are you talking about the six billion here as if it were US money ? According to information, it was the money of the Iranians that the USA stole in the usual way. You really like to steal (seize) other states' money and then you are surprised that they don't trust you and that's why those states that you can't keep in your dirty paws will join forces and conduct their transactions with each other in their own currency ! You are like the dirty robber knights in the Middle Ages, you stand at a bridge and take money from everyone passing by, and if you like something, you take it by force, because you can !

By the way, are you still stealing oil from the Syrians ? What a disgrace, the American army stands guard as the property of a foreign state is stolen in the oil tankers !

Expand full comment

It's their money.

Expand full comment
Sep 12·edited Sep 12

With all the due respect to the writter, it seems difficult to me to characterize letting Iran have access to its own money as "paying a ransom."

Expand full comment

Best guess? "Great Game" thinking, attempting to play Arabs and Iranians off against each other, so they keep the oil flowing to Japan, South Korea, and the EU to fund defense.

Expand full comment

Mediocre people, without integrity or principles, rarely make sound, well thought out decisions, or exhibit consistency in their actions. Maybe they think this deal (especially releasing the funds) will turn Iran away from Russia/China or maybe it has to do with whatever mess they're cooking up in Azerbaijan/Armenia or maybe something to do with Syria. Whatever the case, Blinken & crew just do whatever gets them what they want in the moment; repercussions are not their concern. I doubt that the Americans in Iranian custody concern him much either, from how he handled it.

Expand full comment

There were terrible floods in Derna, Libya overnight, caused by collapse of two old dams not maintained since the overthrow of Gaddafi (who gave his country the best infrastructure and HDI in Africa)

The town of Derna is partly destroyed.

I now remember how this was the centre of the NATO-GCC hardline Islamists for whom America flew air support to topple Gaddafi.

Before being suppressed by the military faction controlling the East of the shattered and divided post-Gaddafi country in 2018, Islamists from Derna formed a large contingent fighting against another regime on the PNAC hitlist, in Syria.

I wrote in 2011 that for some in the CIA linking up again with the Mujahedeen in Eastern Libya - who flew the flag of the Anglo-American puppet Wahabi dictator Idris Senussi overthrown by Gaddafi in 1969 - this must have echoed the good old 1980s in Afghanistan.

But the Islamists of Iran are *bad* Islamists in the strange official Manichean theology of America - that was brought there by Puritans, and derives ultimately from Persian fire-religion that ironically also informs enemy Shia and Alawite theology in Iran and Syria ('pur' is Greek for purifying fire).

Stephen writes about ill-thought-out short-term policy in Iran.

I think there's a deeper question about ill-conceived US foreign policy since WW2, in oilrich Iran and Libya specifically, but of course globally.

You guys gave those countries repressive dictators to help you and Britain skim their oil reserves, and those corrupt repressive regimes in each country were overthrown by two rather different popular Islamic revolutions, which you then attempted for decades to undermine.

It's not just the policy of Blinken - and now no. 2. Nuland, as neocons take over the Dems after abandoning the GOP following their disastrous Iraq oil war...

...It's misguided cowboy foreign policy in general since WW2 that's the problem.

Your WW2 leader Ike explained a big part of that problem in his valedictory - though he didn't mention the MIC-Oil nexus.

Look in your scary mirror, America. You largely created the evil demons you spend all your time and money fighting at great cost to the rest of the world.

With Cheney's advisor 'Fuck the EU' Nuland and the Kagans now back in charge, I remember thinking in 2016: Oh well, Trump's less likely than Hillary to start WW3.

And despite myself, I'm starting to think the same about 2024.

I'm more worried by Bob Kagan than Ginni Thomas.

Expand full comment