Reaganite🇺🇸

What you are missing and this hormuz bs page doesnt mention is the investments release of funds is controlled by the US and is conditional based on Iran meeting the conditions that are tied to it. Like denuclearization regular inspection and behavior change in the region in general. Only the bits I know of that have been released.

You’re missing three things. 1) The question isn’t whether the entire $300B fund is released immediately. The question is whether Iran is receiving economic concessions before it has actually dismantled anything. Current reporting suggests sanctions waivers, resumed oil exports, reopening trade routes, and potentially access to some frozen assets are occurring during negotiations. If that’s true, then significant concessions are being made before the core strategic objective has been achieved. 2) Explain how this is superior to the JCPOA. We were told that a $1.7B payment were and limited sanctions relief were unacceptable concessions. We just spent $30B+ on a military campaign, facilitating a $300B+ wealth fund for the IRGC hardliners (who are now in charge), lifting sanctions, and allowing them access to previously closed trade routes for their oil. What exactly did we gain that justifies the vastly higher cost? 3. If Gulf states are helping finance this, that’s not a sign of strength - at all. These are countries that were repeatedly attacked by Iran while relying on American security guarantees. The entire point of those guarantees was that our allies wouldn’t need to pay regional powers for peace. If they’re now helping fund a massive normalization package, that’s a very clear message they’re no longer confident U.S military deterrence will protect them. That’s a huge loss of credibility for the U.S. This is coming from someone who was hoping this would end well for the U.S and repeatedly called out the reporting by CNN and others on this. But none of this looks good for the U.S.

You’re missing three things. 1) The question isn’t whether the entire $300B fund is released immediately. The question is whether Iran is receiving economic concessions before it has actually dismantled anything. Current reporting suggests sanctions waivers, resumed oil exports, reopening trade routes, and potentially access to some frozen assets are occurring during negotiations. If that’s true, then significant concessions are being made before the core strategic objective has been achieved. 2) Explain how this is superior to the JCPOA. We were told that a $1.7B payment were and limited sanctions relief were unacceptable concessions. We just spent $30B+ on a military campaign, facilitating a $300B+ wealth fund for the IRGC hardliners (who are now in charge), lifting sanctions, and allowing them access to previously closed trade routes for their oil. What exactly did we gain that justifies the vastly higher cost? 3. If Gulf states are helping finance this, that’s not a sign of strength - at all. These are countries that were repeatedly attacked by Iran while relying on American security guarantees. The entire point of those guarantees was that our allies wouldn’t need to pay regional powers for peace. If they’re now helping fund a massive normalization package, that’s a very clear message they’re no longer confident U.S military deterrence will protect them. That’s a huge loss of credibility for the U.S. This is coming from someone who was hoping this would end well for the U.S and repeatedly called out the reporting by CNN and others on this. But none of this looks good for the U.S.

You’re missing three things. 1) The question isn’t whether the entire $300B fund is released immediately. The question is whether Iran is receiving economic concessions before it has actually dismantled anything. Current reporting suggests sanctions waivers, resumed oil exports, reopening trade routes, and potentially access to some frozen assets are occurring during negotiations. If that’s true, then significant concessions are being made before the core strategic objective has been achieved. 2) Explain how this is superior to the JCPOA. We were told that a $1.7B payment were and limited sanctions relief were unacceptable concessions. We just spent $30B+ on a military campaign, facilitating a $300B+ wealth fund for the IRGC hardliners (who are now in charge), lifting sanctions, and allowing them access to previously closed trade routes for their oil. What exactly did we gain that justifies the vastly higher cost? 3. If Gulf states are helping finance this, that’s not a sign of strength - at all. These are countries that were repeatedly attacked by Iran while relying on American security guarantees. The entire point of those guarantees was that our allies wouldn’t need to pay regional powers for peace. If they’re now helping fund a massive normalization package, that’s a very clear message they’re no longer confident U.S military deterrence will protect them. That’s a huge loss of credibility for the U.S. This is coming from someone who was hoping this would end well for the U.S and repeatedly called out the reporting by CNN and others on this. But none of this looks good for the U.S.