3 ms·
I don't really agree with rooting against the USA just because you don't like the president. An Islamist Iran with nukes is a scary proposition. I'm glad someon
by hakrgrl 7mo ago
I don't really agree with rooting against the USA just because you don't like the president. An Islamist Iran with nukes is a scary proposition. I'm glad someone is finally doing something about it rather than sending palettes of cash on an jet to radical Muslims.
- pell 7mo agoThe way you describe the alternative option seems not very good faith.
- hakrgrl 7mo agoObama actually did this in 2016. https://www.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/us-sends-plane-iran-400-million-cash https://www.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/us-sends-plane-iran-... > Washington CNN — The Obama administration secretly arranged a plane delivery of $400 million in cash on the same day Iran released four American prisoners and formally implemented the nuclear deal, US officials confirmed Wednesday.
- skeeter2020 7mo agoWhile the optics of this may look bad, the same thing happens after armed conflict too; the US has spent boatloads of money in Afghanistan on top of all the military costs, and we're basically in the same situation as before.
- nutjob2 7mo agoAnd the bad faith keeps on rolling. We get it, you're a MAGA true believer, it's not like you're being subtle. But besides trying to troll the good people at HN, what is your point?
- hakrgrl 7mo agoWas I not clear? "I'm glad someone is finally doing something about it rather than sending palettes of cash on an jet to radical Muslims." Point is you can mock Trump with your minesweeper game and jeer from the sidelines, but it's a better policy than sending bad guys money.
- voganmother42 7mo agoYeah war in the middle east is great policy, very popular and definitely what he campaigned on. The corruption and incompetence are both unprecedented, but you keep doing your dance!
- zimpenfish 7mo agoSecretly-ish - it was announced publicly 7 months prior (Jan 2016) and it was the first instalment of a legal settlement, not just some random or ransom payment. Obviously Republicans decried it with bad faith bullshit because reality and sanity don't matter to them.
- hakrgrl 7mo ago"reality and sanity"? The reality is the US gave them cash to improve their living standards and enrich their country, not their uranium. With that money they chose to massacre their own people and fund terrorism across the region. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres
- mrbombastic 7mo agoAccount created 52 days ago and working over time ever since to defend trump and the regime. No submissions. Color me skeptical.
- hakrgrl 7mo agoSkeptical of what, exactly?
- nixon_why69 7mo agoAgain, it was legally owed money, a decades-old arbitration claim from some arms deal. Now we're spending a multiple of that literally every day for this war. And screwing the global economy in the process. Is this a better deal?
- zimpenfish 7mo ago> With that money[...] Delivered in August 2016. > ...they chose to massacre their own people... In 2025-26 according to your link. I dunno, that's a big chronological gap to bridge for implying a causal relationship to work.
- JKCalhoun 7mo agoHmmm… $400M and we got a nuclear deal? We're looking at 5x that this time around (so far) and no deal in sight. Not sure this admin is doing the smart thing.
- hakrgrl 7mo agoWe got a nuclear deal Iran violated so badly that we had to take military action.
- nullzzz 7mo agoI don’t think I mentioned USA nor took a side.
- pjc50 7mo ago> palettes of cash on an jet to radical Muslims. You mean the US bipartisan strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan? Is there any plan to do this differently to those expensive failures?
- hakrgrl 7mo ago> is there any plan to do this differently to those expensive failures? Why are you asking me? You can listen to the secretary of war (a veteran of those wars) and the president describe their strategy themselves. They are extremely transparent.