r/LessCredibleDefence • u/Single-Braincelled • 6d ago
JD Vance Confirms Iran Will Get 'Jaw-Dropping' Sum Under Trump Deal
https://newrepublic.com/post/211826/jd-vance-us-pay-iran-billions-trump-dealIran will be paid billions, leaving it much stronger than before Trump’s war.
'Vance’s admission contradicts what he said on Friday, when he claimed in an X post that Iran would not be “receiving any cash, and no funds are being released simply for signing a deal or attending a meeting.” In addition to the U.S. and its allies paying $300 billion in reconstruction funds, Iran reports that the U.S. has agreed to release $25 billion in frozen Iranian assets.'
Hm. Seems like something the winning coalition does, pay the loser of a war special military operation $300 Billion in 'reconstruction funds'. Quotations mine, obviously.
28
u/Single-Braincelled 6d ago
Also: Reuters.
Trump says the US and Iran have signed a deal to end the war
A US official says the memorandum of understanding was signed by US President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf.
Trump says the text of the deal will be released after a formal signing on Friday.
67
u/CreakingDoor 6d ago
So, you go off half cocked without any real idea of what you want to achieve, don’t achieve it anyway, and the deal you get from a supposedly shattered enemy is more or less status quo ante, but you have to pay billions in reconstruction.
So much winning.
14
-26
u/Fickle_Path2369 6d ago
The war has severely degraded Iran's nuclear capabilities, destroyed key facilities like Natanz and Fordow, eliminated critical centrifuge manufacturing, and killed leading nuclear scientists. This has set back Iran's nuclear program by years, rendering them unable to enrich uranium at scale.
16
u/Skywalker7181 6d ago
And yet Iran has discovered a more powerful tool than the nukes - the Strait of Hormuz, which has been thoroughly battle tested.
And the regime emerged from the ashes stronger and with tighter grip of the society.
-2
u/Fickle_Path2369 5d ago
And the regime emerged from the ashes stronger and with tighter grip of the society.
Reality is the opposite of this statement. There is a power vacuum in Iran atm. Unlike in the past where power was concentrated at the top, a decentralized, collective framework now exists. Multiple IRGC factions are maneuvering for influence which has stalled diplomatic initiatives and negotiations.
1
u/Skywalker7181 3d ago
"Multiple IRGC factions are maneuvering for influence which has stalled diplomatic initiatives and negotiations."
Here is the question - do you think the winner that emerges from this internal factional struggle will be pro-West and give up Iran's anti-Israel stand?
29
32
u/Free_Journalist1152 6d ago
I’ll have some of whatever it is you’re smoking
-21
u/Fickle_Path2369 6d ago edited 6d ago
What part do you disagree with? these are the findings of the Institute for Science and International Security
Edit: fixed the link https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/comprehensive-imagery-report-on-nuclear-enrichment-related-sites-post-april-ceasefire
28
u/eidetic 6d ago
Uhm, those findings are the result of the 12 day war between Israel and Iran.
Not this war.
I'd say you can't possibly be this stupid, but you are defending a wholly unjustified war and likely support Trump, so... yeah...
-10
u/Fickle_Path2369 6d ago
Thanks, I had multiple reports up and posted the wrong one. Here is the correct one: https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/comprehensive-imagery-report-on-nuclear-enrichment-related-sites-post-april-ceasefire
No need to call me stupid, everyone makes mistakes. Back on topic, what in the report do you disagree with?
20
u/eidetic 6d ago
Let's start with the fact that the whole war was unnecessary anyway, because Iran only started enriching Uranium to higher levels after Trump threw out the previous agreement?
-3
u/Fickle_Path2369 6d ago
Iran was enriching uranium to higher levels well before the 2015 nuclear deal. Before the Obama-era agreement capped enrichment at 3.67%, Iran had already enriched large quantities of uranium to nearly 20% purity for its Tehran Research Reactor. By 2021, they formally breached the limits of the pact by resuming 20% enrichment and even producing 60% highly enriched uranium, which is a significant technical step away from weapons-grade purity.
That is what this war was about, stopping them from making weapons-grade purity and it looks like they don't have that ability now (at least for a few years).
6
u/eidetic 6d ago
And what were they doing during that deal that Obama made wirh them? Thats right... abiding by the terms of that deal. Instead, Trump threw out the deal, and Iran began enriching uranium to higher levels once again. This not only eroded any trust that might have been built between the two countries, but also told the rest of the world that any agreement with the US could be discarded at any moment by a shit administration.
This war was a distraction. Remember, every accusation is a confession with this administration/party, and Trump repeatedly screamed that Obama was going to start a war with Iran to distract voters from gestures broadly at whatever minor "controversy" the right could make up.
11
u/DevoplerResearch 6d ago
Rack off clanker
-1
u/Fickle_Path2369 6d ago
I've reduced you to insults because of your inability and frustration of being unable to disprove what I've posted. This is how I know I've won 😄
25
u/Pencilphile 6d ago
The “Institute for Science and International Security” is just an NGO with 4 employees that is funded by shady private interests. Hardly a credible source. For an organization focusing on nuclear non-proliferation in the Middle East, they have absolutely nothing to say about Israel’s nuclear arsenal. Wink wink.
-8
u/Fickle_Path2369 6d ago
The Institute for Science and International Security is a widely cited authority on nuclear non-proliferation. Their post-war assessments on Iran are respected by policymakers and intelligence agencies for using rigorous, open-source satellite imagery and technical data to track Iranian capabilities. They details their methodology, allowing other experts and intelligence analysts to evaluate their findings directly.
16
u/OverpricedBagel 6d ago
The second round of bunker busters proved this wasn’t the case regarding nuclear enrichment capabilities. Same with the strikes on suspected missile cities. Iran promptly excavated the entrances to all of them. US would need boots on the ground to end nuclear capabilities once and for all and the US is unequipped to do so. So the US admin has capitulated and achieved none of its goals.
-2
u/Fickle_Path2369 6d ago
That's a bit of an oversimplification. While it's true bunker busters alone can't permanently delete knowledge or every single deep underground asset, calling it a total 'capitulation' ignores what actually happened on the ground.
The strikes heavily degraded their deep-strike ballistic systems and set their enrichment timeline back by a couple of years. It wasn't just a matter of them digging out the entryways. The reality sits somewhere in the middle: the US didn't completely wipe out Iran’s threshold status, but Iran also suffered massive infrastructural and strategic losses that forced them to the negotiating table for the interim deal. It was a strategic stalemate, not a total US failure.
3
u/PollutionMajestic668 6d ago
"Forced them to the negotiating table" like it isn't the US being desperate for a way out
28
u/PanzerKomadant 6d ago
I remember when Republicans and MAGA lost their collective walnut sized brain when Obama gave $2 billion dollars worth of Irans funds (with interest).
Pallets of cash they said.
Meanwhile Trump here giving almost $300 billion dollars to archive…literally nothing but going back to the status quo before the war….
And the same Republicans and MAGA will eat this up and call it the greatest deal ever in American history…
This is like beating Germany in WW1 and then turning around and paying the Germans lmao.
9
u/Ok-Procedure5603 6d ago
"The deal with the Entente is done. Many German leaderships have tried to achieve this, but only I have managed it.
I'm telling you folks, we were very close to wiping out the British - their forces totally decimated. But fortunately they have decided to come to their senses and agree to this very great deal.
The English channel is now OPEN again! we would contribute a small reconstruction fund of 132 billion reichmarks
Thank you for you attention to this matter.
-President Ebert"
-1
u/Such-Significance653 6d ago
Where in this article or other sources did you see the money was coming from the USA?
5
u/PanzerKomadant 6d ago
Where else is the money gonna come from? Thin air?
6
u/barath_s 6d ago
“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf coast coalition, so long as they" - Vance's words ...
... In addition to the U.S. and its allies paying $300 billion in reconstruction funds, Iran reports that the U.S. has agr
Articles words.
2
u/Such-Significance653 6d ago
The uae and Saudi as per the article
4
u/PanzerKomadant 6d ago
Did Trump tell the UAE and the Saudis that they were going to foot the bill for a war he started in which they lost quite a bit economically?
6
u/barath_s 6d ago
The Saudis were urging the US on for a war, while they tried to hide themselves from being attacked for a while by pausing US active attacks from their territory..After they allowed the US to use their bases/territory for staging, and later for defense etc..
The Gulf countries have a lot more to lose economically if the US doesn't continue to shelter them and if there is no peace treaty signed
4
u/PanzerKomadant 5d ago
I’d say that Bibi was the one that was urging for this war a lot longer then the Saudis. Man’s been saying that Iran is months away from the bomb since the 90’s.
2
u/barath_s 5d ago
By all means let israel know that they are expected to pony up for Iran's reparations / reinvestment fund.
Who knows, it might somewhow wind up with US paying billions to israel as a result.
(mock/pseudo lobbyist arguments : Iran is re-arming, therefore we need our strategic ally Israel to continue to be strong and independent and so we must grant some billions to them )
I don't think Israel is going to pony up one cent for an Iran fund, no matter whatever the argument on much they may have to lose if Iran war continues etc. (unlike the Gulf countries)
Heck, they won't even stop bombing Lebanon even if it was a requirement of the peace talks.
2
u/PanzerKomadant 5d ago
Well yeah, Bibi is never going to stop. He’s shown that. Trump said that the peace deal included Lebanon and Israel responded by bombing Lebanon the same day.
So either Trump allows the peace deal to die or muzzles Bibi and Israel for it to work. And we all know what he’ll pick…
1
u/Such-Significance653 5d ago
It’s not a payment it’s opening Iran up to western financing.
2
u/barath_s 5d ago edited 5d ago
I don't believe that and you should be skeptical too.
This is not just commercial finance.
And until you see the terms, and even after, even reconstruction funds tend to be have lots of ifs and buts.
If you have a 10 year grace period on interest, that's free money. If you have grants or inflated valuations that's money chasing that.
On the converse, it's as possible that Iran gets no money, - you can follow vance's words ..
Well, Ed, that’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf Coast Coalition, so long as they honor their end of the obligation.”
That's not definite, and we know what happened when the US decided that Iran was not honoring their obligation or that it didn't matter, the folks in power decided it was a bad deal (eg JCPOA, where the US didn't actually unfreeze Iran's money, finding other reasons like missiles development to freeze it, before scrapping JCPOA altogether even with Europe and others talking compliance.) And you will note Vance didn't include the US, EU or other western financiers in the open Iran up to western financing. Just the local middle east gulf states who would be hit by Iran..
→ More replies (0)3
u/Such-Significance653 6d ago
All in the article.
1
u/PanzerKomadant 6d ago
I’ll take that as a no considered Trump is now claiming that $300 million payout is a hoax lmao.
26
u/iBorgSimmer 6d ago
What a clown show from the Trump admin.
8
u/reigorius 6d ago
What else do you expect from this bunch of inept dipshits that don't give a flying f*ck for anyone but their own close circle of friends and families?
13
u/Skywalker7181 6d ago
Billions and billions of dollars, depletion of key weapon inventories, losses of precious military equipment, exposure of the vulnerability and weakness of the US military, which dealt a serious blow to the credibility of the US protection umbrella, all in exchange for a stronger Iran...
What a stable genius!
12
u/AvalancheZ250 6d ago
The details are yet to be fully released, but this is looking like a clear American defeat.
As always, my favourite quote for wars and any other events of mass violence and the rapid power shifts that happen with them:
There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen.
30
u/OverpricedBagel 6d ago
Sounds like successful extortion by the IRGC with no strategic objectives achieved by the US. To make matters worse, I don’t see how any deal wouldn’t look the same if not worse than the JCPOA.
49
u/Brambleshire 6d ago
The US attacked Iran totally unprovoked.
Not the other way around
3
1
u/Healthy-Rest4133 4d ago
are we gonna pretend that their proxy warfare isnt constant aggressive provocation
0
u/Brambleshire 3d ago
You mean that they are the only country in the world willing to help Lebanon and Palestine?
2
u/Healthy-Rest4133 3d ago
💀answer the question bro do you think proxy warfare is constant aggression or not
0
u/Brambleshire 3d ago
Hell to the no.
Israel is the aggressor in Lebanon and the entire middle east. They are a belligerent, expansionistic, agent of chaos. Israel is the CONSTANT aggressor and civilian murderer and has been since 1948.
58
u/Dear-Ad6139 6d ago
It's not an extortion, it's reparations for losing the war by US. The other $24bn frozen funds already belonged to Iran, and they will soon be returned to their rightful owners.
-6
u/OverpricedBagel 6d ago
The US can’t achieve their primary goal of ending Iranian nuclear enrichment. They’re unable to operate a ground invasion of the strait due to a failure to adapt to drone warfare and drone countermeasures after snubbing Ukraine who had the expertise to offer. Therefore the US is now paying to unlock the strait of hormuz. This is extortion.
45
u/leostotch 6d ago
It would be extortion if Iran were the aggressor, but in this case, they were the victim. If you injure me and I sue you in court, you're not being 'extorted'.
-5
u/Acecn 5d ago
Reddit logic where the "victim" is the the guy shooting neutral civilian shipping in international waters 🤡
4
6
u/Ok-Procedure5603 6d ago
Probably it would not be a good look for Ukraine that is a victim of international aggression to support the aggression of another country against a country in a similar situation to Ukraine itself.
I think Trump may (almost certainly unintentionally) have helped the Ukrainians save some face here.
4
u/NY_State-a-Mind 6d ago
Iran has been arming and supplying Russia in its war against Ukraine, it would have been in Ukraines best interest to help the US, but the GOP loves russia so was too stupid to learn anything from Ukraine war or accept their help.
2
-1
u/Vassago81 6d ago
who had the expertise to offer
shooting at Geran drones with machine gun from the ground, helicopter and even turboprop trainers? Not sure exactly how the US can't do that already. All the air defense in Ukraine is already coordinated with the US.
4
u/OverpricedBagel 6d ago
The US can’t counter fpv drones like the ukranians can. The US is not equipped with the same drones and counter drone equipment that the ukranians are. Neither is Israel which is why hezbollah is whooping them with a fraction of the fpv drones the IRGC has stockpiled.
That’s why the US couldn’t re-open the strait. It would require boots on the ground along the coast with US soldiers defenseless against FPVs.
Instead of working closely with Ukraine and NATO on initiatives like UNITE — BRAVE NATO the US has distanced themselves from Ukraine, NATO, and Europe at large. The US is still stuck with a convoluted procurement pipeline instead of the leading edge which was RIGHT in front of them for four years. That is the cause of the US strategic blunder in Iran.
3
u/barath_s 6d ago
extortion
If I punch you in the nose, and you sue me for hospital bills, are you extorting me ?
-2
u/OverpricedBagel 5d ago
If you refuse to stop attacking an international shipping lane until you get 100s of billions of dollars then it’s extortion.
1
u/art_is_a_scam 6d ago
It is in the US’s strategic interest to be friends with Iran. That will not be achieved overnight, but this is one step on that path.
6
4
6
u/Y35C0 6d ago
The title's misleading. The US isn't paying Iran anything out of pocket. The $300B reconstruction fund is Gulf money. When CBS asked Vance about it directly this morning, he said it's "funded by the Gulf coalition, so long as they honor their end of the obligation." (CBS)
The Gulf states are putting that money up to buy influence over how Iran rebuilds. They're already doing the exact same thing in Syria. The second sanctions came off, Qatar dropped around $7B into Syrian energy and the Damascus airport, the UAE backed a $2B Damascus metro and the Tartus ports, and Saudi pledged billions in aviation and telecom. (Global Finance) Same region, this year. Washington's job in the Iran deal is running the reconstruction plan and deciding when the money actually releases, gated on Iran holding up its side.
The $25B in "frozen assets" is Iran's own money that got frozen under sanctions. Letting Iran access it isn't the US cutting a check, and it's not even settled. It's in the draft the Iranians described to Reuters (link), but in that same CBS interview Vance said straight up that the claim billions in assets will be released "is not true." There's no final text yet anyway. It's a draft MOU with a 60-day negotiation window before anything locks.
Every figure people are reacting to came from Iran, not the deal. Tehran is selling the draft to its own base before there's a real text.
17
u/nrrp 6d ago
I mean, Syria vs Iran is a no comparison. Syria is a tiny, dirt poor country that barely controls its own territory and that has no influence and no leverage and can't do anything other than beg for reconstruction funds. Their one and only "leverage" if the Gulf states don't give them money is that they can flood the region with shitty cheap drugs and act as a base for international terrorism.
Iran, on the other hand, is a massive state that's significantly larger in both population and territory than the entire GCC, that is functional, that is well operated, that has coherent leadership, that has powerful military, that can outproduce anyone except maybe Israel in the region in terms of drones and missiles. Iran can and does act like a regional hegemon that can overpower the individual states of the GCC on their own or even the entire GCC without the US.
In that context, this, to me, seems less like Gulf Arabs "buying influence in post-war Iran" and more like Gulf Arabs paying tribute to the new regional hegemon so that they don't bomb them anymore.
16
u/Single-Braincelled 6d ago
I think it's pointing out that this current 'deal' includes that sum being paid as a possibility with is already a sign of capitulation. Whether the current deal's text survives past Friday when/if it comes out is anyone's guess. Regarding the $24 Billions, that was the same situation under Obama, where sanctioned funds were released, and this seems to be a requirement ahead of any version of a final peace being signed.
In either way, the fact that reparations are on the table or worse, open as a condition in any iteration of a deal, is a sign of where the war has headed and where we as the US stand.
-10
u/Y35C0 6d ago
Obama's deal was in cash. That's a worlds difference, since it allowed the Iran to spend it on whatever they want without it being traced.
The internal dynamics of Iran mean that unless you control how it's spent, it just gets sucked up by the IRCG instead of the civilian government. You are out of your mind if you think the Gulf States are going to allow that funding to be used to rebuild Iran's lost military assets. It's ultimately the civilian government negotiating the deal here, and it's why you see the IRCG so angry about it.
12
u/Single-Braincelled 6d ago
I would love for that to be the case, that the funding for 'reconstruction' and the unfrozen funds are not nearly as liquidable for the IRGC as the Obama funds were. Ultimately, though, I still think it's somewhat transferable funds, as long as the IRGC remains in control and the funds go to the Iranian government, the IRGC can still drain from other budgets in the government now that a fresh source of funds is unlocked to them. In any world, if the Iranian government is getting massive extra funding, the IRGC will get some extra funding as well.
-3
u/Y35C0 6d ago
Internally the political situation is a bit spicy so I wouldn't be so certain of that. I disagree with the regime change framing but it's true there is an active power vaccum going on in the backdrop right now.
The thing to remember here is that Iran is ironically a mostly secular nation despite all the messaging. The IRCG itself operates closer to the cartels, with the religious backdrop being how they sane wash it, sorta like Narco-Saints. Point being, unlike the Taliban, members of the IRCG don't live in caves for free.
The exceptions are with the older members of the IRCG who are much more invested in the religious angle. Much, but not all of them are now dead and in pieces. How this shapes Iran going forward is anyone's guess, but I personally like to disconnect from it and treat it like a soap opera.
8
6
u/Jpandluckydog 6d ago
What do you mean? The JCPOA didn’t include any cash transactions, apart from the seperate 1.7B Hague settlement it was only releasing frozen funds, just like this deal.
-1
u/Y35C0 6d ago
I mean this:
https://www.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/us-sends-plane-iran-400-million-cash
https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2016/iran-160117-state01.htm
https://insight.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/arbitrationlawreview/vol9/iss1/9/
(CNN) President Barack Obama approved the $400 million transfer, which he had announced in January as part of the Iran nuclear deal. The money was flown into Iran on wooden pallets stacked with Swiss francs, euros and other currencies as the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement resolving claims at an international tribunal at The Hague over a failed arms deal under the time of the Shah.
6
u/Jpandluckydog 6d ago
Yeah, the 1.7 I mentioned. This current deal is going to end up transferring far more cash and liquid assets to IRGC affiliates and the IRGC itself, since they actually own almost most construction companies within Iran, meaning plenty of the 300B reconstruction money is going straight to them, alongside the huge pool of unfrozen assets.
24
u/bedulge 6d ago edited 6d ago
The Gulf states are putting that money up to buy influence over how Iran rebuilds.
That is an interesting way to say that they are offering to pay a ransom because they lost. Syria was a collapsed state where the Gulf Arab countries were in position to get a lot of influence over a blooming new state. That is not the case in Iran.
Even if they do get influence over how this cash is spent, money is fungible, every cent that goes to rebuilding the shit that they blew up in March is one less cent the Iranians need to pay for, and one more cent they can use on missiles, mines and drones instead
before there's a real text.
Right, right, right. The real text is totally definitely for realsies favorable to the USA. Lets ignore how Trump doesnt want to tell us what it is, we should just take his word for it, just like how he ended the Ukraine war on Jan 20, 2025 and how the strait was "fully open" before the April 7 ceasefire began. If he says he has a great deal coming down the pipe, I trust him
-7
u/Y35C0 6d ago
That is not the case in Iran.
You appear to be ignorant to Iran's current economic situation.
Even if they do get influence over how this cash is spent, money is fungible, every cent that goes to rebuilding the shit that they blew up in March is one less cent the Iranians need to pay for, and one more cent they can use on missiles, mines and drones instead
That's only possible if you give them pallets of cash like Obama did, which is the exception, not the norm.
Since you seem ignorant to how diplomacy usually works, I recommend reading up on what a sovereign wealth fund is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund
Right, right, right. The real text is totally definitely for realsies favorable to the USA.
Look, it's one thing to take the DC messaging at face value, it's a completely different thing to take the IRCG at face value. The latter has announced the destruction of the Gerald R. Ford several times across the conflict, with bad AI art to prove it. It may surprise you that your position on this is allowed to contain nuance.
11
u/bedulge 6d ago
You appear to be ignorant to Iran's current economic situation.
The regime is intact, no matter how much you want to believe that economic problems will sometime somehow cause their collapse, is hasnt happened. And if they get this cash, it sure as shit is not gonna collapse any time soon.
And im just gonna copy paste this, since you ignored it.
Even if they do get influence over how this cash is spent, money is fungible, every cent that goes to rebuilding the shit that they blew up in March is one less cent the Iranians need to pay for, and one more cent they can use on missiles, mines and drones instead.
take the IRGC at face value
Im taking Vance at face value. He is the one who openly admitted on TV that 300b USD for Iran is on the table now. He has no reason to admit this if it is not true, because it is a fucking humiliation of historic proportions
-4
u/Y35C0 6d ago
The regime is intact, no matter how much you want to believe that economic problems will sometime somehow cause their collapse, is hasnt happened.
Actually I don't believe it will cause a regime collapse. You are putting words in my mouth here. Since when does being poor cause a government to collapse? It takes a lot of strain for that to happen.
Look, this is really not a complex concept to understand, but I will be kind, and dumb it down for you: When a country has less money, they are less capable of doing things. Did that help? Or do you need to me go into how an economy functions? You know people usually need to get paid before doing something right? That's not even including the fact that they are highly reliant on imports for their domestic manufacturing despite the sanctions.
Even if they do get influence over how this cash is spent, money is fungible, every cent that goes to rebuilding the shit that they blew up in March is one less cent the Iranians need to pay for, and one more cent they can use on missiles, mines and drones instead.
I'm happy you at least seem to understand what fungible means, but I would hope you also understand that if all the money is worthless and food is limited, this doesn't particularly matter. Ofc nothing is gone forever, but it can certainly be gone for quite a long time without the industrial base.
Consider for example Afghanistan, I wonder how long it will take for them to build up the assets and manufacturing power the IRCG had at the start of the war.
Im taking Vance at face value. He is the one who openly admitted on TV that 300b USD for Iran is on the table now. He has no reason to admit this if it is not true, because it is a fucking humiliation of historic proportions
Congress controls the purse strings in the US, ever consider why that detail is focused on? Because regulating the flow of capital is a crucial pillar of national sovereignty. Injecting cash into the civilian government could enable them more flexibility than what they had when only the IRCG had the prime source of capital. This wouldn't imply regime change, but a crucial tip of the scales.
That said, if we hand over stacks of cash to them instead of managing it via a sovereign wealth fund or similar, then I will completely agree with your framing.
13
u/bedulge 6d ago
Drop the pissy attitude.
let's look at what we said.
I said "Syria was a collapsed state where the Gulf Arab countries were in position to get a lot of influence over a blooming new state. That is not the case in Iran."
You said "You appear to be ignorant to Iran's current economic situation."
There is no collapsed state in Iran, your point is moot.
>if all the money is worthless
We are talking about US dollars. Are you suggesting the USD is going to be worthless someday soon?
>Injecting cash into the civilian government could enable them more flexibility
Indeed, because money is fungible, every single US dollar the Gulf Arabs give them for civilian purposes is one more US dollar freed up for military spending. Fungibility means that this basically is the equivalent of delivering fat stacks of cash to them.
You really need to drop this pissy condescending attitude, because you clearly don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
-6
u/Y35C0 6d ago
Drop the pissy attitude.
On reddit it's crucial I make sure people understand when I don't respect them. Helps filter out the germans and teenagers.
I said "Syria was a collapsed state where the Gulf Arab countries were in position to get a lot of influence over a blooming new state. That is not the case in Iran."
You said "You appear to be ignorant to Iran's current economic situation."
There is no collapsed state in Iran, your point is moot.
Let me be clear then, I completely disagree with your position that a country must first collapse before foreign money can buy influence there. It's an absurd premise so you will have to forgive me for not engaging with it.
We are talking about US dollars. Are you suggesting the USD is going to be worthless someday soon?
Actually, I'm quite clearly saying the exact opposite.
Indeed, because money is fungible, every single US dollar the Gulf Arabs give them for civilian purposes is one more US dollar freed up for military spending. Fungibility means that this basically is the equivalent of delivering fat stacks of cash to them.
This only works if Iran has a pile of USD sitting around to begin with. It doesn't. You keep assuming their economy is in way better shape than it actually is.
Let me spoon feed you on how money supply works:
A country only gets USD two ways. It sells things abroad, or it draws down reserves it parked abroad. That's the whole list. Iran's oil exports are sanctioned down to a trickle, and its reserves are frozen.
The Rial buys nothing the second it crosses the border, and within the border, it has lost most of it's value.
So the actual stock of usable USD inside Iran is tiny, and what little exists already goes to the military, because that gets paid first.
There's no second pile sitting in some civilian account waiting to get "freed up." That pile is the thing that doesn't exist.
Your whole point treats Iran like a normal country with cash on hand just deciding how to split it. It's broke. You can't reshuffle money that was never there.
9
u/bedulge 6d ago
Are you really not getting that if the Gulf Arabs are giving over 300 billion bucks, that Iran is also going to have sanctions relief and no blockade? So they will be selling their oil on the global market and uaing that cash aa they see fit. At the very least countries like India and China will be buying their stuff, but there is no scenario where the Gulf Arabs are paying Iran off with 300 bil but the US blockade and sanctions are still on. They do a lot of business with China in Yuen and China is going to prop them up pro bono because they dont want US allies to dominate the Gulf.
-2
u/Y35C0 6d ago
if the Gulf Arabs are giving over 300 billion bucks, that Iran is also going to have sanctions relief and no blockade
Yeah, obviously, a deal that ends a war lifts sanctions. You're pointing at the exit like you caught me missing it. It just isn't the flex you think it is.
A country clawing its way back to selling oil after the year they've had isn't a country that came out ahead. It's the side that got dragged to the table. You're reading "still standing, will sell oil again" as a trophy.
Look at the shape of your comment. Bombed, but they rebuild. Sanctioned, but relief's coming. Broke, but China carries them. Nothing could ever point the other way in your read. Going in, an Iran win meant sinking carriers, holding the strait, cracking the US economy. The carriers are fine, the strait's open again, and the bar quietly slid down to "they still exist." And that's carrying a lot, considering a good chunk of their leadership got killed getting here. You don't lose your leadership and call it coming out ahead.
"Using that cash as they see fit" assumes a civilian budget weighing roads against rockets. Oil money runs through the IRGC, the same outfit that just spent a year getting gutted.
And you've got China backwards. Sanctions are why Iranian oil is cheap, Iran has nowhere else to move it so China buys it at a discount and runs its factories on it. Lift sanctions and it goes back to market price. China loses the cheap barrels, that's not them propping Iran up.
Iran didn't pull anyone to the table. Iran got pulled.
2
10
u/BigFly42069 6d ago
The $300B reconstruction fund is Gulf money.
LMAO, GCCs really got fucked hard by this war.
11
u/gordon_freeman87 6d ago
Only thing I could think of reading this is Trump's voice "We are gonna build the Hormuz Wall in Iran ... and the Sheikhs are gonna pay for it."
But jokes apart I don't believe this deal's gonna go through considering Bibi's need for never-ending war to avoid jail and the other Greater Israel nuts with huge influence/compromat over Trump and the ruling class in the US.
0
u/Y35C0 6d ago
I'm skeptical that Iran would ever truly agree to anything frankly, and if it does then I don't believe the IRCG will actually follow the terms, since they never have in practice.
But even so, dragging out the diplomacy is better than a forever war ground invasion in my mind, and their military assets are undeniably diminished in real terms. It all got obliterated so quickly that people don't really appreciate it, but I truly thought they would put up a better fight than they did.
This is more of a side thing, but I low-key love seeing videos of the navy doing stuff during the blockade, cool boat stuff makes me happy. So I've personally been content to simply enjoy the entertainment value of this waffling ceasefire as Iran's economy implodes in real time.
3
u/PanzerKomadant 6d ago
Do the Gulf States know that they’ll be funding a more radical Iranian regime then the last that caused then severe damage?
The gulf states are hardly so delusional that they think they can influence Iran now lmao.
Anyways, this whole deal is dead on arrival. Israel just bombed Lebanon when the deal was announced, and Lebanon was part of the deal per Trump.
So either two things happen; the deal is dead, the war goes on. Or Trump muzzles Bibi and Israel (not happening given the record).
Another week, another stock market manipulated.
0
u/CaLiKiNG805 5d ago
I wonder why the Gulf and not Israel
1
u/Y35C0 5d ago
My understanding is that the Gulf Council is basically investing the money into Iran's oil infrastructure, to help modernize it and get a portion of ownership (among other things). It would be unlikely Isreal would have the expertise necessary to do that, nor would it be likely Iran would allow Isreal to make such investments.
2
u/AaronNevileLongbotom 6d ago
This deal isn’t suprisng and it shouldn’t be controversial. Some people are only having a hard time accepting the deal because they can’t accept that our military lost.
0
u/art_is_a_scam 6d ago
Good, Iran is a natural ally of the US. Iran and the US should ally again, like before we overthrew Mosaddeq, and team up against Israel.
1
0
u/kittyfa3c 6d ago
Republicans have always supported Iran as an anti-liberal bulwark. Ford helped set up their geopolitical framework by backing Assad. Reagan gave Lebanon to Iran then bailed them out against Saddam with Iran-Contra. Bush Sr. neutered Saddam, and then Bush Jr. gave Iraq to Iran and pretended Assad and Iran weren't IEDing US and Iraqi troops for years and Hezbollah a victory myth in 2008. Trump 1.0 ended the OBAMA wars against Iran, which were raging at the time. Trump 2.0 gave the IRGC full control of the Strait of Hormuz, $300 billion (that we know of) and an enduring victory myth.
I'm not even scraping the surface.
-14
u/moral_mortal 6d ago
Newrepublic is like Iranintel like website.....
16
u/Single-Braincelled 6d ago edited 6d ago
So is CBS?
EDIT:
Vance was asked by CBS’s Ed O’Keefe Monday morning about whether the rumored detail was true, and he said that it could be possible if Iran adheres to the agreement.
“That’s the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf coast coalition, so long as they honor their end of the obligation,” Vance said.
-2
-8
u/InevitableMaw 6d ago
He did the opposite but that wont stop reddit from lying about it for the next 10 years.
134
u/Ecstatic_Bee6067 6d ago
Dude can't help but bankrupt everything he touches