Russian State Ran Media Is Now Affirming That The US Air Strike On Soleimani Was Done To Promote Trump For The 2020 Election And To Distract People From The Impeachment Process

By Theodore Shoebat

Russian state-ran government media outlets, are now affirming that the killing of Soleimani was done by Trump to act as a distraction from the impeachment process that has been ongoing within Congress. It is also being said that the assassination of Soleimani will only lead to increased tensions. An official statement from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs it describe’s the killing of Soleimani as “adventurist”  and added that “Soleimani was devoted to protecting Iran’s national interests. We express our sincere condolences to the Iranian people”. Russian’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov affirmed that the killing “grossly violates international law” and will transpire into detrimental outcomes for regional stabilization. Lavrov said that “the targeted actions of a UN member state to eliminate officials of another UN member state, moreover, on the territory of a third sovereign state without its knowledge, flagrantly violate the principles of international law and deserve condemnation.” Stanislav Khamdokhov, reporter for RIA Novosti described the assassination of Soleimani as “a terrorist act” by the US.

Irina Alksnis, a columnist for RIA Novosti, described the US strike on Soleimani as a marketing move for Trump’s 2020 election campaign. She wrote:

“For Donald Trump, the annihilation of an Iranian general presents a decent opportunity for a domestic PR campaign, which is quite timely in the context of the upcoming elections”

You could laugh at this latter statement as just ‘Russian propaganda,’ but if you think about it it actually makes sense. The presidential election is going to happen in 2020 and Trump does need certain attention grabbing things to boost his image. This suggestion reminds me Reagan’s campaign using the Tehran hostage crises as a way to make look Reagan look good and Carter look brittle. I wrote a detailed article on this and will present it here…

The United States government has done policies that have helped Iran. From removing Saddam Hussein — and thus getting rid of a major threat to Iranian hegemony  –; the US government has also worked directly with Iran backed militias in Iraq. The US left the Iran Deal — which was regulating Iran’s nuclear activity — and this has incentivized the Iranians to go above the limit for how big their uranium stockpile can be. Now the Saudis are terrified of a nuclear Iran. Could it be that the US is making the conditions for a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran? Its not a far-fetched claim, given the fact that when Iran and Iraq were at war in the eighties, the US and Israel both made huge profits through arms sales. We know for a fact that Iran will destroy Saudi Arabia, since in the Book of Isaiah it reads: 

Go up, O Elam;
    lay siege, O Media (Isaiah 21:2)

The prophecy then reads:

In the thickets in Arabia you will lodge,
    O caravans of Dedanites.
¹⁴ To the thirsty bring water;
    meet the fugitive with bread,
    O inhabitants of the land of Tema [which is Yathrib, the second holiest city in Islam].
¹⁵ For they have fled from the swords,
    from the drawn sword,
from the bent bow,
    and from the press of battle. (Isaiah 21:13-15) 

Elam was in ancient Iran, and here the Iranians are told to go to war in which the Arabians are devastated. 

So since the Arabs are going to be crushed by Iran, the current political situation should be heading towards this bloody denouement. 

There was a “secret” series of meetings between officials from Washington, Israel and the UAE, to discuss the threat of Iran in the Middle East. Part of the meetings was that these countries would share information and coordinate between each other to strategize against Tehran. The meeting was arranged by Brian Hook, the State Department main official on Iranian matters. The exact dates and location for the meeting is not known, but we know that the first assembly took place in the spring. While until recently there has been tensions between Israel and the Gulf states, the animosity between them is cooling off. This is because the Arabs are terrified of Iran and are looking to Israel for more protection.

In recent years clandestine meetings between Israel and the Gulf Arab nations have been more and more frequent. The focus of the meetings has been Iran’s nuclear plans and Iranian presence in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. The frequency of these meetings is tied to a major conference that took place in Warsaw in February. The Warsaw conference, which was organized by the US, had officials from Israel, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and dozens of other countries, and was focused on challenging Iran. But the entity that has been very instrumental behind these meetings is the Iran Action Group, which is a part of the State Department, was founded in 2018 by Mike Pompeo and is led by Brian Hook.

While the Saudis are getting warmer with Israel in fear of Iran, the UAE has been more on the side of caution since it has better ties with Tehran. As a report from the Wall Street Journal tells us:

“The U.A.E. took a more cautious approach than the U.S. as tensions with Iran rose this summer. It declined to join Washington in blaming Iran for attacks on commercial ships in May, and last month sent officials to Tehran to discuss maritime security.”

The Prime Minister of the UAE, Sheikh Maktoum, has been friendlier with the Iranians as is reflected in his statements playing down the common American trop of an Iranian threat:

While the Saudis are in fear of a nuclear Iran, the Trump administration has allowed nuclear projects to be conducted in Saudi Arabia. As we read in Al-Jazeera:

“First, the Trump administration has given a green light to US companies to work on nuclear projects in Saudi Arabia. According to a report recently released by the US Congress Oversight Committee, “with regard to Saudi Arabia, the Trump Administration has virtually obliterated the lines normally separating government policymaking from corporate and foreign interests.”

By removing itself from the Iran Deal — which imposed regulations on Iran’s nuclear projects —,  and allowing the Saudis to have American nuclear technology, the United States is, in the words of al-Jazeera, “pushing the Middle East towards a dangerous nuclear competition between Saudi Arabia and Iran.” The Saudis have made it very clear that if Iran pursues the possession of a nuclear weapon, so will they.

The Saudis were against the Iran Deal because they wanted intense sanctions to be imposed on the Iranians, but now that Iran is being sanctioned, the Iranians have been intensifying their nuclear activity and has increased its uranium stockpile above the limit that the Iran Deal set in place. So it looks like the Saudis have shot themselves in the foot. So, the US severing itself from the Iran Deal has not helped in bringing peace to the Middle East, but rather it has rippled tensions even further. The Saudis backed the Syrian revolution and provided prodigious amounts of arms to anti-Assad rebels, because Saudi state is in a proxy war with Iran and wants to neutralize the Iran allied Assad regime. But now that Syria has been devastated by war, Iran has only made its presence in Syria larger, especially with its Shiite militias.The Iraq War also helped Iran since it removed Iran’s major enemy, Saddam Hussein, from power. I must bring up the question that I have brought up a number of times: is the US really working to control Iran or unleash Iran? Is the US merely acting like an enemy of Iran only to push Iran into militarism?

Could it be that the US and Israel want a war between Iran and Saudi Arabia? There is a story that has been deemed as a “conspiracy theory” for a very long time: it is the “October Surprise” that took place during the Reagan administration, in which the US and Israel made a shocking deal with Iran: the Iranians would turn in the hostages of the US embassy crises and in return the US would allow arms sales between Israel and Iran.

It was a hostages for arms deal. But the story has been scoffed so many times as a “conspiracy theory” that most people either fully reject it or refuse to even talk about it. But looking pass the accusations and looking at numerous intricacies of the story, it is hard for one to merely laugh the story off as just a conspiracy theory. The story hinges upon a claim that the deal took place in Madrid in 1980 and was attended by Reagan’s campaign manager, William J. Casey, who would also be the head of the CIA. Those who reject the October Surprise story affirm that they do so because there is no evidence that Casey was even in Madrid on the day that the meeting supposedly took place. But, just a number of years ago, journalist Robert Parry found a memo in the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library, dated November 4th of 1991, on an investigation on the October Surprise allegations. The memo, written by President Bush’s deputy counsel, Paul Beach, stated that the Madrid embassy reported that Casey was in Madrid. As we read in a 2017 report from the Los Angeles Times:

“But just a few years ago, Parry discovered a damning memo in the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library. Dated Nov. 4, 1991, the memo was written by President Bush’s deputy counsel, Paul Beach, and it described the State Department’s efforts to collect documents in response to congressional subpoenas for “material potentially relevant to the October Surprise allegations.” Beach then specifically mentions “a cable from the Madrid embassy indicating that Bill Casey was in town, for purposes unknown.”

Now, opponents of the October Surprise can say that it is merely coincidental that Casey was in Madrid (which is interesting because for so long the rejectors of the October Surprise theory said that there is no evidence that Casey was in Madrid), but it is quite fascinating that the hostages were released minutes after Reagan won, and that upon his election victory Casey then gave the okay to Israel to do arms deals with the Iranians. As the Los Angeles Times article goes on to report:

“The Iranians dragged out the negotiations over the release of the hostages. President Carter believed these negotiations were nearly successful in late September 1980, but suddenly new demands were made that stalled the talks. Polls showed Carter within single digits of catching Reagan until about 10 days before the election. Carter lost decisively, and the hostages were inexplicably released minutes after Reagan was sworn in as president.

The story does not end there. Months later, Reagan’s newly installed CIA director, Casey, gave the green light to Israel to sell weapons to Iran. In retrospect, this was the beginning of the scandal that broke in 1987, when it became known that the Reagan administration had been exchanging weapons for hostages.”

According to a draft report of the House October Surprise Task Force (which was formed to investigate the October Surprise claims), the Reagan-Bush campaign created the “October Surprise Group” in order to make strategies for “any last-minute foreign policy or defense-related event, including the release of the hostages, that might favorably impact President Carter in the November election”. The strategist group consisted of some big players of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a major neoconservative organization that was very influential behind the Iraq War, such as Fred C. Ikle, John R. Lehman Jr., Robert G. Neumann, Laurence Silberman and Seymour Weiss. Meetings for the October Surprise Group were attended by Richard Perle, one of the biggest pushers for the 2003 Iraq War, which would ultimately help Iran since it removed Iran’s enemy, Saddam Hussein. Isn’t it interesting that some of the biggest pushers for the Iraq War were also people who wanted to deal with the Iranians for arms deals? 

The team behind Reagan’s campaign was riddled with former CIA agents, to a great extent because of George Bush Sr’s run for presidency and also, supposedly, because a lot of CIA officers lost their jobs under Carter. According to Bill Colby, who was Bush’s predecessor as CIA director, Bush “had a flood of people from the CIA who joined his supporters. They were retirees devoted to him for what he had done” in defending the spy agency in 1976 when heavy criticism hit the CIA for spying on Americans and other abuses. Richard Allen, Reagan’s foreign policy advisor, working on the Bush campaign’s strategy group as a “plane load of disgruntled former CIA” officers who were “playing cops and robbers.”

When the Carter administration was negotiating for the hostages’ release, the Iranians were already itching for Israeli technology and Carter had agreed to provide them with what they wanted. The former governor of Texas, John Connally, told Bush Sr. that he was being told by his oil contacts in the Middle East that Carter had already made a deal with the Iranians of military technology for hostages. On October 27, 1980, Bush Sr. told Richard Allen about this and Allen made a note of it in his private record:

“JBC [Connally] – already made deal. Israelis delivered last wk spare pts. via Amsterdam. Hostages out this wk. Moderate Arabs upset. French have given spares to Iraq and know of JC [Carter] deal w/Iran. JBC [Connally] unsure what we should do. RVA [Allen] to act if true or not.”

In a 1992 deposition, Allen explained to the House October Surprise Task Force that the note was about how Connally had been told that Carter had solidified a ransom for the hostages with a shipment of Israeli military spare parts to the Iranians. Allen recounted that Bush told him of Connally’s report and instructed him to inquire further by asking Connally for details and then pass any new details to two of Bush’s aides. According to the notes, Bush ordered Allen to confide any details to one “Ted Shacklee” or Theodore Shackley, a CIA covert operations specialist very close to the Bush campaign. The Reagan-Bush campaigners were worried that Carter could actually succeed in a deal and defeat his Republican rivals.

Carter was trying desperately to establish a deal with the Iranians to free the hostages and he turned to one Cyrus Hashemi, an Iranian banker who touted himself as being heavily connected with the Iranian mullahs and someone who could help the Carter administration solidify a deal. Hashemi was entrenched in both east and west, having, in the words of Robert Parry, “one foot in the West and the other back in Iran”.  According to Gary Sick, a Middle East expert on Carter’s National Security Council staff:

“Cyrus Hashemi quickly demonstrated that he had access to a number of high-level officials in the Iranian revolutionary government, most notably the governor-general of Khuzistan [Ahmad Madani] but also individuals within Khomeini’s own family”

But while Hashemi was getting the Carter administration to believe that he was helping them, he was having personal and business ties with major Republican figures, such as U.S. intelligence officer John Shaheen, a Lebanese born businessman based in New York City (Shaheen would be involved in a huge political and financial scam involving a personal account of his being full of money from the Shah’s sister Princess Ashraf’s personal account). Shaheen had close ties to Bill Casey who would later become the head of the CIA. Shaheen’s and Hashemi’s relationship went back to the 1970s. Cyrus’ brother, Jamshid, recounted in an interview:

“For many years, he [Cyrus] had been cooperating with Mr. Shaheen … I asked him [Cyrus] in 1979, at the end of 1979. He was very open about it. He knew that Mr. Shaheen had contacts with the government of the United States. At that time, I did not know which section or which organization.”

John Shaheen would connect Cyrus Hashemi to Bill Casey. Former Attorney General Elliot Richardson said in 1984 that Casey recruited Shaheen and Hashemi in 1979 to sell property belonging to a non-profit organization owned by the Shah of Iran, the Pahlavi Foundation (officials like John McCloy, Bill Casey and John Shaheen schemed to have assets in American banks belonging to the Shah family seized. Not surprisingly tens of millions were funneled into a private account owned by John Shaheen). The revolutionary Islamic government of Iran had just toppled the royal family and the Shah was desperate for the cash and wanted the property sold. Whats very interesting is that while the Hashemi brothers sold the Shah’s property, they were involved in supporting the anti-Shah rebels in the revolution. 

Since Hashemi was a banker, the CIA wanted his financial channels. Shaheen connected Hashemi with the CIA so that his bank could be used as a conduit by which to funnel money to fund covert operations. Cyrus Hashemi’s bank, First Gulf Bank & Trust Co., was to the interest of the new Iranian government’s military which wanted to deposit tens of millions of dollars into it. Jamshid Hashemi recounted:

“It was ordered that all these monies be transferred to an account of my brother, into his bank, which was done … The order of the transfer was from Admiral [Ahmad] Madani [who served as Iran’s defense minister]. We went to the admiral with the telex and then we went to the war room of the navy in Teheran and we faxed it … so he [Cyrus] could take over all the money, in late 1979, $30 to $35 million, to the account of the First Gulf.”

But the Hashemi brothers didn’t do these deposits without the influence of the United States. Bill Casey was directing the brothers on the transactions. As Jamshid would recall, Casey “was the man who was actually putting all these things together for both of them … Casey was the adviser.” So, the man who would be Reagan’s campaign manager, was directing major money deposits for the Iranian military.

On April 20th, 1980, Ronald Reagan’s campaign formed the Iran Working Group, a group of Republican foreign policy experts ran by Richard Allen, Fred Ikle and Laurence Silberman. In July of 1980, Cyrus Hashemi began a series of meetings in Madrid on the hostage situation in the Tehran embassy. He was supposedly doing the meetings to strategize on behalf of Carter, but back in Tehran another story was being said. Iranian President Abolhassan Bani-Sadr spoke about a “secret deal” with Iranian Islamic radicals and said that he first learned about this after Reza Passendideh, a nephew of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, attended a meeting in Madrid with Cyrus Hashemi and Republican lawyer Stanley Pottinger, on July 2, 1980.

According to a letter that Bani-Sadr sent to the House October Surprise Task Force on Dec. 17, 1992, Passendideh brought back to Tehran a plan “from the Reagan camp”. Bani-Sadr recounted in the letter:

“Passendideh told me that if I do not accept this proposal, they [the Republicans] would make the same offer to my [radical Iranian] rivals. He further said that they [the Republicans] have enormous influence in the CIA … Lastly, he told me my refusal of their offer would result in my elimination.”

Bani-Sadr said that he had first refused to comply and urged the Khomeini to release the hostages. But he soon realized that the Khomeini was playing both sides, negotiating with the Carter administration while at the same time conspiring with the Republicans. The Bush-Reagan campaign even had its own intelligence apparatus ran by former CIA employees, which monitored all day the news and gave press briefings. The draft report for the October Surprise Task Force said:

“The Reagan-Bush campaign maintained a 24-hour Operations Center, which monitored press wires and reports, gave daily press briefings and maintained telephone and telefax contact with the candidate’s plane … Many of the staff members were former CIA employees who had previously worked on the Bush campaign or were otherwise loyal to George Bush.”

This intelligence center was no doubt fixated on the situation in Iran since it was looking to exploit the situation to the favor of Reagan’s campaign. While the Ayatollah Khomeini was playing both sides of the American political coin, Cyrus Hashemi was as well playing both sides, acting like he was defending the Democrats while secretly helping the Republicans. Cyrus Hashemi told his brother that “we should not play only in the hands of the Democrats,” and that “it was the wish of Mr. Casey to meet with someone from Iran.” Jamshid Hashemi then began coordinating meetings in the Plaza Hotel in Madrid between Iranian radical officials and American operatives. “That’s when I started getting on this work of inviting both Mehdi [Karrubi, a politically powerful Iranian cleric], to come directly, and Hassan [Karrubi, the cleric’s brother], to come indirectly to Madrid,” Jamshid Hashemi said.

At the Plaza Hotel in Madrid, Bill Casey was at the meeting alongside another American who Hashemi identified as Donald Gregg, the CIA officer working on Carter’s National Security Council. It was in the Plaza Hotel where Casey conspired for the hostages to be released right after Reagan’s inauguration. After the Shah was overthrown, the Khomeini took power and Americans were held hostage in the US embassy in Tehran; and because of this, Carter froze a $150 million deal that the Shah made to buy military hardware, including F-14 spare parts. Jamshid Hashemi recalled the meeting:

“What was specifically asked was when these hostages should be released, and it was the wish of Mr. Casey that they be released after the Inauguration … Then the Reagan administration would feel favorably towards Iran and release the FMS [foreign military sales] funds and the frozen assets and return to Iran what had already been purchased.”

After the meeting in July, recalled Jamshid Hashemi, cleric Mehdi Karrubi went back to Tehran and spoke with the Ayatollah Khomeini and his senior advisors. Two or three weeks later, Karrubi requested another meeting with Casey to which he agreed. In the second meeting in Madrid, Karrubi affirmed that the Iranian government agreed to release the hostages once Reagan had taken the election victory. “Karrubi expressed acceptance of the proposal by Mr. Casey,” Jamshid Hashemi said. “The hostages would be released after Carter’s defeat.”

After the Madrid meetings, Jamshid Hashemi said his brother, Cyrus, began organizing military shipments – mostly artillery shells and aircraft tires – from Eilat, in Israel, to Bandar Abbas, an Iranian port. Jamshid Hashemi valued the military supplies in the tens of millions of dollars.

After the meetings in Madrid, Jamshid Hashemi recounted that his brother, Cyrus, commenced the shipment of military parts from Eliat, Israel, to Bandar Abbas, a port in Iran. The parts were mostly artillery shells and aircraft tires. Jamshid Hashemi assessed that the military supplies was worth tens of millions of dollars.

In the United States election season was ongoing. Carter defeated his Democrat rival, Edward Kennedy, and people were doubting whether Reagan could win since there were fears that he was a radical who would intensify the Cold War. Behind the curtains there were actions taking place to hinder Carter’s negotiations for the hostage crises. Sadegh Ghotbzadeh, Iran’s acting Foreign Minister, said in an interview with Agence France Presse on Sept. 6 that he had information that Reagan was “trying to block a solution” to the hostage situation.

Back in Iran, Bani-Sadr managed to get the Khomeini to resume negotiations with the Carter administration, an action that he did reluctantly. Khomeini passed on a new hostage proposal to Washington officials through Sadegh Tabatabai. Right when the Carter administration had lost hope in the Iranians cooperating, this new proposal appeared. This worried the people in Reagan’s camp who thought that Carter could succeed in a negotiation and take the election. On September 16th, Casey met with senior Reagan-Bush campaign officials Edwin Meese, Bill Timmons and Richard Allen, alongside Michael Ledeen and Noel Koch, to discuss the “Persian Gulf Project”.

According to Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben-Menashe, the Reagan campaign wanted the hostages to only be released after Reagan won the November 4 election, with the final steps of the negotiations to be done in Paris between a delegation of Republicans, led by George H.W. Bush, and a delegation of Iranians, led by cleric Mehdi Karrubi. Others that were to be present at the Paris meeting were a half a dozen Israelis, including David Kimche, and several CIA officials, including Donald Gregg and Robert Gates who had strong ties to Bush Sr. As the plan to sabotage Carter’s negotiations were ongoing, the Republicans made sure to utilize propaganda to make Carter’s efforts for the hostage crises look like a failure. Meanwhile there was a six-member delegation from Israel in the Ritz Hotel in Paris which Israeli intelligence agent, Ari Ben-Menashe, also attended. He recalled of how he saw George Bush Sr.,  as well as Robert Gates, Robert McFarlane, Donald Gregg and George Cave, the CIA expert on Iran. “We walked past the vigilant eyes of the French security men to be confronted by two U.S. Secret Service types,” Ben-Menashe wrote in Profits of War. “After checking off our names on their list, they directed us to a guarded elevator at the side of the lobby. Stepping out of the elevator, we found ourselves in a small foyer where soft drinks and fruits had been laid out.” He also added:

“Ten minutes later, [cleric Mehdi] Karrubi, in a Western suit and collarless white shirt with no tie, walked with an aide through the assembled group, bade everyone a good day, and went straight into the conference room … A few minutes later George Bush, with the wispy-haired William Casey in front of him, stepped out of the elevator. He smiled, said hello to everyone, and, like Karrubi, hurried into the conference room. It was a very well-staged entrance. My last view of George Bush was of his back as he walked deeper into the room – and then the doors were closed.”

The Paris meeting’s strategy was that for the 52 hostages, the US would allow $52 million in arms sales to Iran, and would unfreeze Iranian monies in American banks. But, the timing of the hostages’ release had to be precise: Reagan’s expected Inauguration on Jan. 20, 1981. Two days after the meeting, the Ritz Hotel’s records of the Americans’ and Israelis’ attendance in the meeting were erased. “It was such a secret arrangement that all hotel records of the Americans’ and the Israelis’ visits to Paris – I cannot speak for the Iranians – were swept away two days after we left town,” Ben-Menashe wrote.

While Bush, Gates, McFarlane, Gregg, Cave and Karrubi all denied ever being in the meeting, Ben-Menashe testified under oath before Congress that he saw Bush and company in October 1980 at the Ritz Hotel in Paris. But on October 18th, 1980 — the day that the meeting began — there was an interview done in which leaked information that Bush was going to fly to Paris was revealed. A journalist working for the Chicago Tribune named John Maclean, visited David Henderson, then a State Department Foreign Service officer, at his home to interview him. Henderson told McClean that he had been told by a reputable Republican source that Bush was flying to Paris for a clandestine meeting with Iranian officials about the 52 American hostages.The story of the Paris meeting was also backed by Heinrich Rupp, Casey’s pilot who said that he flew Casey to Paris in mid-October. Rupp recounted that after he arrived at LeBourget airport outside Paris, he saw a man who looked like Bush on the tarmac.

In 1990, French intelligence officer, Nicholas Ignatiew, told journalist Robert Parry that he had checked with his French government contacts and confirmed that there indeed was a meeting between Republicans and Iranians in Paris in mid-October 1980. Claude Angeli, a French investigative reporter with a plethora of connections with the French secret service, confirmed that secret service agents provided “cover” for the meeting between Republicans and Iranians on October 18th and 19th. The German journalist, Martin Kilian got corroboration for this from the anti-Communist chief of French intelligence, Alexandre deMarenches. This was brought further to the light by David Andelman, the former New York Times reporter and biographer for Alexandre deMarenches. Andelman recounted about he was told by deMarenches that he had helped arrange the meeting between the Americans and Iranians and how there was indeed a meeting in Paris in mid-October.

After Reagan’s victory, Hashemi was back in New York arranging the arms shipments to Iran. In Europe a French-Israeli arms shipment was getting ready to be sent to Iran.

The Iranian arms dealer, Ahmed Heidari, recounted how he had approached deMarenches in September of 1980 to get help in procuring weapons for the Iranian military, which was then at war with the Iraqi army in the Khuzistan province.

Heidari recalled how deMarenches connected him with a French middleman named Yves deLoreilhe, who facilitated the arms shipment. The plane left France on Oct. 23 and stopped in Tel Aviv to load 250 tires for American built F-4 fighters, and then returned back to France to add spare parts for M-60 tanks, before going to Teheran on Oct. 24. Upon learning of this, Carter protested to Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Israel wasn’t going to stop a good deal from being done. The profit was their inspiration, the market their temple, and capital was their deity. In 1981, Israel sold $75 million worth of arms to Iran. The arms came from Israel Military Industries, Israel Aircraft Industries and the Israel Defense Forces. The Israel arms dealer Yaacov Nimrodi, is said to have signed a deal with Iran’s Ministry of National Defense to sell $135,842,000 worth of weapons, including Lance missiles, Copperhead shells and Hawk missiles. In 1983, Israel sold more than $100 million dollars worth of arms to Tehran.

So while the Iranian government was portrayed as an enemy of the US for holding 52 Americans hostage, the US and Israeli governments did not mind collaborating with the Iranians to make money through arms deals. The US right now is portraying Iran as an enemy and as a major threat. But, what if what is really happening now is the same thing that happened in the 1980s? The US and Israel secretly negotiated arms deals with the Iranians in the early 1980s; in 2003 the US removed Iran’s biggest military threat, Saddam Hussein, thus allowing Iran to become an even bigger regional power and to have huge amounts of influence in Iraq; the US military has collaborated with Iranian soldiers; the US allowed Iran to carve up Iraq and we know for a fact that the US has backed Iranian supported Shiite militias; the United States destabilized Syria and now Syria has been flooded with Iranian backed militias; the US pulled out of the Iran Deal which in turn incentivized the Iranians to break regulations and exceed the limit for its uranium stockpile that it is allowed to own. The more aggressive Iran becomes, the more terrified the Saudis will be.

Could it be that Israel and the US are simply creating the conditions of an Iranian Saudi war that they can simply profit out of? When Israel did arms deals with Iran, it was right when the Iranians were at war with Iraq, and neither the Israelis nor the Americans wanted to leave an opportunity to make money off of bloodshed. When the Saudis were slaughtering the Yemenis, Trump made sure that billions of dollars in arms were sold to the Saudis. Remember what Trump said: “I don’t like the concept of stopping an investment of $110 billion into the United States.” 

This is the American mentality. Money is god, and the American deity cannot be ignored no matter the sins that are committed for his cause. So since we know the American and Israeli aspirations for arms deals, do you think they would miss an opportunity to make money from a Saudi Iranian war? The Americans are only helping to create a monster that will be a devastation to Israel. 

  

  

Source