An American Christian's Understanding of the Israel-Iran War

A Walk Through New Hampshire and the Need for Historical Perspective

Conversations That Matter podcast. I'm your host, John Harris. Hope everyone's doing well out there. It's been a little while. Well, I guess I was on the American Churchman last night, but before that, it's been a little while.

I took a little trip for, I guess it was two full days with travel, four days, right? I'd get there and get back to the White Mountains in New Hampshire. We were actually staying in Maine, in Lovell, Maine, which is, it's actually a quite nice little town.

There aren't hotels or really any corporate anything there. And that's one of the things I liked about it. It had that small town feel, that quaint New England feel. And my wife found this Airbnb cabin.

And so we just stayed there for, I guess it would have been three nights and had a wonderful time just driving around, checking out little towns around there, going hiking. We went up, what do they call that?

Mount Washington. I've been up there. I actually hiked it a few years ago. Now it's like 10 years ago. I don't like to think about how long things are now, but it was a while ago now that I think about it.

Okay. So it wasn't a few years, but I did hike it. This is the first time I actually drove up and that's a bucket list thing, right? A lot of people, especially if you're on the East coast, going up Mount Washington is a big deal.

You get a little bumper sticker that says my car went up Mount Washington, which I'm not going to put on my car, but I've driven up, driven in Alaska, I've driven in Colorado, I've driven in California.

I don't really, I don't know. It's not the biggest feat I've ever, I've ever been through, I suppose. So, but it's still, you know, for the Northeast, that's kind of a big deal. Anyway, I was away and while I was away, I guess the world ended or at least it was supposed to end.

Some people said it was going to be World War III. And of course I did not want missiles to be sent when I heard, oh no, Trump's thinking of missiles. I think it went through all our minds. We're like, oh no, no, please don't, don't do this.

Don't escalate this, which was the concern. But I saw a number of folks in the limited time I had to check social media out saying, honestly, kind of crazy stuff. I thought at least, I mean, like, I mean, I guess if you, if we're going to have a nuclear war, maybe it's not that crazy, but I just thought this is a little bit panicky.

Saying things like I regret voting for Trump. I basically repenting of it. I should never have told any of you to vote for Trump as if Kamala Harris would have been better. And Dave Smith was one, Candace Owens was one, Nick Fuentes, not that I follow him, but of course this is like go time for those guys, right?

They're like, oh man, this is our opportunity. This is our narrative. Like this is go time. And of course it wasn't go time. And I, I'm, I'm actually very happy with the way things turned out compared to the way what could have happened.

What could have happened obviously scared a lot of us. And so this prompted me, I thought, you know, when I get back, I don't know if I'll cover this. I'm not sure. Like it was still a little bit of an ongoing thing, but the more I thought about it, the more I thought, you know, there's not a lot of great resources out there to explain and give a historical background to what actually led to all this.

And you could spend a series of podcasts talking about all this, but I thought, you know, I have some requests to talk about it. I'll do it. And I'll probably give you a perspective that you likely aren't hearing in other places as much.

And that's because it's driven by a more historical long view. And I think that's really important. I value that. Obviously, I think a lot of people who listen to this podcast value that even my critiques of social justice are very driven by historical research and understanding what led to the point that we're at now.

And then what are the historical patterns? What could happen given what has happened? So this is not going to be any different. I will confess though, if it's Eastern or even Middle Eastern history, it's not my strongest point.

So I'm thinking back, I had a graduate or sorry, an undergraduate course in Middle Eastern history. And there's, there's a number of things I learned in that obviously that I think pertain. And it was actually that background that's background from like now 16 years ago or more that I was tapping into that made me realize, wow, a lot of the takes out there, especially on X are just really awful.

Like these people, a lot of them don't seem to understand the dynamics geopolitically. And I'm no expert, but Hey, I know they're wrong, but they're very sure of themselves. And that just prompted me to say, you know what?

I may not know. I may not have all the answers. So if you ask a question in this live chat, I may have to get back to you. I'm thinking of possibly doing a follow-up and in the follow-up talking more about Zionism and that kind of stuff.

I think that's that's important to this, but it's that that's being covered. I think maybe over-covered and, and probably overplayed by a lot of folks. So it's not my first instinct to cover that, but I may do another episode on that.

If people are interested, I want to focus on Iran, Israel and the United States though, and geopolitically, what just happened? Why did, why did that happen? Why did Trump feel compelled to throw some rockets over there?

Iran’s Ancient Roots, Islamization, and the Rise of the Ayatollahs

And Israel, of course, starting this off in a way, I mean, it really is one of those things where you get into parental disputes, right. Or, or arguments between kids and the parent has to come in and it's like, who, you know, he hit me first.

Oh yeah. But he said this. Oh yeah. But it's one of those things, right. You can't, yes, Israel did shoot some rockets that kick this off, but there's a long history here and that's, what's important to understand.

And that's what we're going to get into. And I don't represent all Christians here, but I am a Christian and I am going to see things in hopefully a Christian way, meaning just war theory, meaning I, I am American first, meaning the order of Amoris means something to me.

I care about my country and I don't want us getting tangled up into wars that aren't ours or don't serve our interests, especially when we have a problem with our own border and our own debt and all kinds of other things.

So that's going to play into this obviously as well. But I also have sympathy and compassion for both Iran and Israel and people in general. They're not just, I don't look at things just ideologically.

I mean, there's real people in these places that are getting hurt and I don't know what the casualty levels are now. I think they were estimated to be around five or 600 last I checked. That seems, I mean, I don't know.

That's what I read at least. So I haven't looked into that deeply, but five or 600 for the Iranian people. And then for Israel, I think it was I don't know, 15, 20, something like that. But with Iran, especially, we probably aren't going to know for a little while, if ever exactly how many, but these are people, these are real people and this has real world ramifications.

And that's why it does matter to an extent at the same time though. And I do need to say this before we get into all of it. I don't want, and I don't like the obsession with foreign conflicts and issues.

And there definitely has been, and I think it's the right word, an obsession with Israel's conflicts, both coming from a neoconservative kind of hegemony that's been in place for 25 years, at least in DC and a very pro-Israel lobby there, but also a rising kind of Islamic sympathy coming from those who, and you see this on American university campus, obviously from those who are pro-Palestinian quote unquote.

And really, I think what it is more than anything is an anti-Israel kind of zeitgeist. And now this is on both the post-liberal left and the post-liberal right. Not obviously every iteration of post-liberalism, but you definitely see these things taking shape and form.

And maybe if we have some time, I'll explain why I think that's happening and what that actually is. Cause I think that's often misdiagnosed, but that does lend itself to a hyper-fixation on these things as well.

And I think if you're a Washington guy, you want a Washingtonian foreign policy. You want to, as much as possible, scale back foreign involvement, get back to an America first kind of agenda. Some people call this naive.

It would take steps to do it. But if you, if that's what you are interested in, which I would say I am someone who is interested in this kind of thing to do it responsibly, knowing that it takes steps to do it, then there needs to be a focus on our problems that is much greater than a focus on the problems of other countries.

And, and so I'm, I'm doing this as carefully as I possibly can knowing, Hey, we just launched some rockets. This affects us. So we do need to talk about it. But at the same time, realizing the goal now should be okay.

Now we need to start the deportations guys, right? That's what we're going to do because we've temporarily at the very least staved off this issue. We've, you might, you might say we kicked the can down the road, but we've managed it.

Haven't solved it, but we've managed it, which is probably the best you can hope for in this situation. Let's get some stuff done here. That's kind of my push here. But given all the takes, I saw that so many of them are so egregious.

I thought, you know what, let's, let's walk down middle Eastern memory lane here. And history is interesting, right? No matter what it's interesting. So let's just talk about it. That's, that's my thing.

So that's what we're going to do. And I will try to get to questions and comments as we go through the podcast as much as I can, but I have a slideshow prepared the infamous slideshow. I also want to just make two announcements real quick though, before we get into all of this.

And one is what we do have a retreat coming up, the music and masculinity retreat, music and masculinity .com. And this is going to fill up, I think pretty quick. I'm telling you now it's just, you're going to want to sign up now.

I'm just telling you that because I think that this will fill up. So if you want to check out more about it, go to music and masculinity .com. And also I need to let you know, this is very important. The church reform initiative is putting out the third installment and the last installment in the saga of Summit Church, pastored by JD Greer and Faith Baptist of Knightdale, North Carolina.

This is incredible. What has happened? We already have over about 260 ,000 views on YouTube alone of episode one. Episode two has about almost a hundred thousand views. And then episode three is coming out tonight.

This is powerful. You will be, if you watch all three of these, you will be almost in tears at the end and has a happy ending. Not many of the stories that I talk about do. This one does. And I was very proud to be part of the team and really arranging this, helping, doing the interviews and just being part of it.

It has been a wonderful thing. And I really would love to see larger media outlets see this as important because it is. This is actually, if you watch this documentary and then you read my article that I did for American Reformer, I had a shorter one at the Federalist.

I do give you the template. I give you the formula used to sabotage these more conservative or if you want traditional churches and conform them to a more modernistic kind of progressive template. And this is something you can actually do something about this.

So many of the things I talk about, you're sitting there, you're like, I don't know what I can do. I'm just a person in the pew. This is something you can do something about this. When it comes to your church, if it hasn't already, you can actually see the signs and you can put a foot down and say no more before things really get going.

So I would love to see broader coverage of this. It's probably one of the most important things I think I've done in my podcast career, if you want to call it that. And so if there are those of you who have connections, I don't know if you have media connections to podcasters who have large audiences like Tucker Carlson's and even the Tim Pool's of the world might be interested in this.

I don't know. It's not just a Christian audience that would be interested, but I think that there's a lot of opportunity here for those who see it. And of course, when we launched the first few, it was right before this war.

And so of course, all heads turned towards the war. But I think now that things are hopefully settling down, I would love to get a focus on this. And yeah, so if you have any of those connections, feel free to reach out to me on social media.

And Hey, wherever the Lord takes it, that's I'll be satisfied with that. It's obviously it's his mission. So let's get into the topic for today. I already see that there are comments coming in. Hey, you're not black and white.

That's right, Isaiah. I'm not black and white today. The camera works and please, please pray for me because this computer was not working earlier today. I'm in the market for a new computer. Uh, I, I reset it and everything, but I'm, you know, so let's try to get through this podcast.

So just pray for that. But anyway, um, Ryan says, let's see, American hegemony. We didn't choose to be in the position we're in, but we're in it nevertheless. There's some truth to this and that there's a very, there is a naive way of looking at foreign policy where it's like without any steps, you can just pull back from everything.

That's not true. You can't at least do that responsibly. Uh, and there's, you know, there's a lot of things even domestically that I'd love to pull back on. You can't just do it in one shot without there being massive consequences.

You have to consider those. Uh, so anyway, um, let's see, the USA has already pulling back from global order. We created a post-world war two, but we're still involved and we'll never get out of involvement completely.

I think that's true, says Ryan. Uh, I hope you're correct. So Jimmy starfish. Okay. Well, let's start with some history here. Uh, we're going to, Oh, that's not it. Here we go. Here's my fancy slide show for you.

Let's see. And if you're not, if you're listening, I know I'm going to try my best. Uh, there's a few pictures I'll explain them, but if, um, if you're viewing, it's a better experience, I think, especially with a slide show.

If you are a patron patreon .com forward slash, uh, conversations that matter podcast. No wait, John Harris podcast. I think that's what it is. Let me just make sure here. I think the link is in the, uh, info or the title section there.

Let's see here. Yes. It's John Harris podcast. You will get access to this particular slide show so you can have it for yourself. But, uh, this is what I prepared to, uh, service us as we talk about this.

So I want to start really early. Let's start with ancient Iran and it is pronounced Iran. And one of the first major figures, and this is still a figure revered by Iranians today is Cyrus the great. Uh, he founded the, um, Achaemenid empire, uh, and he United Persian tribes and established a vast empire known for its administrative innovations and tolerance of local cultures.

And we know about this as Christians, because the Bible talks about this Ezra chapter one talks about how the Lord stirred up the spirit of the Cyrus, the King of Persia. And he set out a proclamation that the Lord, the God of heaven has given to me all the kingdoms of the earth and has appointed me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah.

So there is an ancient tie actually between the Persians, modern Iranians and the Israelis, modern Jews. And some of you, I realized some of you think, I don't know exactly where this started, but some people think, well, you know, the modern Jews aren't really Jews and all this.

And there's a theological argument for this. There's also a genetic argument for this. I'll just say this, and I could probably go into more detail if people want me to a little bit, but, um, I will say this.

If that's true, then Persians aren't Persians either. Cause Persians, as you will see, went through a lot of changes, uh, over the years, including religious changes, including changes in, um, intermarrying with other cultures at times.

And so, and that kind of thing, I think, uh, one of three Persians today are Iranians can trace. They have some trace of Turkish ancestry, actually. So are they not, uh, Persians? They, they, they think they are right.

And there is obviously a strong, uh, connection and cultural inheritance they have that they've had for years. It's not as strong as maybe Jewish people, but it is, it is nonetheless, they're the Persians today.

They would Iranians, Iranians would view themselves as Persians. Uh, and then, so you have, uh, Darius, um, the first expands and organizes this empire. Ezra talks about Darius too, right? He issues a decree, uh, to do the same thing.

Uh, he finds out what Cyrus said, and he says, Hey, concerning the houses of God in Jerusalem, let the temple be rebuilt. And then you have Alexander the great that comes in Alexander, the great conquers Persia, defeats Darius the third, and he ends the, uh, the rule of, of that particular house.

And he ushers in the Hellenistic influence. Now, Daniel 11 talks about this. And as a mighty King will arise, he will rule with great authority and do as he pleases. But as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom will be broken up and parceled out for the four points of the compass because Alexander the great's army was divided into four points.

And this is one of the amazing things about biblical prophecy is Daniel knew about this before it actually happened. And if you're watching that's Darius the first, uh, in a carving. In 250 BC to 224 AD, the Parthian empire revives Persian identity by restoring Zoroastrianism.

So during the Hellenistic period, Zoroastrianism starts to fade. You have Hellenistic influence and, uh, then it comes back. So there's, there's a rejuvenation of Zoroastrianism. This is also the time you had Kings from the East coming right.

And they visit, uh, the Messiah. And, um, some think that those are Zoroastrians potentially, and they expel the Seleucid successors of Alexander, the Parthian empire does. They resist Roman expansion, notably repelling Mark Antony's invasion circa 36 BC.

And after his alliance with Jewish factions against Parthian interests. So there, there you have Jewish people, uh, siding with Mark Antony against the Parthians and the Parthians win the, and these are Persians.

So then we have a switch though. Uh, we go from Zoroastrianism to Islam, right? So Zoroastrianism, uh, still has an impact. There actually are practicing Zoroastrians today in Iran, but it's no influence.

Uh, there it's a relic, uh, apparently. So 224 to 651, the Sassanian empire rises with the Zoroastrian priest Cartier organizing the Zoroastrian Magi formalizing religious authority, and this strengthens Persian culture.

So there, there's this thing called Persian culture, but then 602 to 628, uh, Khosrau the second seeks alliances with the Byzantine empire to counter nomadic invasion. So there's, there's invaders coming in and there's, they, we need to, uh, have an alliance to protect from these people, but the invaders end up winning because 636 to 651 Arab Muslim armies come in led by generals like Khalid Ibn al-Walid, and they defeat the Sassanian forces ending Persian rule and introducing Islam.

And though Persians resist cultural assimilation, there still is this infusion and Islam becomes, uh, kind of the order of the day. And it looks like my slide is a little cut off and I don't know why that it does that.

So let me see if I can, uh, open up a, an alternative version here that I can look at. So I can read for you everything I had here, but, uh, we have the Farsi emerging as a distinct language. Farsi is what they speak today in Iran, blending Persian and Islamic influences.

And it fosters a unique cultural identity. So the identity that Persians or Iranians have today is a fusion. It's a fusion of Islam and, uh, and the Persian culture that had been there before. And this means that they actually also have their own unique strain of Islam, which puts them at odds with the Saudis.

They are, uh, the, they are Shiites and the Saudis are Sunnis. And this is something that actually comes, uh, is an important point to make for the current situation that exists there and why we did what we did last week.

And yet the Seljuk Turks beginning their conquest of Persia in early 11th century with significant control established by 1037. So the Turkish empire comes in, um, and you have Genghis Khan coming in later than that.

Uh, and then you have a Turkish migration into Iran. So now they're blending with, so they have Hellenistic influence and they have, uh, Turkish influence. And there's basically Iran gets reduced or Persia gets reduced to these, this nomadic empire during this time.

And you have the white sheep Turkmen against the black sheep Turkmen. And, and so it's not this cohesive empire. It's more fractured. It's it's wanderers, it's, it's sheep herders and this kind of thing.

It's, it's kind of a clan-ish setup. And then at 501, 1501 rather, so we're talking the middle ages now, Ismail the first founds the, uh, Safavid, Safavid, sorry, dynasty and declares Shiism the state religion.

So now Shiism, the Islamic form that took root there, uh, becomes the dominating force that distinguishing Iran from Sunni majority neighbors and embedding the 12th Shiisms belief in the return of the 12th Imam.

So the turn of the 12th Imam is this belief that there's a messianic figure coming. And this factors right into Iran's foreign policy today. And, uh, there's a spiritual and political kind of dimension where Iran needs to set up a favorable condition for the return of this 12th Imam.

And part of this is they're, they're seeking global hegemony, uh, seeking, um, and you can say, well, they're not doing that yet. Right. Well, they, right. Obviously they, but they want middle Eastern hegemony to some extent.

They are at odds with the, uh, some of the countries around them, which I'll get into, but Israel obviously being one of the major enemies. So, so this is, uh, this 12th Imam belief becomes pervasive.

1501 to 1736, the Safavid rule sees corruption with harem, harem enticements, undermining the Shah. So the Shah has become corrupt in the harem and there's drug use and there's, uh, obviously sexual perversion and so forth.

And this creates a disjointment between the Shahs who are the Kings Shah just means King or ruler and those who they govern. So the nomadic tribal, uh, peoples have a tension with the Imperial wing and this leads to centuries of instability.

And then in 1800, the Ayatollahs surpassed the corrupt, uh, Shahs in influence, legitimizing rulers and issuing legal rulings, laying the groundwork for theocratic power. The Ayatollahs are just the religious scholars essentially.

And this is, this is what Iran is now ruled by is Ayatollahs. Okay. This is, you hear about the Ayatollah hominid. You're, you're hearing about a cleric, a Muslim cleric, a, um, Farsi speaking, uh, Shiite believing cleric that dominates a theocracy, which is Iran today.

Western Influence, the CIA Coup, and the Iranian Revolution

Right? So there's, this is where the roots of all of this come from. Then you have Western influence starting in the late 1800s through, obviously the 20th century, 18, and it starts economically. Okay.

So 1890 to 1892, you have British tobacco concessions fueled, that it's really what became the tobacco protest. There was even a Jihad called against the British. And this, uh, this is the beginning of suspicions of foreign or Western influence, which also affects us today.

Uh, the British are trying to take advantage of us, that, that kind of thing. Right. And then in 1905 to 1906, the constitutional revolution establishes a parliament and constitutional monarchy introducing a democratic ideals amid resistance to foreign control.

So you have the infusion of some of these foreign structures, uh, these Western or modern structures, you can even say liberal kind of structures. And at the same time though, there's resistance in Iran to some of these things.

Uh, 19, you can see, by the way, a lot of parallels with Turkey. If you ever studied the history of Turkey, uh, and the young Turks and that kind of thing, there's a lot of parallels here. 1907, Britain and Russia divide Iran into spheres of influence via the Anglo-Russian convention undermining national sovereignty.

So you had not just the English, but the Russians are also in Iran. They're at this point, it's primarily oil that they're after and they divide Iran up economically. So you already have divisions happening in Iran.

This time though, it's not, uh, divisions socially, this is economic divisions. 1919 to 1921 post-world war one, Britain attempts to dominate Iran through the Anglo-Persian agreement rebellions against the Russians influence persists.

And then, uh, 1925, Reza Shah Pahlavi inspired by Ataturk, who's the leader in Turkey, his secular reforms in Turkey deposes the dynasty enforcing secular laws and suppresses tribal structures to modernize Iran.

And so these factions have existed by the way, going back as far as the beginning of Western influence, the same factions that exist in Iran today have a start back then you have pro Western pro modern forces.

And you have those who want the 12th Imam who want Islamic domination, Sharia law, all of that, that is where Iran is at today. And that's been a struggle for a while. And it, if you don't understand that, you will not understand why we did what we did.

You want to understand our foreign policy. You have to understand there is an internal instability in Iran, just like there's an internal instability. It's not as unstable perhaps, but there's an internal instability in Israel.

Israel has religious Jews and it has those who are very secular, uh, forming a government together. And there it's kind of held together by a mutual enemies list and mutual survival, but they are very at odds with each other.

Iran has a similar issue with modern influence in Islam. Turkey does too. A lot of these countries do. So you have in 1946, uh, Shaw, uh, Gavin, uh, uh, rebels in a bloodbath against the Kurds. So the Kurds are a minority faction with different beliefs here.

And I probably didn't need to mention this, but it's part of their history. Uh, after the there's, there, I guess you could say the representative arm passes laws, rejecting foreign concessions, following Soviet withdrawal from Iran post-World War II is all post-World War II.

Uh, the protections for the Kurds aren't there. So the Kurds are, have a protection from the Soviets it's removed. And then there's a bloodbath against the Kurds 1949. So now we are in the, the time of Israel is ascending as beginning it's it's ascension as a country.

Um, 1949, there's a planning organization set up, uh, the, uh, Sazimen, uh, if I can pronounce this Sazimene Barnima, and it's established to drive economic and social modernization. And this will, this, this spirit will basically impact Iran for the next few decades.

U.S.-Iran Relations from the Cold War to the Nuclear Deal

Uh, you have, uh, then the timeline kind of diverges and we have us and Iran, and then I have Israel and Iran and their relationships. So we'll talk about this. And there's a picture of Richard Nixon with the Shah of Iran.

It doesn't look very Muslim, right? It doesn't look, I mean, it looks kind of Western, right? 1830 to 1900, their American Presbyterians had already sent missionaries in who established 31 schools in Iran.

They set up hospitals as well, 1941 to 1945 S FDR provides aid by a lend lease. And by 1953, the U S had provided $1 million, a billion dollars in aid eclipsing Britain and Russian influences, Iran's primarily foreign partners.

So the U S becomes very influential in Iran. Now this is history. You may not know. It's also important for understating where, why we're at, where we are today, but Iran and the U S haven't always been this opposed to each other.

1946, though, Alan Dulles persuades the shot to remove the prime minister over fears of communist influence, aligning Iran, Iran with U S cold war policies. So this is partially driven by the cold war.

Now let me make a big point here and you'll see this a little bit, but our involvement with Iran does not start with Israel. Okay. Our concern over Iran and Iran's policies do not start with Israel. Our concern with Iran starts with the cold war and our involvement starts even before that a little bit, but our official government state directed foreign policy starts with concerns over the cold war primarily.

Okay. Obviously, yes, there was, there was some oil interest in those kinds of things, but we do not want the Russians who have been involved in Iran before and have a history there to use Iran for their own benefit as a colonial, um, you know, state underneath them, which they very well, uh, could easily have done.

So this, as, as Britain kind of exits the world stage, we enter, we fill that void during the cold war to counter the Soviet union. This is where we actually start to get tangled up. And like I said, if you want to go back and I want to go back to a more humble foreign policy, you have to, you have to undo some of these wires.

And it's a very difficult thing when you have a history now being involved in a country. So we get involved in Iran. And, uh, so the, the Shah visits the U S cementing anti-communist ties by 1950, the U S relies heavily on Iranian oil by nine, uh, and, and to fuel its post-war economy.

And in 1953, this C this is, this is a big, big thing here too. This, uh, this is another big point I have to make, but in 1953, the CIA and M um, and my six orchestrate a coup to oust prime minister Mohammed.

I think it's, uh, Mosada after his nationalization attempt of the Anglo-Iranian, uh, Iranian oil company, AIOC. This is the company that England had in Iran to manage its oil. So, so you have the prime minister.

Who's not, this is not the Shah. This is the prime minister in this sort of liberal Republic form. He says, you know what? We're getting a bad broad deal from great Britain. Let's nationalize this. Let's take the oil for ourselves and the CIA.

And so the British and the, the, the Americans say, you know what? Um, no. And this, we don't like that. Gary sick, uh, notes that this coup abruptly impermanently ended Iran's or sorry, American's political innocence with respect to Iran and the Shah then becomes Iran.

So what basically happens in all this is Iran develops from this point forward, a severe mistrust of the United States with a certain class. It doesn't mean the United States influence ceases. It doesn't mean there's not still friendly cooperation with the Shah on some level, but there is a deep mistrust that's formed at this point.

Now, some say this is overblown and a lot of it is shout shrouded in some mystery, but it does seem we were involved in a political influence at the very least that now the Iranian people view as a coup and they do not like the United States for this.

And so I want to emphasize something here. Yes, Iran does not like us for our support of Israel, but Iran's distaste for America started long before anything related to Israel. So that's another important point for me to make.

And that's, that's something that I think people ought to understand in this whole conflict. So then we have from 1970 to 79, the U S grants a $200 ,000 loan with stipulations, deepening economic ties, but reinforcing Iran's dependency.

So when I, when I say the Shah, Iran becomes the Shah, the Shah becomes Iran getting rid of the prime minister means the Shah now is our we have economic deals with the Shah. We have advisory roles with the Shah.

We don't want the shop going under communist influence. So we have a relationship with the Shah. We fund things in Iran, in Iran. We tell the Shah that he needs to do what we want him to do. If we're going to give him money and that kind of thing, Henry Kissinger was all over this and the Shah becomes kind of the figurative head here for Iran, more than figurative.

He's the actual head of Iran, the governmental head, but this doesn't mean all of Iran feels the way the Shah feels, but we have a generally decent relationship. Even during this time, the Shah had a nuclear program from 1970 to 79 that employed 500 people, his regime, human rights abuses.

Let's see. Let's see during, okay. During this period, there are human rights abuses. There's imprisonments. There's all these issues, but it doesn't, we don't really get involved in these things. Then what happens is the Iranian revolution.

This is a big, big event. This is something that has to be understood to understand what just happened. The Iranian revolution is led by a religious and populist forces. They overthrow the Shah. That's our lifeline.

Remember, that's our connection and the revolutionary guard forms at this point and 5 ,000 officers are executed in purges, consolidating the Islamic Republic. The US embassy then has a hostage crisis that lasts 444 days.

There's an interesting story here, by the way, Brian McClanahan did a podcast on this. I thought it was interesting that, so Reagan's election team, essentially, there's some thought that they, and it seems like there's some evidence, they actually cut a deal with Iran to release the hostages after the election so that it would benefit Ronald Reagan and not Jimmy Carter.

Whether Reagan knew about this, I don't know, but this probably cost Carter the election, the fact that we had these hostages and he just seemed unable to do anything about it. You have now the wing that is very mistrustful of us taking control of Iran, 1979 to 2015.

This colors the rest of our foreign policy. The US imposes sanctions on Iran for 36 years, targeting its nuclear program and economy, aiming to isolate the Islamic Republic there. 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is elected.

This is fueled by economic discontent that bolsters Iran's defiance of US policies. 2006, 2007, there's an intensified sanctioning under President Bush and Obama, then aims for regime change, escalating tensions.

2012, sanctions trigger 50 inflation, crippling Iran's educated middle class and deepening economic hardship. You can see that there's some resentment the common people of Iran have towards the United States.

The sanctions are hurting them and they're hurting the common people. And, you know, this is there's a hatred there. There's a hatred for whether Israel's involved or not. There's a hatred there. Israel does get very involved, though, and I'm going to show you that in a minute.

2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action forms. That's Obama's nuclear deal, which limits Iran's uranium enrichment and lift sanctions. Netanyahu's makes a speech in 2015, calls it a mistake. The strains are ties with Israel.