The overt attention given to Iran for the last 50 days has completely shattered the fabricated image that Israeli-affiliated media had crafted of the country for decades.

 https://x.com/RezaNasri1/status/2047258976304115778

Reza Nasri

@RezaNasri1

The war benefited Iran in at least one aspect: The overt attention given to Iran for the last 50 days has completely shattered the fabricated image that Israeli-affiliated media had crafted of the country for decades. Many people have now realized that: 1- Iran is not run by mad apocalyptic “mullahs". Many Iranian officials are sophisticated technocrats, steeped in political science, literature, mathematics, international relations, and philosophy. They hold PhDs and strong academic credentials from renowned universities, and have actually authored books on Immanuel Kant, negotiations and governance. In fact, they are much more sophisticated than their Western counterparts. For one, none of them ever appeared on the Epstein list. That is precisely why they do not have to bend or bow before Israel or its network of lobbies. 2- The Iranian people are proud and patriotic. They are willing to risk their lives by forming human chains around bridges and critical infrastructure to protect their homeland. They have never welcomed, and will never welcome, foreign intervention. Neighboring countries were mistaken in assuming they would need to close their borders to manage an influx of refugees fleeing war from Iran. Not only did Iranians refuse to flee the war zone, but many living abroad actually returned home by land once the conflict began. 3- Iran is a resilient nation that has endured decades of illegal sanctions, sadistic “maximum pressure” campaigns, covert operations, and outright war. It stood tall, relied solely on itself, and built a formidable military, industrial, and scientific base. By contrast, countries with far stronger economies are already complaining about the economic fallout from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and are growing impatient. Iran withstood their sanctions for nearly fifty years, yet they cannot tolerate fifty days of reciprocal economic pressure. Hopefully this reality will force them to recognize the depravity of their past policies. 4- Iran is not a state sponsor of terrorism. Its only “sin” has been to be the sole country on Earth that has firmly, openly, and proudly stood up to Israeli apartheid and genocidal policies. That is the real source of all the demonization. 5- Iran did not squander money—or the brief proceeds from temporary sanctions relief—on destabilizing the region. It invested in infrastructure instead. The sheer number of hospitals, airports, petrochemical plants, railroads, bridges, ports, pharmaceutical factories, and universities targeted in the war reveals exactly where that money was spent. 6- Iran did not seek war. It pursued serious diplomacy, only to be betrayed on multiple occasions. The United States withdrew from the JCPOA and then attacked Iran twice while new negotiations were underway. All the smears claiming that Iran fails to honor its international commitments or is prone to lying and cheating are pure nonsense unsupported by empirical evidence. 7- Iran’s foreign policy is guided by values, principles, and national pride rather than materialist “cost-benefit” calculations. Understanding this is essential to reaching any genuine deal. Otherwise, within a narrow “cost-benefit” paradigm, Israeli experts and think tanks will continue to rush to portray Iran’s intentions as hostile—just as they have done for decades by relentlessly disseminating the falsehood that Iran is seeking to build nuclear weapons.

8:19 PM · Apr 23, 2026

·

330

Views

https://x.com/RezaNasri1/status/2047258976304115778

Roosevelt and his advisors understood explicitly that every German division fighting the Soviet Union was a German division not threatening Britain, not threatening American interests, not requiring American soldiers.

 https://x.com/nxt888/status/2047261479045579244

Sony Thăng

@nxt888

Lend-Lease was real. Significant. Worth knowing about. You're right that Soviet leadership acknowledged its importance, and anyone who dismisses it entirely is being dishonest. Now let's talk about what it actually shows. Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union totaled approximately $11.3 billion, roughly 4% of Soviet war expenditure. Meaningful. Not decisive in the way you're implying. Soviet industrial output, relocated behind the Urals in one of the most extraordinary logistical feats in military history, produced roughly 100,000 tanks and self-propelled guns plus over 140,000 aircraft domestically. The trucks helped. The rails helped. The aviation fuel helped at critical moments. The T-34, the Katyusha, the IL-2, the weapons that actually broke the Wehrmacht, came from Soviet factories, built by Soviet workers, many of them women and children working 12-hour shifts in the Siberian winter. But here's the more important point you're walking past: Lend-Lease was not charity. It was not generosity in the pure sense you're implying. It was strategic calculation. Roosevelt and his advisors understood explicitly that every German division fighting the Soviet Union was a German division not threatening Britain, not threatening American interests, not requiring American soldiers. Keeping the Soviets fighting was worth $11 billion because the alternative was fighting those German divisions yourself, with American bodies. Stalin knew this. Churchill knew this. Roosevelt knew this. The transaction was mutual. The Soviets bled in quantities that made the Western Allied strategic position possible. The Americans supplied materials that helped the Soviets sustain that bleeding. These are not competing facts. They are the same fact from two directions. What Lend-Lease does not do, and this is where your argument quietly collapses, is change the operational record. Germany's military was destroyed on the Eastern Front. 27 million Soviets died. American supply lines did not storm Stalingrad. American trucks did not fight at Kursk. American aviation fuel did not plan Operation Bagration. Soviet soldiers, in Soviet cities, on Soviet soil, with Soviet blood, broke the German army. The Lend-Lease argument is the most sophisticated version of the asterisk. It's the one that sounds like it respects the history while still finding a way to place America at the center of it. Without us, you couldn't have done it. With us, you could. That framing keeps the American as the indispensable variable. The one whose presence or absence determines the outcome. The protagonist, even in someone else's catastrophe. The Soviets also couldn't have fought without American supply. The Americans also couldn't have won without Soviet sacrifice absorbing 80% of German military power for four years. These dependencies ran in both directions. You've chosen to emphasize one direction. That choice is the curation I was describing. And you've been living inside it long enough that it feels like balance.

Quote

Apelham

@Apelham8

·

3h

Replying to @nxt888

Some Americans know all about the Lend Lease the Soviets received that kept that number lower than it could have been. The Lend Lease that Stalin and others admitted they couldn't have beaten Germany without. So what do you want to talk about? The fact that most of the rail

8:29 PM · Apr 23, 2026

·

283

Views

https://x.com/nxt888/status/2047261479045579244