19 minutes ago, jvs said:

And why did Obama do this? Just to fund terrorism or was it because a long standing debt that was finally settled and enforced by the International court in The Hague?

Obama was ordered to pay this money and the principal sum was (only) 400 million and the rest was interest.

The Obama administration paid $1.7 billion to Iran in 2016 to settle a decades-old, pre-1979 failed military arms deal dispute. The payment, consisting of $400 million in principal and $1.3 billion in interest, was made in cash and delivered via airplane, which officials argued was necessary due to severe restrictions on Iran within the international banking system. 

Key Details Behind the Payment:

• Failed Arms Deal: Following the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the U.S. failed to deliver military equipment that Iran had already paid for, prompting a long-standing case at the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal at The Hague.

• Settlement Timing: The payment was announced in January 2016, coinciding with the implementation of the Iran Nuclear Deal (JCPOA) and the release of American prisoners held in Iran.

• Leverage for Prisoners: While initially denying a connection, the State Department later admitted the $400 million cash payment was delayed to serve as "leverage" to ensure the safe return of American hostages.

• Litigation Risk: The Obama administration argued that settling was in the U.S. interest, avoiding a potentially higher legal cost if the tribunal ruled entirely in Iran's favor. 

The payment was strongly criticized by opponents who argued the cash, delivered in foreign banknotes, constituted a ransom payment for hostages, a claim the administration denied, insisting it was a separate legal settlement. 

• Investigating the Obama administration's $400 million ...

  Aug 5, 2559 BE — the Iran nuclear. deal has been a major issue in this year's presidential election detractors blame Hillary Clinton and the Obama.

  YouTube·PBS NewsHour

  6:35

• Fact-checking Trump tweets on Obama’s payments to Iran - CNN

  Jun 21, 2562 BE — The Obama administration maintained that the payments were made as a reimbursement to Iran for military equipment that the country...

  CNN

• The United States, Iran, and $1.7 billion: Sorting out the details |

  The amounts were transferred to the Dutch National Bank, where they were converted into euros and withdrawn in euro banknotes. The...

You kind of explained why it happened. The funds settled a claim at the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in The Hague regarding a trust fund established by the Shah of Iran before the 1979 revolution to purchase U.S. military equipment that was never delivered. So, international law was used.

You also admitted that due to strict U.S. and international sanctions, Iran was isolated from the international banking system. The Obama administration stated that, because of this lack of a banking relationship, the funds could not be wired electronically and had to be delivered in foreign bank notes (Swiss francs, euros, and other currencies). At the time, some money was returned at the same time hostages were released. You seem to think that was unreasonable but Obama had to return the money anyway so the timing was good for everyone.

I really don't think Obama can be accused of anything underhand as the delivery was settled (i.e. agreed) by the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in The Hague, not Obama's personal decision.

Don't know about the number of, 30 ?, but the premise is apparently true, (AI confirmed, sort of) and why the Oath to the Constitution is a beautiful thing.

From G AI ...

28 minutes ago, Purdey said:

You kind of explained why it happened. The funds settled a claim at the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in The Hague regarding a trust fund established by the Shah of Iran before the 1979 revolution to purchase U.S. military equipment that was never delivered. So, international law was used.

You also admitted that due to strict U.S. and international sanctions, Iran was isolated from the international banking system. The Obama administration stated that, because of this lack of a banking relationship, the funds could not be wired electronically and had to be delivered in foreign bank notes (Swiss francs, euros, and other currencies). At the time, some money was returned at the same time hostages were released. You seem to think that was unreasonable but Obama had to return the money anyway so the timing was good for everyone.

I really don't think Obama can be accused of anything underhand as the delivery was settled (i.e. agreed) by the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in The Hague, not Obama's personal decision.

What i posted was a response to Khunla's post.

He made it look like Obama gave this money to Iran in order to sponsor international terrorism.

Obama had no choice and he did follow international law,i am not blaming him at all.

It was Iran's money because of a deal they made for weapons from the US.

Winning!

…

.

.

4 hours ago, TedG said:

…

What's the difference between a POM and a 747?

The 747 stops whining when it gets to Sydney.

mission accomplished!

...

.sloppy seconds donald!

…

Have got news for you!

Grindr in the whitehouse!

.

.

‘

.

.

She stabbed him in the backside,kind of like what Sacha did.

China to the rescue ... shh

.

.

.

.