The Working Profit Investment Letter

Subscribe to the newsletter

Check it out

March 6, 2026

Not wishing to sound like Denny’s retiree breakfast on Wednesday mornings, but I remember the takeover of the US embassy in 1979. 

What became difficult was three news networks started their evening newscasts with (paraphrase) “Good evening on this, the 185th day of the hostage crisis.” And they would do that every single evening, kind of drilling it into the American people…444 days in all. Imagine being Jimmy Carter.

An attempt was made to rescue them. The U.S. launched Operation Eagle Claw on April 24, 1980, a military rescue attempt to free the 52 American hostages. The mission was aborted at a staging area in the Iranian desert called “Desert One” after multiple helicopters experienced mechanical failures in a sandstorm. During the withdrawal, a helicopter collided with a C-130 transport plane, killing eight U.S. servicemen. 

The failed mission was a major embarrassment for the Carter administration and is widely considered a factor in Carter’s loss to Reagan in the 1980 election.

So, they further stuck it to Carter by freeing the hostages within 10 minutes of Reagan having been sworn in.

One of the things that strikes me about all the news and spin today, is how the Shah is somehow looked at warmly, through happy nostalgic eyes. Here’s the truth.

The Shah’s secret police were SAVAK (Organization of Intelligence and National Security). It was established in 1957with assistance from the CIA and Israeli Mossad.

SAVAK was notorious for its surveillance of political dissidents, censorship, and use of torture against opponents of the Shah’s regime. It became one of the most feared secret police organizations in the Middle East. Its brutality was a major factor fueling public opposition that ultimately led to the 1979 revolution.

After the revolution, SAVAK was dissolved, though the new Islamic Republic established its own intelligence services.

Rough place, Iran, no matter who is leading. Well, you get a new regime to replace an old regime and somehow, the United States winds up all embroiled in all of it. If they didn’t have all that oil, not sure anyone would care.

The majority of Iranians are Persians; they are not Arabs. To many, a distinction without a difference but not to them. Persia was a global power eons ago, a history of conquest and reconquest and eventually, at odds with the West since they pushed up against Christian lands in the Middle East. A friend of mine once said that a professor of his summarized the Middle East as “too much history and not enough land.”

I’ve thought about all of that and concluded that it doesn’t really matter at this point. There will be plenty of time to analyze and parse decisions, place blame and offer praise. To me, what matters is this:

They could not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. 

We’ve all watched endless negotiations, over many years, on this subject. My patience with it all ran out a long time ago, for people to say today that we circumvented diplomacy are not working with all cylinders intact. If you’re interested, the history of these negotiations is copied below (Claude.AI). But the short take is they have been going on for 20 years. 

At some point, you have to conclude that nothing is going to change, other than continued finesse and obfuscation and misdirection and unmet promises. At some point, if you accept the unacceptable fact that they can’t be allowed to have nuclear weapons, you must act.

Those critical of the action might answer this: Had we not, and if Iran developed that weapon and used it here, what would critics have to say?

The world learned with Hitler and the Czechs, that attempts to appease aggressive and destabilizing dictatorships eventually run aground. 

Iran has clearly been the lead destabilizing force in the Middle East, both directly and through proxies. Thus, it needed to be stopped one way or the other.

I’m not sidetracked by the blame thing, or the political rants, or the motives of Israel or a hundred other “buts.” Its hard, because among others the Mayor of New York joined with Vladimir Putin in condemning the assault. I’m reminded that you’re known by your friends.

I think it’s all regrettable but ultimately necessary, this war. Iran had a lot of opportunity to off-ramp the problems but chose instead to continue to pursue a world in which women are completely disenfranchised, racial hate is foremost and constant promises to annihilate other cultures and peoples and countries were the feature of almost any day or week at the microphone. All with their hope to weaponize in a way that could hold the world hostage.

Does the world need or want that today? Do we want to inhabit this planet with a country that routinely uses stoning as capital punishment for what they consider to be moral crimes?

Two final thoughts. I was really quite shocked to see them attack other Arab countries. I have absolutely no clue why they would do so and alienate them, other than to conclude that rogues are operating in that leadership decapitated military construct. And if so, imagine if those rogues had nuclear weapons. 

The other is this and so far, I’ve not seen mentioned: If North Korea needed any convincing as to why nuclear weapons provide the ultimate deterrent to invasion, they just got it.

The History of Nuclear Negotiations

Early 2000s – The issue emerges. Undeclared nuclear sites at Natanz and Arak were exposed in 2002, and Fordow in 2009. Wikipedia This triggered the first diplomatic efforts, led primarily by the EU-3 (France, Germany, UK) starting around 2003.

2006–2013 – Sanctions and stalemate. The UN Security Council passed multiple rounds of sanctions. Intermittent talks between Iran and the P5+1 (US, UK, France, Russia, China, Germany) occurred but produced no lasting agreement.

2013–2015 – The JCPOA. Formal negotiations began with the adoption of the Joint Plan of Action, an interim agreement signed between Iran and the P5+1 in November 2013. Wikipedia After about 20 months of negotiations, the JCPOA was reached on July 14, 2015, and implemented January 16, 2016. Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

2018 – Trump withdraws. The United States withdrew from the pact in 2018, imposing sanctions under its maximum pressure campaign, Wikipedia effectively killing the deal’s economic provisions.

2021–2022 – Revival attempts. The Biden administration tried to revive the JCPOA through indirect talks in Vienna, but those collapsed without an agreement.

April 2025 – February 2026 – The most recent round. On April 12, 2025, Iran and the United States began a new series of negotiations aimed at reaching a nuclear peace agreement, following a letter from Trump to Khamenei. Wikipedia Multiple rounds of Omani-mediated indirect talks took place in Muscat, Rome, and Geneva through February 2026. A perceived lack of progress in the last of those indirect negotiations on February 26, 2026, was enough to prompt Trump to green-light strikes, The Conversation and on February 28, the US and Israel launched large-scale military operations against Iran.

So in short — serious multilateral negotiations have been ongoing in various forms for over 20 years, and they’ve now culminated in a military conflict rather than a diplomatic resolution. The fundamental sticking point has always been the same: Iran insists on its right to enrich uranium, while the US and Israel insist on guarantees that Iran cannot develop a nuclear weapon.

Thoughts, questions, or reflections? I’d love to hear them. You can reach me anytime at anthony@workingprofit.com

READ THE POST

Iran

Iranian national flag waving in the wind against a clear blue sky.

Wisdom You’ll Actually Want to Read

Join a community of readers who value thoughtful, unfiltered commentary—delivered with clarity, insight, and the occasional story that reminds us we’re all human.

subscribe

Investment Protection
Content on Working Profit is not financial advice. It reflects personal views and is for informational purposes only. Investments involve risk. Consult a licensed advisor before making decisions.

Political Commentary
Opinions shared are personal and nonpartisan. They reflect evolving perspectives, not endorsements. The focus is on cultural insight—not political alignment.

Legal Safeguards:
Liability limitations, accuracy disclaimers, and third-party content protections. 

User Responsibilities
Readers are responsible for their own decisions. Do your own research, verify sources, and follow relevant laws. This platform offers perspective—not instruction.