Discuss history in US.

Country – Iran

Brief history with US – In the aftermath of World War II and beginning of the Cold War, Washington sees Iran as a bulwark against Soviet expansion and a source of stability in the oil-rich Persian Gulf. It cultivates a friendly relationship with Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, although the partnership is threatened with the 1951 appointment of Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh, who moves to nationalize Iran’s oil industry. A CIA-backed coup ousts Mossadegh in 1953. The shah returns from a brief exile and resumes control. The United States provides the shah hundreds of millions of dollars during the next quarter-century. The U.S. helps set up Iran’s intelligence agency in 1957. Iranians come to revile the agency for its repression. Iran’s oil exports expand and the economy expands. The shah recognizes Israel and becomes a dominant figure in the Middle East. Some tensions persist, however. Iran refuses to help the U.S. in the 1970s by lowering the price of petroleum. Toward the end of the shah’s reign, the U.S. criticizes his government’s worsening human rights record and crackdown on democracy. Frustrated by the monarchy’s brutality, corruption and autocracy, and faced with economic slowdown, Iranians overthrow the shah in 1979. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returns from exile, seizes power and declares the U.S. the “Great Satan.” In November 1979, during the Carter administration, militants storm the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Fifty-two Americans are held for 444 days. An American rescue operation ends in disaster. Washington freezes billions of dollars in Iranian assets stored in the United States. The U.S. ends diplomatic relations with Iran. The shah goes to Panama in December 1979 and dies in Egypt on July 27, 1980. Iraq’s President Saddam Hussein invades Iran in 1980, and the United States provides him with support, and an estimated 1.5 million people are killed during the next eight years. The Iranian government kills thousands of political opponents at home and assassinates several high-profile figures abroad. It gets involved in Lebanon’s civil war, providing support to Hezbollah. The new Shiite militant group is blamed for the 1983 bombings of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut and of the Beirut barracks of the U.S. Marine Corps; the two bombings killed more than 250 Americans. Iran places underwater mines in the strategic Persian Gulf. The U.S. responds by targeting Iranian oil installations in 1987 and 1988. The two countries approach outright war. In July 1988, the U.S. mistakenly downs an Iranian passenger jet flying above the Strait of Hormuz, killing 290 people. Two months later, Iran and Iraq reach a cease-fire. Amid of some of the fiercest U.S.-Iranian hostility, the White House covertly sells arms to Iran and uses the proceeds to bankroll a secret war in Central America. Exposed in 1986, the scandal cripples the final two years of Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Through the 1990s, the U.S. accuses Iran of sponsoring terrorism attacks around the world. Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, are blamed for a 1992 attack on the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina, that kills 29 people, and an attack on a Jewish community centre there two years later that kills 85. The U.S. and Israel say Iran provides the critical support for dozens of Hamas suicide attacks and other bombings. President Bill Clinton imposes far-reaching oil and trade sanctions on Iran in 1995.
Decision #1 President Ronald Reagan, August 20, 1985
The governments involved was The U.S., Iran, Israel and Nicaragua. From the U.S. the key players were President Ronald Reagan, Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of State George Shultz, Attorney General Ed Meese and Chief of Staff Don Regan. Others players include Lt. Col. Oliver North, Iranian arms merchant Manucher Ghorbanifar, National Security Council (NSC) consultant Michael Ledeen, Israel Prime Minister Shimon Peres
The United States provided money, material, and operational support to the contras. However, the purpose of the United States’ Nicaragua policy during the early years of the Reagan Administration is a matter of debate. According to Kagan, the ostensible goal of U.S. support for the contras, according to some in the Administration, was not to overthrow the Sandinistas but to compel them to stop sending arms to the Salvadoran rebels. This changed, however, with the formulation of the Reagan Doctrine in 1982, which was “a policy of supporting democratic reform or revolution everywhere.” At this point, the goal of the Reagan Administration’s policy in Nicaragua arguably became to overthrow the Sandinistas. Others, such as Draper, suggest that regime change was the goal of the Administration’s Nicaragua policy from the beginning.

In August 1981, a CIA official met with Honduran military officials, Argentine advisers, and the FDN leadership and expressed his support for the contra operations. On November 1, the Director of the CIA William Casey met with the Chief of Staff of the Argentine military; the two purportedly agreed that Argentina would oversee the contras and the United States would provide money and weapons. In late 1981, President Reagan authorized the U.S. to support the contras by giving them “money, arms, and equipment” through Argentina, with the potential for “the occasional direct involvement of the United States in supporting individual operations.”

As contra attacks continued throughout 1982, the U.S. press began to report on U.S. support for the rebels. Liberal members of Congress condemned the policy, arguing that it was immoral and perhaps illegal. Eventually, Congressman Edward Boland (D-MA), Chairman of the House intelligence committee, offered an amendment “prohibiting the use of funds ‘for the purpose of’ overthrowing the government of Nicaragua or provoking a war between Nicaragua and Honduras” which became law on December 21, 1982. The use of funds for this purpose had actually been secretly prohibited per an agreement between Congress and the White House; thus, the amendment had no practical effect on the conduct of U.S. policy. Kagan identifies a “loophole” in the law; namely, that as long as the United States itself did not intend to overthrow the Nicaraguan government, the United States could support the contras, who did have that intent. Indeed, according to a PBS Frontline documentary, the amendment did not affect the conduct of the war in Nicaragua.
Disagreements within the policy-making community prior to a decision/opponents to the plan
The only options for President to take was to stop funding the contras as the funding was not available and was illegal through the Boland Act.
The U.S. took millions of dollars from the weapons sale and routed them and guns to the right-wing “Contra”² guerrillas in Nicaragua. The Contras were the armed opponents of Nicaragua’s Sandinista Junta of National Reconstruction, following the July 1979 overthrow of strongman Anastasio Somoza Debayle and the ending of the Somoza family’s 43-year reign.
Illegal trading
The transactions that took place in the Iran-Contra scandal were contrary to the legislation of the Democratic-dominated Congress and contrary to official Reagan administration policy.
Part of the deal was that, in July 1985, the United States would send 508 American-made TOW anti-tank missiles from Israel to Iran for the safe exchange of a hostage, the Reverend Benjamin Weir.
After that successful transfer, the Israelis offered to ship 500 HAWK surface-to-air missiles to Iran in November 1985, in exchange for the release of all remaining American hostages being held in Lebanon. Eventually the arms were sold with proceeds going to the contras, and the hostages were released.
In February 1986, 1,000 TOW missiles were shipped to Iran. From May to November, there were more shipments of various weapons and parts.
Eventually Hezbollah elected to kidnap more hostages following their release of the previous ones, which rendered meaningless any further dealings with Iran.

How did the decision affect US/Country relations?
Decision #2 Barak Obama, September 2013 (including President and date)
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/04/economist-explains-3
Government and non-government actors involved in decision-making process (Include heads of major players such as State, Defense, Treasury, CIA, NSA, etc. as appropriate),
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Plan_of_Action
Disagreements within the policy-making community prior to a decision/opponents to the plan
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5314.htm
– How did the decision affect US/Country relations?
http://www.cfr.org/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east-after-iran-nuclear-deal/p36963
What alternatives were provided to the president besides the option he eventually selected?
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/politics/congress-iran-bill-nuclear-deal/index.html
What action was actually taken? (Provide details)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action
How did the decision affect US/Country relations?

http://www.cfr.org/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east-after-iran-nuclear-deal/p36963