Yeah, that's a really good question. And contemporary us Iran relations are always evolving, right. So for folks who are listening to this, who knows when you know, we're, we're talking early in the week after the helicopter crash that resulted in the death of the Rouhani, President, Foreign Minister and others, but, of course, a month ago, there would have been a different kind of media landscape. And in a month, who knows there might be as well so just kind of preface, this, these comments with that comment. So the first part of me kind of wants to say, not at all. It's not that simple, of course, right. But a big goal of the book was to, you know, as best as we all can as mortals, humans living in the world, you know, and shaped by all the things happening around us, right? To at least try to escape some of the teleology is that dominate? You know, our understandings of us Iran relations. So I really appreciated the the one blurb on the book, about, you know, how this how mission manifest speaks to a history, I think they say, long before the rise of more familiar religious or political myths, right, that really made me happy to see people kind of kind of picking up on that. Just kind of one more kind of on that point, you know, folks who read the book will, you know, kind of get a lot of discussion of periodization. As you know, historians love to talk about periodization. Right, but there are various reasons why every chapter in this book, except for the very last chapter, ends in the mid to late 1960s, right, maybe a few kind of trickle into the early 70s, this kind of thing, but so the the kind of the endpoint is not 1979. Right? It's, it's actually kind of the materialization of the Shahs White Revolution and the Shahs establishment of at least a relative degree of autonomy, kind of from his American patrons and kind of the Iranian assumption, or a broader international assumption of control over institutions that would have been like American or Presbyterian or foreign. Prior to the 1960s. Right, the 1960s is not just the decade of the Shahs White Revolution. But it's you know, in 1967, the US declares Iran a developed country, quote, unquote, withdrawals, US aid mission, the Shah holds his coronation in 1967. Right, more than two decades after he assumed power. So there are a lot of these kind of, you know, signposts, right in the late 1960s, in addition to the closure of the Presbyterian Mission that we need to see what comes in the 1970s is, at least in the context of history, I was trying to write and being somewhat different, right. But of course, you know, it's not that simple, you know, so I can speak to some ways that the book, at least is relevant to some of the conversations that are happening more broadly right now. So the final chapter of the book does deal with the ultimate disappearance, right of this not just Presbyterian Mission, which is pretty small by the late 1970s. But the broader American colony and you're right, so if that colony was approaching 50,000, say at the end of the summer of 1978. In November 1979, when the hostage crisis started, there, were only about 1000 American nationals there who were who were there voluntarily, right. And a lot of them were business people kind of cleaning up tying up loose ends, or, you know, this kind of thing. People who married and married Iranians, so Americans who married Iranians and go back to Iran, and are there then maybe they have binational children, but there aren't many people there. I mean, it's a tremendous it's almost like an evaporation of the whole, you know, kind of lifestyle whole kind of that whole colony doesn't exist, at least with Americans living in it, right? These institutions have afterlife after 1979. But that happens very quick. Right? And so that final chapter, tries to explain that the best that I can there could be an entire book or a whole body of literature, of course, about that kind of question, but I demonstrate how these Americans really hitched their star to the Shah of Iran. Ian's national mission is memory to this idea of kind of restoring kind of a Ron's kind of greatness in the region as a modern developed socio economically advanced, globally connected but not politically free. Country. This was something that, you know, the Americans I write about, appreciate it. They benefited from from this personally, professionally and in all the other ways. So there's this moment right in the 1960s. And that White Revolution moment where, you know, a lot of the missionary folks and other Americans kind of see all their kind of ambitions and ideals as being realized and actualized, right that Iran had, in fact, gave this American community of Evangelicals a loving embrace, and this embrace was going to be permanent and long lasting. Right? The Job had been completed right that other another historian writes about this, that peaceful conquest, right that Wilsonian idea that that had happened. This was the belief of the people that I'm writing about. Of course, not everybody in the 1960s and 70s, thought that but really, a lot of Americans did think that but they were getting reassurances from people who are associated with the monarchical vision of Iran. What happens in the final chapter is we see that there were competing Iranian missions, right? There's this idea of Dawa, or Islamic mission that was at once at odds with the monarchical vision of modern Iran. And also, what these Americans, not only what they were doing in Iran, but at a point the fact that they were even there to begin with, right. So we see in that final chapter that while there was this kind of Iranian national secular monarchical, vision that was attractive to Americans, there was this other really kind of potentially larger group at the time in the 60s and 70s, of course, of Iranians who didn't see it, though, right. So as we think about all the complex things happening in the world, it's interesting to think about whether Americans are thinking about us Iran relations, and kind of in connection to monarchical mission, which is, of course, a huge part of the overseas conversation, whether they're thinking about it in terms of this now state sanctioned notion of what the Islamic Republic of Iran is supposed to be, or if there are, you know, a bunch of kind of points in between and shades of grey and middle ground that can help Americans maybe have a better read on what the appropriate role of the United States of the world, in the world and in places like Iran actually is, right. Because this hyper interventionism that took, you know, kind of before my write about in the book ultimately is very, you know, offensive to people who expelled the Americans in the revolution in 1979. Right. Now, so, you know, that would just be, you know, one possible point of relevance between the book and some of the uglier aspects of contemporary Yes, Ron relations, but, you know, I conclude the book, maybe the same way I can complete our talk today, which is this idea of the Del Be Del residuals, right, that this kind of idea of a heart to heart community, based on a Persian proverb about, like connection being made or road existing between each heart, from heart to heart, this idea that you can make this connection with somebody that is more than a material experience and impactful kind of, you know, the soul or spirit, depending on the missionary view, or at least maybe the kind of worldview or, you know, kind of mindset, from, you know, kind of some of the less missionary minded American, but this idea that they're, you know, the folks who had this type of affection or love for Iran, very problematic, very complicated, you know, certainly, you know, with strings attached, right, and, you know, kind of all the other kind of aspects of the power situation that informs the human relationships of the cold were between a superpower in any country that isn't a superpower, right?