Iran nuclear program. It is a lie

#76
#76
Grand Vol said:
No, I was suggesting we installed a government friendly to the US in the region. The Shah was responsible for implementing the rapid changes in their society that led to the rise of the extremists and eventual revolution.

As I said, change has to be slow and taken a small step at a time in that part of the world. Iran went too fast for the people.
Click to expand...
The extremists were a reaction to the SAVAK and the authoritarian antics of The Shah. The US caught the blowback because we were the ones that installed him.

The Shah outlived his usefulness with the US once Kissinger and the Saudis developed the Petrodollar scheme. From the mid-70s until his fall, The Shah and Iran were the major threats to the petrodollar arrangment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#77
#77
Rasputin_Vol said:
The extremists were a reaction to the SAVAK and the authoritarian antics of The Shah. The US caught the blowback because we were the ones that installed him.

The Shah outlived his usefulness with the US once Kissinger and the Saudis developed the Petrodollar scheme. From the mid-70s until his fall, The Shah and Iran were the major threats to the petrodollar arrangment.
Click to expand...

...and still are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#78
#78
Rasputin_Vol said:
The extremists were a reaction to the SAVAK and the authoritarian antics of The Shah. The US caught the blowback because we were the ones that installed him.

The Shah outlived his usefulness with the US once Kissinger and the Saudis developed the Petrodollar scheme. From the mid-70s until his fall, The Shah and Iran were the major threats to the petrodollar arrangment.
Click to expand...

But you cannot directly link the cause and effect in this instance. Did the US require all those changes be made in the Iranian society? Or was it the Shah that pushed for those?

There is no way of definitively saying the 1953 coup directly resulted in the 1979 revolution since the underlying problems were there prior to and after the coup. The two were related, obviously, but the internal matters during that 25 year time span cannot be attributed to the US specifically. Reza Pahlavi was just far too progressive for what the country wanted.
 
#79
#79
Grand Vol said:
But you cannot directly link the cause and effect in this instance. Did the US require all those changes be made in the Iranian society? Or was it the Shah that pushed for those?

There is no way of definitively saying the 1953 coup directly resulted in the 1979 revolution since the underlying problems were there prior to and after the coup. The two were related, obviously, but the internal matters during that 25 year time span cannot be attributed to the US specifically. Reza Pahlavi was just far too progressive for what the country wanted.
Click to expand...

You keep saying progressive... Iran was already one of the most westernized countries in the Middle East. It wasn't the cultural changes Pahlavi did that caused the radicals to pop up. It was the reaction to The Shah's authoritarian rule. Once he fell out of favor with the US, that is when the US persuaded Khomeini to return from exile in France.

Are you calling the authoritarian Shah a progressive?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#80
#80
Rasputin_Vol said:
You keep saying progressive... Iran was already one of the most westernized countries in the Middle East. It wasn't the cultural changes Pahlavi did that caused the radicals to pop up. It was the reaction to The Shah's authoritarian rule. Once he fell out of favor with the US, that is when the US persuaded Khomeini to return from exile in France.

Are you calling the authoritarian Shah a progressive?
Click to expand...

a lot of the ME was more progressive before the US/Russia got involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#82
#82
Grand Vol said:
Yeah, most historians do as well.

Try actually studying history instead of just your typically assumption of anti-US efforts.
Click to expand...

I do study history. Just because we constantly do evil things around the globe, that doesn’t make me anti-American. I'm just telling the truth. Hell, and I'm probably more pro-Constitution than most folks in here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#83
#83
hog88 said:
If you want to go back to root cause. The Iranians allowed (begged) western oil companies to spend millions developing their oil reserves then was going to double cross them.
Click to expand...

So that was their justification for overthrowing a democratically elected leader? Unless you are a supporter of the law of the jungle, just because I invite you to my house to do some work for me doesn't give you the justification to take over my home.
 
#84
#84
05_never_again said:
Their anger at the Shah for having "Western values" was incidental. They wanted the Shah gone because he was pushed into power by a US/UK-orchestrated coup that overthrew a leader they had democratically elected.

If a foreign power overthrew our democratically-elected government and replaced it with another government of their choosing, even if you didn't like our government, how would you feel about that foreign power?
Click to expand...
Talk about revisionist history. He's portraying Shah Pahlavi as the second coming of Thomas Jefferson.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#85
#85
Rasputin_Vol said:
Talk about revisionist history. He's portraying Shah Pahlavi as the second coming of Thomas Jefferson.
Click to expand...

Oh did I?

Go ahead and try your mental gymnastics to point to that proof.

And FYI, Mosaddegh was elected by the parliament, but the Shah had the ultimate decision to appoint him to the post of Prime Minister. So, it's a stretch to say he was the "democratically elected leader" when in fact he was appointed to that position.
 
#86
#86
Rasputin_Vol said:
So that was their justification for overthrowing a democratically elected leader? Unless you are a supporter of the law of the jungle, just because I invite you to my house to do some work for me doesn't give you the justification to take over my home.
Click to expand...

If you don’t pay me I can damn sure put a lien on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#87
#87
Is it just me or did John Kerry's spokesperson pretty much admit he's violating the Logan Act?

Trump slams Kerry over 'shadow diplomacy' to save Iran deal - CNNPolitics

But a Kerry spokesman pushed back against Trump's remarks in a statement on Monday.

"I think every American would want every voice possible urging Iran to remain in compliance with the nuclear agreement that prevented a war. Secretary Kerry stays in touch with his former counterparts around the world just like every previous Secretary of State," said the spokesman in a written statement. "Like America's closest allies, he believes it is important that the nuclear agreement, which took the world years to negotiate, remain effective as countries focus on stability in the region."
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#88
#88
Grand Vol said:
Is it just me or did John Kerry's spokesperson pretty much admit he's violating the Logan Act?

Trump slams Kerry over 'shadow diplomacy' to save Iran deal - CNNPolitics
Click to expand...

Meh, IDK if its a Logan Act violation, but if he contends that most former State Department employees maintain contact with their counterparts even after leaving, then what is the big deal about Trump being in contact with the Russians before they get into office? Seems like if they can justify Kerry's actions, then they should have no with all of this Trump-Russia nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#89
#89
lawgator1 said:
You are correct.

The materials Netanyahu was talking about are from the Iranian archives, and detailed efforts to obtain weapons prior to the agreement.

There was a lot of confusion as Trump and other persons as uninformed and as abjectly stupid as he is went around saying these materials were about ongoing or current efforts to obtain weapons. Which they are not.

This, for example, caused an embarrassing snafu for the White House when Sanders said that the documents showed that Iran "has" such a program when in fact they do not prove that, and relate to what Iran at one time had. Before the agreement.

You can read about the difference and how the WH had to then quickly change their statement to clarify that it was past tense:

White House claims 'clerical error' led to drastic change in Iran statement - CNNPolitics

This is the kind of thing that ought to concern people. Once again, Trump hears something on Fox or gets snookered by someone like Netanyahu, and makes all sorts of dumbass statements that have to then be walked back.

Tillerson and Kelly are right. Trump has no clue about policy and is an f'ing moron and an idiot.
Click to expand...

A and not ”an” in your last sentence about morons and idiots.
 
#90
#90
US/Israel losing proxy war in Syria...

Result = broken record of demonizing lies against winners...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#91
#91
Looks like we are backing out of the Iran deal.

America is no longer a reliable partner to our allies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#99
#99
I’m sure Bolton and Pompeo are excited. Can only hope that these fools and administration don’t do anything to damage us long term until they are voted out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#100
#100
Trump doesn't even know where Iran is on a map. This is what has been recommended to him by a combination of the pro-Israel lobby (to whom he owes much because of campaign $) and the war hawks in the administration (see e.g. Bolton).

That he gets to keep the base happy by blasting Obama for something more is all he needed to hear to say ok, we are out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top