 Originally Posted by Universal
Imran,
Thanks. That sounds good. I always ask people those questions when they go off about my country and not the terrorists that were the topic of the discussion, but it looks like you probably have your priorities straight.
What I know about Mossadeq is that he was believed by U.S. and British intelligence to have threatening ties to the Soviet Union and was a communist supporter. Some sources, even major ones, now say that the intelligence was false, but as I have said, the Cold War was the biggest problem my country has ever faced aside from the Nazi world domination conquest, and it had to be treated like a war. Maybe some of my government's decisions can now be said to have been bad ones, but hindsight is 20/20. We went after other governments for the same reason, including that of Nicaragua and El Salvador. I was a young kid who didn't know the difference between El Salvador and Salvador Dali when that stuff was happening, but from what I have read, those governments were perceived as very serious Cold War threats. The Vietnam War was the most controversial Cold War move we ever made, and I really question how that situation should have been handled. What I do know is that we won the Cold War and that the Soviet Union did not take over the world and make it communist. That was their goal. Eastern Europe is free, the former Soviet states are free, the Soviets do not rule Afghanistan or anywhere else in the Middle East, and a free world is looking more and more possible. If some of the tactics we used to get here were unethical or unnecessary, then that's terrible, but the overall scheme was effective.
The Iranian terrorist who was not punished by us is something I am not that familiar with, but I believe you are referring to one of Bozo the Clinton's horrendous moves. He made many of them. You are not going to get me to take up for that schmuck. He gave military technology to China and passed up four chances to assassinate Bin Laden. Screw Bill Clinton. I am embarassed that he was ever our President.
The Oil For Food policy was a United Nations deal. I am no fan of the United Nations. They are highly corrupt and almost completely undependable. I will not take up for any of that corruption either.
The United States is not completely angelic, and we sure as Hell weren't in our early days. I just start pointing things out when people from other countries seem to have nothing but bad to say about us. The fact that both of my grandfathers fought in World War II has something to do with that, especially since it apparently left one of my grandfathers kind of messed up in the head. Also, all three of my uncles were in the military, and I know that none of them were in it to steal oil or to oppress anybody. One of them is dead now, and he was one of the greatest people I have ever known. But don't assume I am some patriotic fanatic. I have always made fun of blind patriotism. Even in high school I refused to say the Pledge of Allegience, and in college I offended some people by mocking how people act when our national anthem is sung at ball games. If I were ever drafted to fight in a war I don't believe in, I would not be one of those people who says, "My country called me to duty. I must fight." I would burn my draft card and move to Canada.
[/b]
On the topic of the Soviets, elts not go into it, because you can tell from my signature that I have some far- left ideologies, and thts an altogether bigger discussion.
Yes i'll accept you were misguided by the British because they had huge oil interests in Iran
Mossadeghs nationalization, woudned there economy drastically. They used propganda to draw the US into the conflict. He was not closely tid to the USSR at all.
Still, the US must be held accountable for there actions, misguided or not.
And Vietnam was a disgrace, the napalm and such should alwyas be looked upon as a disgusting act of hatred and terror.
Heres a little bit about Mohammad Reza Pahlavi:
With Iran's great oil wealth, Mohammad Reza Shah became the pre-eminent leader of the Middle East, and self-styled "Guardian" of the Persian Gulf. In 1975, he abolished the multi-party system of government so that he could rule through a one-party state under the Rastakhiz (Resurrection) Party in autocratic fashion, which he claimed was a response, among other things, to the Soviet Union's support of Iranian Communist militias and parties, particularly the Tudeh Party. In addition, the Shah had decreed that all Iranian citizens and the few remaining political parties must become part of Rastakhiz. [12] The Shah also authorized the creation of the secret police force, SAVAK (National Organization for Information and Security, which was organized with the help of the CIA.).This infamous agency operated its own secret prison, used torture extensively, assassinated dissidents, and kept the CIA informed.
After the Islamic Revolution, the Shah fled the country at the advice of his prime minister at the time.
Reluctantly, on 22 October 1979 President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah to make a brief stopover in the United States to undergo medical treatment. The compromise was extremely unpopular with the revolutionary movement, which were against the United States' years of support of the Shah's rule, and demanded his return to Iran to stand trial.
Why?
Im sory but I can see no discernable diffrence between him and Saddam
except for the fact that they are the very people who placed him in power
my point is, that the US have done good, but that many of the US presidents i nthe past have not intervened at toher time andahve shown undoubted support for autocratic regimes in the East.
But qwhen it suits them, they are the world policmen,
this is not a title to be dropepd and picked up at ones own whim.
and finally, I bleieve the Iraq war to be in itslef a grave awar crime
we have already discussed the legality of the war and I do not accept that the war was legal.
The UN was just pwoerless to stop the US.
I also condemn my country
Oh and I dont doubt the soldiers were fighting for feedom of the Iraqi people, but they were iselad
I would not suggest ever arresting or condeming soldeirs that fight for there country, rather condemn there leaders
"One does not put the gun on trial, they charge the man who pulled the trigger"
Imran
|
|
Bookmarks