Iran before 1979.
Would someone please explain to me why the U.S. will repeatedly meddle in the various countries of the Middle East only to make matters FAR worse. Iran is the perfect example. Was the Shah a perfect situation?? No. Were the Iranians far better off in the 70s than living in crap hole Iran is today?? OMG yes. How many Middle Eastern countries have been ruined by U.S. meddling?? Will we ever learn??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF47rrHd7wo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF47rrHd7wo
0
-
So that politicians and government insiders can make money off their investments by awarding lucrative contracts to the companies of their choice. What's a little bloodshed, death, & human suffering when elitists get rich?? 0 -
Well if the world was a vacuum and the US was the only source of influence then yes you'd be correct. However there are other counter forces antithetical to our interests competing to undermine our position. Fossil fuels are a strategic interest, and we can't just surrender our position in the world to China and Russia to take the moral high ground. The difference being we offer freedom versus the totalitarianism that Russia and China deliver.
Maybe I misunderstand you, but the US supported the Shah, it was the revolutionaries in Iran that deposed him. The American hostages were taken because the revolutionaries were angry that the US offered safe haven and medical care to the Shah once he fled. They wanted us to turn him over to be "tried" and executed.0 -
If I remember right when the mullahs were protesting the Shah, Carter, rather than support the Shah, threw the Shah under the bus. The mullahs hated the Shah because......well just look at the link and see how the people dressed and how they lived. Now Iran is one of those poop holes Trump talks about. 0 -
If I remember right when the mullahs were protesting the Shah, Carter, rather than support the Shah, threw the Shah under the bus. The mullahs hated the Shah because......well just look at the link and see how the people dressed and how they lived. Now Iran is one of those poop holes Trump talks about. 0 -
Shah Reza Pahlavi was the US-backed choice to replace the slavering religious (not Christian) fanatic in charge. He was a moderate in a sea of fundamentalist fervor.
The mullahs simply saw an opportunity to seat themselves in a place of ultimate power(you're not gonna tell Alleh he's wrong), and mobilized a campaign of lies, which got the average Mo to think about it.
The students simply did what they were taught; if some jackwagon points at the Kiran and says you need to die for your Faith, go along with it.0 -
quote:Originally posted by DirtyDawg
So that politicians and government insiders can make money off their investments by awarding lucrative contracts to the companies of their choice. What's a little bloodshed, death, & human suffering when elitists get rich??
Bingo!
Corrupt to the core. Both sides.
Except one side is having a knutty tantrum because they were told:
"NO"
We have the usual choices every election.
The lesser of evils.
Because they ALL are.0 -
Speaking of meddling in other countries, Iraq is at the top of the list. As bad as Saddam was, he was a lot better, a hell of a lot better, than what is there now.
Thank you, George Bush and Dick Cheney.0 -
We can't even Fix Our Own For Christ Sakes 0 -
The problem is the Shah let the Mullahs live. If he had given them a free helicopter ride there would have not been a revolution.
All you have to do is look at Jordan.0 -
Do not remember the U.S. "meddling" with IRAN, ever. What I remember is working for Brown & Root in 1968 on a IRANIAN Naval Facility. We had a "change order" to make the turning basin "wider" to accommodate the largest aircraft carrier in the U.S. fleet.
The Iranian revolution in 1979 "ousted" the last Shah of Iran, a friend of the U.S.
The IRANIANS, all by themselves replaced the Shah with Ayatollah Khomeini. Similar to the U.S. who w/o interference elected Obummer, twice.
The U.S. did meddle in 1953 which helped IRAN immensely,, in 1979 the Iranians were "tired of winning" and wanted to live under a religious "dictator" and regress back the "dark ages" and look how successful they've been.0 -
The Shah spent millions of dollars against Carter's presidential campaign. So when Carter won the presidency, he ordered the CIA to destabilize the Shah to remove him and place a more friendly ruler in place. The CIA started the seeds of the revolution, but lost control of the direction and magnitude of the revolution which led to what is there now. So our government is directly responsible for what happened there. I have other, stronger opinions about the government in Iran, but since I still have relatives back there, I'll keep my mouth shut.
There is a great American documentary on this which I saw many years ago. Can't remember what it was called though.0 -
quote:Originally posted by AzAfshin
The Shah spent millions of dollars against Carter's presidential campaign. So when Carter won the presidency, he ordered the CIA to destabilize the Shah to remove him and place a more friendly ruler in place. The CIA started the seeds of the revolution, but lost control of the direction and magnitude of the revolution which led to what is there now. So our government is directly responsible for what happened there. I have other, stronger opinions about the government in Iran, but since I still have relatives back there, I'll keep my mouth shut.
There is a great American documentary on this which I saw many years ago. Can't remember what it was called though.
Yes, and the Libs are "shocked, horrified" at the thought that Russia stole the election for Trump. It is not true, but they are horrified at the thought of it.
When we have been meddling in the elections of other countries for decades.
In 2014 Obama spent millions to try to defeat Netanyahu in Israel. It was done openly with US tax dollars and everybody knew about it.
As he did with most things, Obama screwed it up and Netanyahu was re elected.
In the early seventies the CIA fomented a coup to oust, and kill, the communist President of Chile. I could go on and on.0 -
quote:Originally posted by AzAfshin
The Shah spent millions of dollars against Carter's presidential campaign. So when Carter won the presidency, he ordered the CIA to destabilize the Shah to remove him and place a more friendly ruler in place. The CIA started the seeds of the revolution, but lost control of the direction and magnitude of the revolution which led to what is there now. So our government is directly responsible for what happened there. I have other, stronger opinions about the government in Iran, but since I still have relatives back there, I'll keep my mouth shut.
There is a great American documentary on this which I saw many years ago. Can't remember what it was called though.
I can find NO reference of the Shah of Iran spending any, let alone millions of dollars AGAINST Carters Presidential campaign.
To the contrary, it seems Carter continued with the good relations the U.S. had with Iran.
Iran
On November 15, 1977, Carter pledged his administration would continue positive relations between the US and Iran, calling its contemporary status "strong, stable and progressive".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter
Appears the Shah knew he had cancer in 1976/77, doubt he was up to spending money against his biggest ally.
The U.S. welcomed him into the U.S. in Jan. of 1979. Iran had acknowledged there would be no problems with the Shah being in the U.S. Shah died in 1980, probably before seeing Disney World.
However, a link would be nice so I could read about about the Shah of Iran trying to influence a U.S. election.0 -
quote:Originally posted by droptop
quote:Originally posted by AzAfshin
The Shah spent millions of dollars against Carter's presidential campaign. So when Carter won the presidency, he ordered the CIA to destabilize the Shah to remove him and place a more friendly ruler in place. The CIA started the seeds of the revolution, but lost control of the direction and magnitude of the revolution which led to what is there now. So our government is directly responsible for what happened there. I have other, stronger opinions about the government in Iran, but since I still have relatives back there, I'll keep my mouth shut.
There is a great American documentary on this which I saw many years ago. Can't remember what it was called though.
I can find NO reference of the Shah of Iran spending any, let alone millions of dollars AGAINST Carters Presidential campaign.
To the contrary, it seems Carter continued with the good relations the U.S. had with Iran.
Iran
On November 15, 1977, Carter pledged his administration would continue positive relations between the US and Iran, calling its contemporary status "strong, stable and progressive".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter
Appears the Shah knew he had cancer in 1976/77, doubt he was up to spending money against his biggest ally.
The U.S. welcomed him into the U.S. in Jan. of 1979. Iran had acknowledged there would be no problems with the Shah being in the U.S. Shah died in 1980, probably before seeing Disney World.
However, a link would be nice so I could read about about the Shah of Iran trying to influence a U.S. election.
You won't find any evidence online. It would have been an illegal act and the receiving party would have been fried in the media and courts. So, no I can't prove it with a link. Worse than that, my evidence is hearsay, but from what I consider to be a reliable source, but you may take that any way you wish. I wouldn't believe someone else saying similar things on the internet either [:D]
As for Carter and the Shah being friendly, that was purely for show. I believe one week after that pledge, the CIA began its activities to undermine the Shah. It's well known in the middle east that Republicans are always the more friendly party to stabilizing countries in that region. Why do you think Republicans support the Saudis and Israelis so much?
BTW, I was wrong about the documentary, it wasn't made in the US, it was made by the BBC and should still be available on utube.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
14 comments