POLL: When should the USA liberate Iran?

The CIA told the Shah he would be deposed if he did not support throwing the PM out of office. They directed him to install a General in his place. Yes, he had the power to make such a decree in the constitution, but he himself did not wish to utilise it. The CIA directed the Shah to use his powers, with force, against the will of the wider populace, to strangle government dissent and actively pursue policies of special interest groups. The CIA utilised the legal powers of the Shah AND military force to change the government. NO ONE disputes that this was a coup. He became an autocrat by enforcing his powers as an authoritarian instead of as a bystander which he had previously adhered to.
No doubt this was a coup - Operation Ajax, the CIA called it. Whether the Shah was a legal autocrat or not is beside the point in that the US directed him to act as an autocrat. This is evident in the long-standing history that followed, in which the US encouraged and supported the Pahlavi regime acting with brutal reprimand against enemies of its authority. Carter in fact congratulated the Shah in the 70s on an outstanding human rights record while he was torturing people. Kind of like Cheney and Mubarak. The story continues. If you dont think the actions of the US heavily assisted in the culmination of the rise of the Ayatollah you are deluded.

As I said, the US is a serous threat to humanity, especially to peace and stability in the Middle East, as the history of Iran indicates.

 

Debatable. I've read he was well intentioned but it was hard to make a good choice since, well you know, you dont really have a clue about the world if you live in a palace surrounded by blissful wealth and friends.

LOL Ok mate.

How so?

Wrong.

So? Hitler is dead. Trust me, hes not coming back.

Not really. The USA's priority isnt peace, stability or justice. Its about control and power. If it has to cut off Israel to maintain that, no doubt it will.

So that another '79 will happen?

MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

And never mind that the Iranian economy was in shambles after the actions of that Prime Minister.

It was not so much the Nationalization that had an impact (that happens all the time), but the action of appropriating all of the assets that the AIOC then ordering them to keep their employees there without compensation that infuriated England and other nations. Tantamount to Theft and Slavery, no nation has the right to do things like that. And as a result most of world stopped buying Iranian oil causing a financial meltdown. Until finally the AIOC evacuated all of it's employees from Iran and their oil industry collapsed. Their oil production dropped from over 240 million barrels to just over 10 million barrels.

After that the Prime Minister resigned, then later was reinstated. This time he decided to go after the Monarchy itself. Slashing the Shah's personal budget, trying to pass orders that all communications to or from the Shah had to go through him, seizing royal lands, then finally expelling the Shah's sister. And cutting all relations with England, ordering embassies in both countries closed and announcing publically that they were a "Hostile Nation" were all pretty much the final straw for the Shah.

Funny how often some people in here are willing to forgive some of the worst actions of leaders, just so that their politics are in line with their own. If the Prime Minister of England had done actions like that, I would have expected he or she would have been removed as well.

 

Yeah because the CIA just wanted to help Iranians have a good economy

So you're an advocate of autocratic Monarchy? Ok.

Yeah right. Where did I do that?

Sure, but not at the behest of a foreign power and a corporation.

 

Only the worst sort of fool would rush into a war on Iran.

 

Want to know something?

I really do not give a frack what form of government a country has. And Iran in it's own 1906 Constitution (the government in place at the time) was an autocratic Monarchy with a Parliament that served in the service of the Monarch (not unlike the early British Parliament).

Monarchy, Dictatorship, Meritocracy, Communist, Democracy, Republic, Oligarchy, Theocracy, it really does not matter much to me. Just so that they respect the rights of others both inside and outside their own country.

Do the words "Enlightened Monarchy" mean anything to you? That was something that the Shah was trying hard to promote and achieve. Equal rights (and even high level government positions) for people of all races and religions, even Jews. Equal rights and suffrage for all members, regardless of religion or sex.

That certainly is not the case today. Iran has given up an Enlightened Monarchy for a brutal Theocracy.

And you call that progress? Your hatred of the US has made you blind to reality my friend.

 

I sure as hell do not want to fight with Iran. I do not want to fight with anybody to be completely honest.

But I also do not delude myself that if the US and Iran came to blows, which side would unquestionably win. Iran fought a brutal decade long stalemate with Iraq. A nation we destroyed in combat 2 different times in a decade with ease.

 

Depends what it is. So I guess I wont know until you tell me...

What's a frack?

Why did you talk about the PM being ever so poor for his country then? Strange.

Where did the 1906 constitution say Parliament is in service to the Monarch?

So you detest the actions of the US in launching a coup in Iran in 1954 then?

Indeed that's partly correct. However he supported the PM until the CIA changed his mind by threatening him.

And Mossadegh was opposed to that? Incidentally the Pahlavi regime instituted a secret police following the coup, banned political parties and set up a long history of repression and torture.

Ok. Interesting how, just a little fact, that literacy rates amongst girls was at 42% in 1976, under the Pahlavi regimes "enlightened dictatorship" but has risen to 98% by 2008 under the "brutal theocracy."

See above. I would have called Mossadegh's government living out its term until the next election progress.

Seems more like your whiny prejudice has made you completely hypocritical and ignorant. Apparently you dont care what government a country has until the CIA changes it and then its the best they ever had and ever will. I dont hate the US at all, in fact I think its one of the freest and most admirable countries in the world in many respects. I think its foreign policy is terrible however and its history in that regard, atrocious.

So aside from your contradictory remarks, shallow arguments and unfounded prejudice, I still cant figure out what 'frack' means and I'm still waiting for you to say something productive. You keep at it.

 

OK, yea. Whoop-de-doo, they can read.

Can she go out in public without a Hijab? Can she expose anything other then her hands? (the answer, no - exposing anything else is punishable by 70 lashes).

Can they run for public office? (No, women running for office is banned)

Can women be forced into prostitution? Yes, "Temporary Marriages" are a way that impoverished fathers force their daughters into prostitution.

Can a woman request a divorce? Only if it is an extreme and documentable case of abuse against her male children. Otherwise only men can request a divorce, and women do not get custody rights (a man can abuse his wife or daughters all he wants - that is not cause for divorce).

Women can go to college, but most are unable to work in their chosen fields. There are strict quotas (generally 15-25%) that regulate the ratio of men to women in the professional workplace.

Can they participate in the Olympic games? The Iranian Women's Volleyball Team was once among the best in the world, they have not existed for decades however. Of the 53 Iranian athletes in the Chinese Olympics, only 3 were female. But that was an improvement from the 2004 Olympics, where only 1 female from Iran competed.

The legal system in Iran is severely slanted. The testimony of a man will always be taken as true over that of a woman. And any damages for wrongful death or injury to a woman are awarded at 1/2 of that of a man.

The last "woman's magazine" in Iran was founded in 1992, and ordered closed by the government in 2008 as a "threat to the psychological security of the society".

Yea, more of them can read. To bad that is about all they can do.

 

Indeed its pretty obvious you dont think very much of education LOL

I thought you said you didnt care? Now you do? You have more freedom in Iran than Saudi Arabia and the latter is the US' closest ally in the region.

Bahahaha! Oh mate you are so clueless. The current vice president of Iran is a woman - Masoumeh Ebtekar.

That's interesting, I've not heard of workplace gender quotas that are so strict.

So yes, they can participate.

You'll recall I never said the current regime is good. I think its terrible. I dont see how this point changes anything I've said nor somehow defends or vindicates America's coup in 1954, since it directly cause the rise of the regime you now condemn, despite the fact you "dont care" what governments exist in other countries

Cant tell whats bs and what isnt, so you'll need some sources bro. Man you're funny though.

 

So you think we should send American soldiers to restore a government that derives its rule from the Divine Right of Kings? Man, I knew conservatives were backward but....

 

The US already liberated Iran from its democratically-elected government back in 1953 as this 2013 article points out:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/cia-admits-role-1953-iranian-coup

But then the Iranians liberated themselves in 1979, and probably don't want anymore liberating at the moment.

 

Iran will be liberated by the USA of
1) its IslamoTerrorism
2) its nukes
3) its military

Only then, will our key allies in Israel be safe

 

We definitely do NOT want to engage in a bunch of "nation-building" in Iran like we did in Iraq. What a rotten, miserable failure THAT was.

We don't need to try to bomb their nuclear laboratories deep underground, either. We need to use thermobaric bombs on the surface, in all their towns and cities. Destroy the roads and bridges, along with the electrical, fresh water, and sewer infrastructure. Destroy the grocery stores, the hardware stores, the garages and repair facilities. Destroy all the municipal services for all the cities and towns. Leave the entire country a chaotic, bloody, starving mass of refugees who can't even find toilet paper to wipe their asses. We do NOT need nuclear weapons to do this. And we do NOT need to blow billions of dollars to rebuild everything that we destroyed in self-defense!

And after we've done this, then we must have the good sense to get the hell out and give whatever they have left for a government a simple message: "If you ever attempt to gain nuclear weapons again or engage in aggressive strategies against any other country, we will come back and do this all over again!"

 

Here are some pictures of Iran.
http://www.pbase.com/k_amj/throughout_iran&page=all

Is the Shock and Awe, "Bomb, bomb, bomb. Bomb, bomb, Iran" of John McCain and the neocons really preferable to Ron Paul's idea of bringing US forces home and leaving the Mid-East to Mid-Easterners?

 

You seem pretty gung-ho to go to war.
Why don't you just take a deep breath and realize that for decades Iran has been making noise and we in turn have sanctions in place and - so far - it's worked. Now, it might not work any longer if Hitlery gets in office next time because she has a real itching to strike Iran. She and Ariel Sharon were best buds. Here's a quote from the Hildebeast:

"I held a series of meetings with Israeli officials [last summer], including the prime minister and the foreign minister and the head of the [Israel Defense Forces], to discuss such challenges we confront. In each of these meetings, we talked at length about the dire threat posed by the potential of a nuclear-armed Iran, not only to Israel, but also to Europe and Russia. Just this week, the new president of Iran made further outrageous comments that attacked Israel's right to exist that are simply beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptability. During my meeting with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, I was reminded vividly of the threats that Israel faces every hour of every day. … It became even more clear how important it is for the United States to stand with Israel…."

So in short - the attack will happen when and if Hillary is President.

Any other questions?

 

If and when America and or her allies can field an entire division of soldiers who understand how the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) may have had a near death experiencer or OOBE would be helpful?!

http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...d-son-good-prophet-prophet-muhammad-pbuh.html


I believe Abraham said "good son and good Prophet" to The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)



If more Christian Mystics and even some Jewish Mystics will begin to discuss the theory that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was in many ways a Prophet Like Unto Moses as well as perhaps King David or Elijah or the Patriarch Abraham reincarnated........ then peace will soon break out in the Middle East!!!!!!!!!


http://www.near-death.com/muslim.html
Near-Death Experiences of Muslims

 

There's no option to NOT attack Iran.

But let's clue y'all in for a second.

Do you know that Iranian soldiers are currently aiding US forces in fighting ISIS?

[video=youtube;uC3JI7d7cSQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC3JI7d7cSQ[/video]

So, please, try and think about that when Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, or Mark Levin tell you what to think.

 

That is certainly an important part of the entire question!

At this time there is a diplomatic solution to the Middle East crisis that could alter how many people in Iran view their relationship with the western democracies?!


http://www.politicalforum.com/opini...saving-new-orleans-florida-rising-oceans.html

The Sahara Forest Project...and saving New Orleans and Florida from rising oceans!



Did you know that there is an Islamic prophecy that the Islamic desert regions would be turned green in the latter days?????

This topic is of special interest to me because I live about a hundred miles from the Bay of Fundy. I live five kms from the ocean on the eastern part of Nova Scotia. In my area the difference between low tide to high tide is about one meter! The land form of the Bay of Fundy has a funnelling effect on tidal waters and so parts of the Fundy have a difference of fifteen to seventeen meters between low to high tide!

The question on my mind would be if ocean levels were to rise about thirty centimeters in my part of Nova Scotia, would they rise by four or five meters along parts of the Fundy????

There are 143,000 acres of farmland taken back from the Fundy by dikes that are probably in the position of the proverbial canary in a coal mine in relation to rising ocean levels!

Every cubic meter of H2O added to the water table of nations in the Middle EAst will NOT be on top of New Orleans, Florida, Holland, Bangladesh or those 143,000 acres along the Fundy!!!!!

I felt a huge sense of relief when I first heard about The Sahara Forest Project!


https://www.facebook.com/SaharaForestProject
Sahara Forest Project
April 19




Sahara Forest Project takes what we have a enough of to create what we need more of, using CO2, salt water, sunlight and arid areas, to produce energy, fresh water, vegetation and food.

......
http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/koran/index.blog?topic_id=1021110

 

We aren't dealing with a rational, logical government in Iran... we are dealing with a clot of religious zealots who subscribe to a bizarre religion that calls for all unbelievers to be converted or killed.

The mere thought of what could happen to them once President Ronald Reagan was in office was enough to make even the most delusional Islamo-Nazis (like Ayatollah Khomeini) understand that they must comply with standards of international convention and release the American Embassy hostages -- or face what were sure to be dreadful consequences. The hostages were set free at the very moment that President Reagan took the Oath of Office....

Now, 35 years later, we have a knee-walking, negligent NOTHINGNESS in the White House who has clearly demonstrated to Iran and the rest of the world that he has no real intention of stopping today's Iranian Islamo-Nazis from threatening all of us "infidels" with nuclear weapons and missiles to send them around the planet. We will either stop them, now, or they WILL set off the great apocalyptical war that their insane religion tells them to strive toward....

 

Which…… is part of what has me wondering if perhaps Canada's Prime Minister may well be onto something with this rather new policy of deporting people who make statements that would tend to identify them as radical Muslims?????

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/0...otting-to-bomb-u-s-consulate-in-toronto-cbsa/
ISIS sympathizer arrested after plotting to bomb U.S. consulate in Toronto: CBSA

 

they hide terrorist. i am pretty sure thats against the law.

 

those conditions have not been met.

 

why are you responding to a post from january 16?

 

Where did I say that I believed that? I was stating what it said in their Constitution, not my own personal beliefs (not being Iranian, I could not care if the power comes from Allah, Rights of Man, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster to be perfectly honest).

That was what it said right in their Constitution. Not unlike say a certain US document which talks about "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights".

I am sorry if you can not comprehend the difference between a comment made on the constitution of a country, and the beliefs of the poster.

It has?

Like sanctions forced Iraq out of Kuwait? And forced them to open up their country for weapons inspectors? Like it stopped them from continuing to make proscribed weapons?

Like sanctions stopped North Korea from making nuclear weapons?

Sorry, my faith in sanctions runs about as high as my trust that a OWS minion really just wants to have a job.