Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the truth the history books don't tell you. The shah of Iran Mohammad reza Pahlavi and his father were patriots of Iran who modernized and westernized Iran. They gave women more rights. The shah of Iran was suppressing the radical muslims and communists who were subversives. the shah of Iran suppressed the terrorists of Iran, like those who started the cinema Rex fire in Iran. If the shah didn't die in 1980, and his system stayed in place (economic systems and reforms) Iran would have been a rich first world nation by now just like the USA and France for example. The shah did many good things for Iran, such as building railways hospitals universities etc. one of the main reasons the Iranian revolution happened was because of former president jimmy carter. Jimmy carter urged the shah to release political prisoners, many of whom were radical Muslim fundamentalists. Shah complied with disastrous results. The more demands of carter that the shah complied with, the more the opposition demanded. Nothing was good enough for the opposition, and the opposition grew more militant and bore a distinctly Muslim characteristic. The shah realizing that he lost control of his country and the support of jimmy carter fled Iran and never returned. And we all know what happened after that. Khomeini made himself the leader of Iran and established an Islamic theocracy. Such a shame. Iran was the most progressive nation in the Middle East at one time. Iran 🇮🇷 could have been the absolute jewel of the Middle East, the best nation in the Middle East even. The mullahs have almost destroyed Iran, and the people of Iran are dissastified and angry 😡 with their government, as seen by the recent protests. I think of the brave Iranians who have the courage to protest against their government. They are risking their lives to protest against their government. So much bravery. I admire them.
Just something I want to add, my dad had Iranian roommates in college and those roommates told him that they loved the shah and hated Khomeini. I asked my dad what he thought of the shah and he said the shah was better than the ayatollah and the system that came after 1979. He said that yes maybe if you were vocal in your opposition to the shah, you could get in trouble. He also said that the leaders of the middle eastern nations actually know what they are doing, and jimmy carter should not have meddled in the internal affairs of Iran 🇮🇷 jimmy carter thought he knew better than the shah, well look what happened.
This is the truth the history books don't tell you. The shah of Iran Mohammad reza Pahlavi and his father were patriots of Iran who modernized and westernized Iran. They gave women more rights. The shah of Iran was suppressing the radical muslims and communists who were subversives. the shah of Iran suppressed the terrorists of Iran, like those who started the cinema Rex fire in Iran. If the shah didn't die in 1980, and his system stayed in place (economic systems and reforms) Iran would have been a rich first world nation by now just like the USA and France for example. The shah did many good things for Iran, such as building railways hospitals universities etc. one of the main reasons the Iranian revolution happened was because of former president jimmy carter. Jimmy carter urged the shah to release political prisoners, many of whom were radical Muslim fundamentalists. Shah complied with disastrous results. The more demands of carter that the shah complied with, the more the opposition demanded. Nothing was good enough for the opposition, and the opposition grew more militant and bore a distinctly Muslim characteristic. The shah realizing that he lost control of his country and the support of jimmy carter fled Iran and never returned. And we all know what happened after that. Khomeini made himself the leader of Iran and established an Islamic theocracy. Such a shame. Iran was the most progressive nation in the Middle East at one time. Iran ���� could have been the absolute jewel of the Middle East, the best nation in the Middle East even. The mullahs have almost destroyed Iran, and the people of Iran are dissastified and angry �� with their government, as seen by the recent protests. I think of the brave Iranians who have the courage to protest against their government. They are risking their lives to protest against their government. So much bravery. I admire them.
Just something I want to add, my dad had Iranian roommates in college and those roommates told him that they loved the shah and hated Khomeini. I asked my dad what he thought of the shah and he said the shah was better than the ayatollah and the system that came after 1979. He said that yes maybe if you were vocal in your opposition to the shah, you could get in trouble. He also said that the leaders of the middle eastern nations actually know what they are doing, and jimmy carter should not have meddled in the internal affairs of Iran ���� jimmy carter thought he knew better than the shah, well look what happened.
This is a good post, and the blame rests squarely on President Carter and the left, especially the US media coverage, which favored Khomeini and helped fuel the revolution. Carter wouldn't even give the Shah rubber bullets for crowd control. The Shah was a good guy by dictator standards of the day, and he was fighting for Iran, not the US, with the influence he exerted in OPEC, to drive up the price of oil and bring more revenue into Iran. He gave people a free choice in their lifestyles, and those who chose a western lifestyle were the left in Iran. They too made a fatal error in believing the lies of Khomeini, who implied he would be as tolerant as the Shah and benefit more under Kohmeini's rule. They believed him, and ended up having to flee in exile.
The Shah's son lives in the US now, and seems like a pretty good guy, he wanted to lead a transition to democracy in Iran, but was cut down by weak kneed liberal politicians and reporters in the US, whom aided a revolution and got 52 Americans taken hostage. Other presidents had bad policy with Iran in one way or another over the years, Reagan's arms for hostages thing, Bush gave them planes after desert storm, Obama let them move into Iraq and steal oil equipment and gave them a sweetheart deal. About the only president who kinda got it right with Iran was Bill Clinton, who stepped up sanctions and kept pressure on them throughout his term. I don't recall Bush2 giving them anything either, but I might have forgotten something, lol.
I like the recent course correction policy with Iran, without going into any further details.
This is a good post, and the blame rests squarely on President Carter and the left, especially the US media coverage, which favored Khomeini and helped fuel the revolution. Carter wouldn't even give the Shah rubber bullets for crowd control. The Shah was a good guy by dictator standards of the day, and he was fighting for Iran, not the US, with the influence he exerted in OPEC, to drive up the price of oil and bring more revenue into Iran. He gave people a free choice in their lifestyles, and those who chose a western lifestyle were the left in Iran. They too made a fatal error in believing the lies of Khomeini, who implied he would be as tolerant as the Shah and benefit more under Kohmeini's rule. They believed him, and ended up having to flee in exile.
The Shah's son lives in the US now, and seems like a pretty good guy, he wanted to lead a transition to democracy in Iran, but was cut down by weak kneed liberal politicians and reporters in the US, whom aided a revolution and got 52 Americans taken hostage. Other presidents had bad policy with Iran in one way or another over the years, Reagan's arms for hostages thing, Bush gave them planes after desert storm, Obama let them move into Iraq and steal oil equipment and gave them a sweetheart deal. About the only president who kinda got it right with Iran was Bill Clinton, who stepped up sanctions and kept pressure on them throughout his term. I don't recall Bush2 giving them anything either, but I might have forgotten something, lol.
I like the recent course correction policy with Iran, without going into any further details.
Even many Iranians themselves agree that the shah was much better for Iran 🇮🇷 than Khomeini or the leaders that came after the 79 revolution. Just go to quora.com and look up Iranian revolution or Mohammad reza Pahlavi on that website and you'll see responses from Iranians. Lots of interesting answers on there.
Not patriots at all. They with US assistance deprived Iranians of democracy through the 1953 coup, establishing a dictatorship. Of course aside the coup, the pretext assisted by the US and UK in setting conditions for the government to severely be weakened.
Not patriots at all. They with US assistance deprived Iranians of democracy through the 1953 coup, establishing a dictatorship. Of course aside the coup, the pretext assisted by the US and UK in setting conditions for the government to severely be weakened.
The problem was that guy nationalized the oil industry owned by the British. Britain was in dire economic straits in the early 50's, and it had a lot invested in the oil industry they had built in Iran. They retaliated by cutting off the markets for Iranian oil. The Iranian economy spiraled down fast, and the country was about to slip into anarchy, much like Venezuela today. Democracy had about 5 minutes to go in Iran, with their new president, before he turned to the Soviets for aid and assistance. With Iran in such close proximity to the USSR, it would be pretty damned hard to get them out of there, should they wish to make Iran another satellite state.
And remember, it was 1953, the height of the cold war, with Churchill and Eisenhower calling the shots, different from the times to come 7 years later with Kennedy, Cuba and Fidel Castro, although the situation was similar, policy had changed under Kennedy, and we had become more familiar with the unknown of what would happen after Stalin's death, which was concerning in 1953. The danger of Iran being drawn behind the iron curtain was very great, should Mosaddegh want to buddy up to the Russians. And the guy didn't have much choice if he wanted to remain in power, nobody else but the Russians would have helped him, Churchill knew this and convinced Ike this was about to happen, and Ike used the CIA to take care of it. How long do you think it would have been before the Russians sent in political advisers to rig any future elections in their favor, with no opposition from Mosaddegh? Iran could not stand on it's own, the way Mosaddegh wanted to do it, he was a dummy for not playing ball with the British. Shah Pahlavi did play ball, and kept getting a larger and larger share of the oil revenue for Iran, as his rule progressed. IMO, the decision Ike made was right, to remove Mosaddegh.
On the flip side, who knows what would have happened to Iran, if they did become communist and join the Soviet sphere. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, it would have changed the timeline so much, Khomeini can't come to power in 1979, revolution is suppressed like other satellite states. They start out with a clean slate in 1990 with absolute freedom to go in any direction they wished. Does the Iran-Iraq war still happen? Does the radicalism spread to Saudi Arabia and other neighboring countries without Khomeini to set it off? Maybe 37 years behind the iron curtain was just what they needed, lol.
I was stationed at Lackland AFB and worked in stat chemistry when the Shah arrived for treatment in late 1979. I only saw him once when I attempted to enter a stairwell and found that the door was locked.
It had never been locked before.
I could hear people coming down so I waited for the door to open. When it did, some serious looking guy in a suit was the first one through the door and told me to “step back” in a voice that a newly minted sergeant knew better than to dispute or disobey.
The Shah and his entourage came out and he said hello and nodded to me as they walked by. They stayed in a dorm about five buildings down from mine. Security was evident and impressive even though it was inside the base. I’ll never forget the feeling that they had run the wrong people out of Iran.
I was stationed at Lackland AFB and worked in stat chemistry when the Shah arrived for treatment in late 1979. I only saw him once when I attempted to enter a stairwell and found that the door was locked.
It had never been locked before.
I could hear people coming down so I waited for the door to open. When it did, some serious looking guy in a suit was the first one through the door and told me to “step back” in a voice that a newly minted sergeant knew better than to dispute or disobey.
The Shah and his entourage came out and he said hello and nodded to me as they walked by. They stayed in a dorm about five buildings down from mine. Security was evident and impressive even though it was inside the base. I’ll never forget the feeling that they had run the wrong people out of Iran.
Running into a sick old man in exile provides insight as to who should run some far-flung country?
Anyway, the Iranian revolution wasn't an either/or binary question of the Shah or the Ayatollah.
The revolution was a slow burn, beginning in early 1978. The Shah wasn't forced out until early 1979, and Khomeini didn't return to Iran from France for another couple of weeks after that, essentially stepping into the vacuum. Those who uphold that Shah as a leader are entirely reliant upon comparing him to his ultimate successor Khomeini, and the argument that "Hey, he may have been really bad, but he wasn't really really bad!" is some incredibly weak sauce. Furthermore, they fail to see that the Shah's self-centered corruption created the weak state that couldn't resist the angry populace it created, and that in its weakness it paved the way for the Islamic Republic.
If you want to point a finger of blame for the rise to power of Khomeini, you need look no further than the Shah himself and his western enablers.
This is a good post, and the blame rests squarely on President Carter and the left, especially the US media coverage, which favored Khomeini and helped fuel the revolution. .
The media wasn't left-leaning at all on the issue; it hounded Carter throughout the hostage crisis, and was a big reason as to why he lost the election Reagan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
