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.
They absolutely should not have been part of it, which is why they weren't. China, Russia, France, Britain and Germany were there to discuss Iran's nuclear program, not Americans in Iran.
I don't agree with any threats. I do agree with the deal, and its a damn good thing its done.
Done? Last I recall, Iran hasn't signed off on it.
Even though President Obama could soon start the process of lifting sanctions, any enthusiasm here will probably wait for Iran’s leaders to go through their own deliberately orchestrated review process.
Again, after this deal is signed they can trade with the rest of the world, but yes congress increasing sanctions would do little but alienate Iran and the other nations. Iran could use this as an excuse to walk away from the agreement.
The sanctions are ending whether the US goes along with the deal or not.
The rest of the world will trade with Iran regardless of what the US does.
If I were Iran I would not sign the deal. Avoiding inspections plus sanctions gone anyway.
You need to learn history (or not). We overthrew the Iranian government in 1953 largely at the behest of the British. THEY controlled the Iranian oil system. And we didn't kill their leader.
The revolution in 1979 was an entirely different and largely unrelated affair. The Mullahs didn't invoke the 1953 coup much. They didn't have to. The Shah was becoming more and more dictatorial, the economy was in a shambles, complex internal political strife was being settled in the streets and radical Islam was on the rise. These factors were enough to foment the revolution.
Stop making excuses for frothing Islamists.
Our participation in the 1953 coup is not even arguable, so we assisted in the overthrow at the request of the British, that's all it takes to kill a democratically elected leader of another country. Now why do you suppose we took that action.
The 1979 Shah was yet another poor example of one of our puppets, he had a brutal regime and we had responsibility.
Your point was why that Iran hates us, there are plenty of history to support that hatred.
So it would be O.K. for Iran to bomb one of our cities as long as another country requests it?
I didn't say it was right or that I agreed with it. I simply explained the facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
Our guy made a mess and Iran was mad. Being mad about another country installing a failed dictator in your country makes one a frothing islamists?
The Shah did a LOT to move Iran forward. He extended voting rights to women (almost unheard of in the Middle east). He got factory workers to invest in shares of their factory for profit sharing. He started a school nourishment program for children. He greatly improved the educational system and set up literacy programs in remote villages. He greatly improved infrastructure across the country. He also encouraged intercultural exchanges with other countries. He did FAR more that the previous administration or the subsequent administrations.
LATER in his regime he began to centralize government. Most Iranians objected to this. In addition the economy was weak. But a "failed dictator"? Not really.
We are always lectured by the Left about the 'secular youth' in Iran. If there are any (and there are) it's because of the Shah, not the Islamic fanatics that took over in 1979.
And No... ISLAM makes one a frothing Islamist. No particular form of government is required.
If you want to urinate on the US (and it seems you do) you'll have to find some other angle because this isn't working for you.
You need to learn history (or not). We overthrew the Iranian government in 1953 largely at the behest of the British. THEY controlled the Iranian oil system. And we didn't kill their leader.
Three failed assassination attempts...you forgot that part.
Perhaps you didn't kill Mossadeq, but that wasn't for a lack of trying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyster
The revolution in 1979 was an entirely different and largely unrelated affair.
You forgot the part about the US instigating a military coup. That attempt failed.
I didn't say it was right or that I agreed with it. I simply explained the facts.
We know the facts and understand why a country that had this done to them would be upset at that country.
Quote:
The Shah did a LOT to move Iran forward. He extended voting rights to women (almost unheard of in the Middle east). He got factory workers to invest in shares of their factory for profit sharing. He started a school nourishment program for children. He greatly improved the educational system and set up literacy programs in remote villages. He greatly improved infrastructure across the country. He also encouraged intercultural exchanges with other countries. He did FAR more that the previous administration or the subsequent administrations.
LATER in his regime he began to centralize government. Most Iranians objected to this. In addition the economy was weak. But a "failed dictator"? Not really.
A well place nuclear bomb targeting Detroit might make some things better there in 60 years but it still wouldn't be acceptable.
It was none of our business to get involved.
Quote:
We are always lectured by the Left about the 'secular youth' in Iran. If there are any (and there are) it's because of the Shah, not the Islamic fanatics that took over in 1979.
What their youth dance to is none of my business.
Quote:
And No... ISLAM makes one a frothing Islamist. No particular form of government is required.
If you want to urinate on the US (and it seems you do) you'll have to find some other angle because this isn't working for you.
Our participation in the 1953 coup is not even arguable, so we assisted in the overthrow at the request of the British, that's all it takes to kill a democratically elected leader of another country. Now why do you suppose we took that action.
Except we didn't actually kill anyone. Facts are hard, especially when you don't know any.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
The 1979 Shah was yet another poor example of one of our puppets, he had a brutal regime and we had responsibility.
Yep... so brutal the Shah introduced all of the social programs I already mentioned. Facts clearly mean nothing to you unless you are able to marshall them in an effort to squat down and urinate on the USA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Your point was why that Iran hates us, there are plenty of history to support that hatred.
No, my point is that you are a deranged, uninformed America hater. Thanks for proving my point.
Except we didn't actually kill anyone. Facts are hard, especially when you don't know any.
Yep... so brutal the Shah introduced all of the social programs I already mentioned. Facts clearly mean nothing to you unless you are able to marshall them in an effort to squat down and urinate on the USA.
No, my point is that you are a deranged, uninformed America hater. Thanks for proving my point.
And? The Shah brutally oppressed the Iranian people, something the U.S. did and should not have done. It is not the job of the U.S. to pick governments for other nations.
Overthrowing the Mosaddegh government in 1953 was wrong, and it has led to huge blow back for the U.S.
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.
