Trump - Iran

Select to expand quote

Poida said..
when you look at the history of Iran from the 1950's its a sad tale of intervention gone wrong, all for the oil revenue. The USA doesn't learn from all these interventions that turn into a cluster f*ck

You are wrong - they have learned from their interventions.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..
I love how people present the middle East as a peaceful garden of coexistence and brotherly love ... and then the West comes and ruins it all. Comedy gold.

Let's unpack this dribble....

You "love love how people present the middle East as a peaceful garden of coexistence and brotherly love"?
No you don't. You hate it.

But is this "thing" you "love" a correct interpretation? No. Clearly not. No one is making such representations here. You've imagined this dribble.

"and then the West comes and ruins it all. Comedy gold."
Ignoring the above ridiculous misinterpretation, I would consider overthrowing a democratically elected government over oil to be ruination of a country's sovereignty and dignity yes. It's criminal activity at the sovereign level. The equivalent would be if China instigated a coup in Australia over resources and you just sat back and said it's fine. So stupid and immoral it's beyond belief.

Select to expand quote

evlPanda said..

And Trump is in touch with the average man, and woman, in the street? Really?

(He probably wants to be in touch with every woman in the street)

Select to expand quote

holy guacamole said..
HG: Today, Iran is a bit of a hell hole. To understand how this came about, we need to go back to the 1953 coup instigated by the BRITS to overthrow Iran's democratic government. Iran was planning to nationalise its oil industry, but the BRITS and US wouldn't stand for this so they forcibly took control of Iran's oil resources through the coup....

TH:

HG: The BRITS, with the help of the CIA and Iranian mobsters then installed the puppet dictator and Shah to mind their new assets and ensure a steady flow of oil on their terms. So the BRITS aren't so innocent are they?

TH:

HG: When the Iranian people got jack of the UK/US installed puppet dictator, they revolted. Unfortunately, the coup and it's replacement government radicalised the population into a frenzied desperate mob that turned to fundamentalist Islamic leaders for salvation from the hell that the coup created and, here we are today.

TH:

HG: So if it wasn't for the UK/US coup, Iran would probably still be democratic and likely very prosperous today , since Iran was planning in 1953 to kick out the corrupt UK/US oil barons and nationalise its oil industry, just as Norway did. Norway now has the world's richest sovereign wealth fund....go figure.

TH: Yeah I see your point. Thanks HG.

You really area self righteous know it all. FS stated that Iraq was created by the Brits. I proved it wasn't. I didn't say anything about their involvement after that so why would you think it necessary to give me that child like summary? The middle east in general is a mess and has a history of conflict going back 4,000 years BACA (that is Before A Current Affair). If they didn't have oil no one would care. For a more in depth review of pre 1953 politics read below. The Brits actually assisted in the democratic period prior to 1953 (by mistake perhaps) and I would have thought you would have mentioned the Russians involvement since you know everything

In 1941, after the Nazi invasion of the USSR, the British and Commonwealth of Nations forces and the Red Army invaded Iran. Reza Shah had declared neutrality in World War II, and tried to balance between the two major powers, Britain and Nazi Germany. The primary reason for the invasion was to secure Iran's oil fields and the Trans-Iranian Railway in order to deliver supplies to the USSR. Reza Shah was arrested, deposed, and exiled by the British, and some other prominent officials were jailed as well. Reza Shah's 22-year-old son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, became the Shah of Iran. The new Shah, unlike his father, was initially a mild leader and at times indecisive. During the 1940s he did not for most part take an independent role in the government, and much of Reza Shah's authoritarian policies were rolled back. Iranian democracy effectively was restored during this period as a result.

And the Americans have admitted to have a major role as well

In August 2013, sixty years afterward, the U.S. government formally acknowledged the U.S. role in the coup by releasing a bulk of previously classified government documents that show it was in charge of both the planning and the execution of the coup, including the bribing of Iranian politicians, security and army high-ranking officials, as well as pro-coup propaganda.[29][30][31] The CIA is quoted acknowledging the coup was carried out "under CIA direction" and "as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government"

TH..

Prob'ly another canned war about oil - not much for us to see on TV unfortunately. Just the usual grainy drone visions and lots of tea towels yelling, jumping up and down and getting all sweaty.

Since the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, wars haven't been that good to follow on TV. Only a few random bizarre and shocking exceptions - like when ISIS set that pilot on fire in the cage - that was f'ckn gross - it gave me nightmares for weeks/months. And that retarded Aussie who's little kids were carrying around heads. I think those kids are still stuck in some refugee camp - I mean, how are we supposed to process that $hit?

Select to expand quote

tangohotel said..You really area self righteous know it all.

holy guacamole said..
HG: Today, Iran is a bit of a hell hole. To understand how this came about, we need to go back to the 1953 coup instigated by the BRITS to overthrow Iran's democratic government. Iran was planning to nationalise its oil industry, but the BRITS and US wouldn't stand for this so they forcibly took control of Iran's oil resources through the coup....

TH:

HG: The BRITS, with the help of the CIA and Iranian mobsters then installed the puppet dictator and Shah to mind their new assets and ensure a steady flow of oil on their terms. So the BRITS aren't so innocent are they?

TH:

HG: When the Iranian people got jack of the UK/US installed puppet dictator, they revolted. Unfortunately, the coup and it's replacement government radicalised the population into a frenzied desperate mob that turned to fundamentalist Islamic leaders for salvation from the hell that the coup created and, here we are today.

TH:

HG: So if it wasn't for the UK/US coup, Iran would probably still be democratic and likely very prosperous today , since Iran was planning in 1953 to kick out the corrupt UK/US oil barons and nationalise its oil industry, just as Norway did. Norway now has the world's richest sovereign wealth fund....go figure.

TH: Yeah I see your point. Thanks HG.

Not really. I was employing humour and rehashing your own little comedy sketch. You took it personally. Shame because I found your post funny enough to borrow the format.

It's not difficult to find out about this stuff. Coups are pretty transparent once the information is declassified. The US actually publicly admitted to it's role about a decade ago when it declassified the Operation Ajax records.

This thread is about Iran so I thought I'd point out the fact the the UK/US is guilty as heck when it comes to criminal behaviour in the region, especially Iran.

I wasn't disputing your post about Iraq. In fact you're absolutely correct.

I was pointing out that no one has ever forced western interests into the Middle East, but rather that the west goes in there in order to exert their power and control and then whinges when they get into trouble with their failed puppet regimes. They know the profit is always worth it though. They know the mess it creates locally doesn't matter because "we've got the bomb".

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

Select to expand quote

japie said.
Who does that?

Anyone who keeps bringing up the UK and US sticking their noses in as the cause of The Troubles. They know who they are.

Select to expand quote

holy guacamole said..
Let's unpack this dribble....

You "love love how people present the middle East as a peaceful garden of coexistence and brotherly love"?
No you don't. You hate it.

But is this "thing" you "love" a correct interpretation? No. Clearly not. No one is making such representations here. You've imagined this dribble.

"and then the West comes and ruins it all. Comedy gold."
Ignoring the above ridiculous misinterpretation, I would consider overthrowing a democratically elected government over oil to be ruination of a country's sovereignty and dignity yes. It's criminal activity at the sovereign level. The equivalent would be if China instigated a coup in Australia over resources and you just sat back and said it's fine. So stupid and immoral it's beyond belief.

Doubling-down is a hobby for you isn't it Gone platinum!

Select to expand quote

tangohotel said..
Sorry Fly Surfer. It was the league of Nations which comprised the following members.
ARGENTINA, AUSTRALIA, BELGIUM, BOLIVIA, BRAZIL, CANADA, CHILE, CHINA, COLOMBIA, CUBA, CZECHOSLOVAKIA, DENMARK, EL SALVADOR, FRANCE, GREECE, GUATEMALA, HAITI, HONDURAS, INDIA, ITALY, JAPAN, LIBERIA, NETHERLANDS, NEW ZEALAND NICARAGUA, NORWAY, PANAMA, PARAGUAY, PERSIA, PERU POLAND, PORTUGAL, ROMANIA, SIAM, SPAIN, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, SOUTH AFRICA, UNITED KINGDOM, URUGUAY VENEZUELA, YUGOSLAVIA.

Understand your problem now, maybe this format could help you.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

evlPanda said..
And Trump is in touch with the average man, and woman, in the street? Really?

(He probably wants to be in touch with every woman in the street)

Well ... yes. He won the last election didn't he. Why?

He didn't win the popular vote. He won on the technicality of electoral college votes.

Looks like ol' stable genius is gonna get capped one day soon

Bloody hell, the leftist media are turning this murderer into their next Che Guevara. Even putting aside what he's done outside of Iran, he was in charge of the security apparatus who's been killing, imprisoning and torturing (mostly young people) anyone who speaks out against the regime.

Even just a month ago as many as 1500 Iranians were killed by the Rev Guard for protesting against the regime.

Select to expand quote

KelpoS said..
Bloody hell, the leftist media are turning this murderer into their next Che Guevara. Even putting aside what he's done outside of Iran, he was in charge of the security apparatus who's been killing, imprisoning and torturing (mostly young people) anyone who speaks out against the regime.

Even just a month ago as many as 1500 Iranians were killed by the Rev Guard for protesting against the regime.

What would you do to the people that stole your country's sovereignty and destroyed it's nascent democracy? Are they worthy of assassination too?

Select to expand quote

holy guacamole said..

Kamikuza said..

evlPanda said..
And Trump is in touch with the average man, and woman, in the street? Really?

(He probably wants to be in touch with every woman in the street)

Well ... yes. He won the last election didn't he. Why?

He didn't win the popular vote. He won on the technicality of electoral college votes.

More people choose to vote for Trump and against Hillary across traditional party lines. The core voters were pretty much unchanged. Why?

And the difference in the popular vote was what, 80,000?

Select to expand quote

log man said..

Kamikuza said..

holy guacamole said..
I love the way some people say that the "Middle East" is as a mess going back thousands of years but conveniently ignore the fact that Europe had two massive wars leading to the deaths of more people than the sum total of all war ever in the middle east and feudal infighting and general mayhem for centuries before that. Comedy gold, comedy gold.

Whataboutism at it's finest. Nice one.

And you didn't check the math did you: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_conflicts_in_the_Middle_East

Get your calculator and work backwards...

That's not whataboutism

I'm not surprised you don't understand the implication of the big "but" in the middle there.