Latest Nobel Peace Prize winner

[hazed-]

Originally posted by Kieran
He didn't watch the polls to see if his decisions would fly, he made his choices and stuck with them. That's leadership.

er i think you'll find thats dictatorship

[babek-]

@Udie: "Farsi" is the iranian language.
I was born in Germany before the revolution - both parents iranians - and I was very often (again before the revolution) in Iran. Since the revolution I wasnt in Iran.
During the revolution my family living ín Germany and Switzerland managed to get out many family members and friends - they lived for some weeks in our house before they continued their trip to the USA or Canada or whereever.
Without exception they were blaming Carter for success of the the revolution. And they were not only from the military or police but also from all other social branches - like M.D.´s, lawyers or businesmen.

@fd ski: Sure - under the Shah´s reign there were inhumean crimes of the government but he cant be compared with a Stalin.
Shah Reza Pahlavi II hasnt killed more or less people than the Shah´s before him - including his father or the Quadjar-Dynasty.

The change came with the Khomeini-regime.
They built a perfect terror-regime - cleaning and supressing ethnical and political minorities.
So if you want to compare someone with Stalin then do it with these people.
And maybe you should read about the religious minority of the Bahai and their fate after the islamic revolution.

Under the islamic regime of Khomeini and his successors more than 1 million iranians died.  

@SaburoS
You wrote: "The Shah's treatment of his people (cause and effect) is what made ripe the conditions of the Islamic revolution, not whether Carter 'allowed' it to happen or not. Why would the Shah need to have the CIA and Mossad-trained SAVAK? "

Great - you seem to be an expert of the iranian history. Do you know how many revolution attempts there have been in Iran in the last 150 years ? Nearly every 5 years a political or religios party tried to overthrow the ruling persons.
Iran is structured in family-castes. These families are fighting for power - making alliances and manipulating the lower castes.
So the situation in 1979 was nothing new or surprising.

Also in all the time Iran hat at least one secret police - like the SAVAK or its successor of the islamic regime SAVAMA.
Even the Pahlavi-dynasty came into power by a revolution by  deposing the last Quadjar-Shah.

Only few years before there was a communistic revolution attempt which lost. Also during the reign of Reza I in the 1920ties there were revolutionary attemps which were also not succesful.

But all these revolutions claimed to be "revolutions of the people" against the opressing rulers.

So the 1979 revolution of that what you call "the people" was nothing unusual. The unusual thing was the fact that the army was forbidden to act against them.
It was the mistake of the Shah that he trusted Carter and gave him control over the imperial forces.
This weak man couldnt give the order for the imperial units to act against the growing revolution and so he encouraged them to go on.
Unluckily there was no Ronald Reagan, Bush sr. or Bush jr president of the USA when this crisis came.


But back to the iranian revolutions:
Even under the islamic regime there were revolutionary attempts.

Now : Just imagine what would happen with Iran if the revolution-attempt some years ago wasnt crushed down with brutal military actions of the islamic forces.
If there was a person like Carter which had the power to forbid any military actions against these revolutionaries.

Only an idiot would allow that revolutionaries could win if he has the power and the forces to crush down a revolution.
Carter did it and Iran became the Islamic Republic in 1979.
The Mullahs were more clever and acted immedeately when there was a staring revolutionary movements some years ago - and so they are still in rule of Iran.

Now the only hope for the Iranians is that they can depose the Mullahs step by step, because all opposition forces are effectivly destroyed.

[Udie]

@Udie: "Farsi" is the iranian language.
I was born in Germany before the revolution - both parents iranians - and I was very often (again before the revolution) in Iran. Since the revolution I wasnt in Iran.
During the revolution my family living ín Germany and Switzerland managed to get out many family members and friends - they lived for some weeks in our house before they continued their trip to the USA or Canada or whereever.
Without exception they were blaming Carter for success of the the revolution. And they were not only from the military or police but also from all other social branches - like M.D.´s, lawyers or businesmen.



 (spelling is going to be real bad )

 Solom chitori,  esme man Sean hast

 and in closing,  kodofis

 The rest of what I know is BAD very BAD,  but I do love the food too especially Kurosh Botomjun (sp again) and TADEEK!!!! I love tadeek,  it's my favorite

 I know that farsi is the language, but I've heard it used to describe the people too.  I have some friends from Rafsanjoni (sp?)  My 1st band in high school was called "Darius" and I spent a couple of years studying Irans history, specificly around 528 BC during Darius I's rule and NOT Darius III

 My friends came over during the revolution and moved to Baton Rouge La. (talk about moving from the pan to the fire!)  They never really had bad things to say about Carter.  They loved the Shaw and hated Kohmeni.

 Great people though to be sure,  such a shame that their country is controlled by madmen

[Kieran]

Aw, hazed, that's really a stretch.

C'mon. You know he can only influence, not force. I respect him because he at least had an idea of what he wanted to accomplish and pursued it even when it was not politically expedient to do so. He certainly doesn't come remotely close to the description of dictator or despot.

Me, I foolishly believe leaders have to first possess vision. They need to have the charisma and personal persuasive abilities to get people to follow. I think Carter had a disposition to be a dove at any expense, and this damaged him politically. I think he had a vision, but he did not have the charisma or persuasive ability to get the followers. Or perhaps his vision was flawed. At any rate, he remained consistant throughout his term in what he tried to accomplish.