Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: StarOfAfrica2 on March 08, 2006, 12:22:10 PM
-
The UN promises to act within the week after having Iran brought before the Security Council. Not that they'll do anything but talk mind you, but at least its something. But Iran has promised to repay the US for its role in bringing them up before the Council with "harm and pain".
http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-03-08T152415Z_01_L08408279_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN.xml
Something tells me they dont like us much. And then of course Israel comes out and says if you cant do anything about it, we will!
http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-03-08T143030Z_01_L08205988_RTRUKOT_0_TEXT0.xml&related=true
Thats going to make things even better!
-
Uh! The UN (Universal Nincompoops). I'm sure they'll conduct a thorough investigation. Let me guess? Hmmmmmm Hans Blix again for "Just Vun Luk - Just Vun. Zat is good no?"
-
You got it wrong.
First the UN needs a 6 month policy fact finding committee
then they make an resolution to decide if they should write a strongly worded letter
Then they have to form another committee to determin what the letter should say.
Then they pass a resolution to determine if any amendments to the stronggly worded letter are required
Then they pass the resolution to write a strongly worded letter but have to go back to committee for more fact finding and write amendments that condem Israel and praise palestine just fro the heck of it.
Then the send the strongly worded letter to Iran with said amendments.
Iran's president gives the UN the finger.
Then it's back to committe to determine if sactions may be necessary.
Then it goes up for debate amungst the general assembly.
Then it gets determined that more facts are needed and possibly another strongly worded letter.
From there it goes back to committee......and so on and so on
The UN is a usless spinless body.
-
The Great UN cheese distribution team is being called in? Must be a glut of Grueyere in france needing to be distributed...
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
You got it wrong. ................... The UN is a usless spinless body.
Sad but 100% True. Right on Gun! :aok
-
add about 6 more months to decide what pattern on the stationary to use
-
I think the US should attack Iran with shock and awe
-
They are a little tired right now Nilsen. Check back next year.
-
but what if the Iranians are too stupid to find the USA and attack Norway instead?
-
Originally posted by john9001
but what if the Iranians are too stupid to find the USA and attack Norway instead?
:lol
-
I heard Iran is already arming their F-14 Tomcats and camouflaging them; now they look like Airbus A300s... :noid
-
Originally posted by Staga
I heard Iran is already arming their F-14 Tomcats and camouflaging them; now they look like Airbus A300s... :noid
probably the funniest thing you've ever said on this board.;)
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I think the US should attack Iran with shock and awe
I can see it now, Hey First Sargent we got a good news bad news situation, the good news is we are rotating out of Iraq.......
shamus
-
Originally posted by Shamus
I can see it now, Hey First Sargent we got a good news bad news situation, the good news is we are rotating out of Iraq.......
shamus
LMAO :rofl :aok
-
Originally posted by Shamus
I can see it now, Hey First Sargent we got a good news bad news situation, the good news is we are rotating out of Iraq.......
shamus
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by john9001
but what if the Iranians are too stupid to find the USA and attack Norway instead?
Their turbans would freeze and the weight would snap their necks when they bowed towards Mekka
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Their turbans would freeze and the weight would snap their necks when they bowed towards Mekka
That is an anti-Islamic statement and the deaths from the protests going on throughout the Muslim world are a direct consequence of your statement and are on your head.
You should be deeply ashamed.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
That is an anti-Islamic statement, and the deaths in the protests going on throught the Muslim world are a direct consequence of your statement and are on your head.
You should be deeply ashamed.
i am sorry..
i would bow my head in shame but my remaining hair has frozen so my neck would snap..
ill wait til the spring if thats ok
-
This is 20+ year old news...
-
We should just apologize for being so evil and leave everyone alone....I'm certain folks would love us then.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I think the US should attack Iran with shock and awe
we'll give them michal jackson. then see what they do.
-
the action jackson in question has been pre-positioned in the gulf, greatly reducing both the number of pre-pubescent children and the amount of time required to put clogs on the ground in theatre.
so to speak.
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
The UN promises to act within the week after having Iran brought before the Security Council. Not that they'll do anything but talk mind you, but at least its something. But Iran has promised to repay the US for its role in bringing them up before the Council with "harm and pain".
http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-03-08T152415Z_01_L08408279_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN.xml
Something tells me they dont like us much. And then of course Israel comes out and says if you cant do anything about it, we will!
http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-03-08T143030Z_01_L08205988_RTRUKOT_0_TEXT0.xml&related=true
Thats going to make things even better!
Has anybody ever read Nostradomus?
-
I think you guys are not giving the U.N. anywhere near the credit it deserves. Iran is so getting a strongly worded letter out of this, mark my words.:furious
-
I thought Kofi wanted to sit down with them under the tree and have a picnic.
-
Damn haji's......
-
Originally posted by dmf
Has anybody ever read Nostradomus?
Sure... and astrology and tarot cards and Revelation and any number of whack job predictions of the future. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by mentalguy
we'll give them michal jackson. then see what they do.
Take us to the Hague..justifiably :lol
-
Originally posted by Slash27
I think you guys are not giving the U.N. anywhere near the credit it deserves. Iran is so getting a strongly worded letter out of this, mark my words.:furious
Oooooooh, hardball! :rofl
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
You got it wrong.
First the UN needs a 6 month policy fact finding committee
then they make an resolution to decide if they should write a strongly worded letter
Then they have to form another committee to determin what the letter should say.
Then they pass a resolution to determine if any amendments to the stronggly worded letter are required
Then they pass the resolution to write a strongly worded letter but have to go back to committee for more fact finding and write amendments that condem Israel and praise palestine just fro the heck of it.
Then the send the strongly worded letter to Iran with said amendments.
Iran's president gives the UN the finger.
Then it's back to committe to determine if sactions may be necessary.
Then it goes up for debate amungst the general assembly.
Then it gets determined that more facts are needed and possibly another strongly worded letter.
From there it goes back to committee......and so on and so on
The UN is a usless spinless body.
:rofl :lol
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
the action jackson in question has been pre-positioned in the gulf, greatly reducing both the number of pre-pubescent children and the amount of time required to put clogs on the ground in theatre.
so to speak.
:D
-
Iran wants nukes so bad, I say we give them some
sadly, it is probably the only way to save the rest of the western world
another Iraq with troops on the ground in Iran is the wrong way to go
-
Oh no... lots of troops on the ground is the way to go. First fire off plenty of cruisemissiles and then alot of gps bombs. Then you go in to defeat iran with soldiers on the ground. You get alot better TV pictures with the embedded reporters that way and you can make sure the oil fields remain intact. A nukular strike would make it harder to get the oil.
-
yes
iran is all about the oil .. nothing about a crazy man, who happens to be the pres of one of the largest terror states in the world, building nukes ..
yep, all about the oil
Assassination is the other way to go. maybe the hand wringing libs of the world could stomach that in place of a dozen mushroom clouds over Iran
sooner or later they'll figure out you can't pet a rabid dog .. hopefully it is sooner
-
Of course its not about the oil.. never said it was. Im just saying that it would be a bad move deprive the world of that oil. Its like a nice bonus after the crazy man is gone and the region is stable.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
sooner or later they'll figure out you can't pet a rabid dog .. hopefully it is sooner
Who's the rabid dog who has been attacking sovereign countries and occupying them right now?
Hint: It's not Iran.
-
Originally posted by Staga
Who's the rabid dog who has been attacking sovereign countries and occupying them right now?
Hint: It's not Iran.
yes the US is the world's great evil!!
lol - please bioya
-
Originally posted by Staga
Who's the rabid dog who has been attacking sovereign countries and occupying them right now?
Hint: It's not Iran.
Its not occupation its liberation. The world could learn great things if we followed the path of America who after all is the real leader of the free world. Freedom is an awsome thing that america has shown us. We should be thankful and not spend so much energy trying to hold the nation back with our liberal and socialist ways.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
yes the US is the world's great evil!!
lol - please bioya
No..
Bush is what stands between the free world and chaos.
-
I think that liberating some backward countries from the oppression of socialism and ice bears should be our first priority.... especialy if they have oil.
I have heard a lot of em even speak english instead of jiberish so they can be civilized.
lazs
-
more noise from the peanut gallery ... otherwise known as finland
-
If it can free us from the liberals and bring us closer to jesus and more conservative thinking then yes.
-
Originally posted by Staga
Who's the rabid dog who has been attacking sovereign countries and occupying them right now?
Hint: It's not Iran.
:cry :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry :cry:aok
-
Originally posted by Staga
Who's the rabid dog who has been attacking sovereign countries and occupying them right now?
Hint: It's not Iran.
saddam was not a "sovereign country"
-
Iran is a terd that needed flushing along time ago.
Only now they are showing there arse to the whole world.
Who does this little piss ant country think they are? They are fixin to get there butt's handed to them in a most violent way and there to stupid to even know that.
Some one please give these piss ant countrys a history lesson.
I will start it off.
In 1945 after a long and bloody conventional war with Japan America finally saw that the only way to bring there enemy to the peace table was to do something so devistating that it would shock there fanny's to the signing that surrender
agreement on the USS Missouri.
I fear that this is what its going to take to get these arse clowns to figure out
that if you keep snapping a rubber band on a pitt bulls balls sooner or later he will trun around and rip off your face:D
-
Originally posted by fartwinkle
Iran is a terd that needed flushing along time ago.
Only now they are showing there arse to the whole world.
Who does this little piss ant country think they are? They are fixin to get there butt's handed to them in a most violent way and there to stupid to even know that.
Some one please give these piss ant countrys a history lesson.
I will start it off.
In 1945 after a long and bloody conventional war with Japan America finally saw that the only way to bring there enemy to the peace table was to do something so devistating that it would shock there fanny's to the signing that surrender
agreement on the USS Missouri.
I fear that this is what its going to take to get these arse clowns to figure out
that if you keep snapping a rubber band on a pitt bulls balls sooner or later he will trun around and rip off your face:D
FYI.. the one doing the "rubber band snapping" is the leader of the free world. What Iran has said is that if America does anything they will respond. They have not made a threat to start the "rubber band snapping"
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
FYI.. the one doing the "rubber band snapping" is the leader of the free world. What Iran has said is that if America does anything they will respond. They have not made a threat to start the "rubber band snapping"
BS Iran is poking a stick thru the fence at the big dog in the neighborhood and they will get bit if they keep it up.
They are nothing but arse backwards ignorant fools that have not evolved since biblical times and they are fixin to learn how to play nice with the rest of the world or get spanked and sent to bed without there dinner.
If the world is silly enough to let morinic countrys like Iraq and N korea get nukes then we all deserve what we get when they start showing off with there new toys.
Oh and who said we have to be the "leader" of the free world anyways?
Grow up and lead your own countrys it aint Americas responsability to tit feed all you whiny arsed europeon countrys.
-
Originally posted by Staga
Who's the rabid dog who has been attacking sovereign countries and occupying them right now?
Hint: It's not Iran.
This is an anti-American statement, you and Moore and Kerry should move to Vietnam where you all can be heros.
-
Bumper Sticker from the 70's which still holds true today:
"Nukem till they glow, It worked in Japan, it will work in Iran"
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
The UN is a usless spinless body.
Not as useless to the world as Bush's administration is.
-
Originally posted by fartwinkle
BS Iran is poking a stick thru the fence at the big dog in the neighborhood and they will get bit if they keep it up.
They are nothing but arse backwards ignorant fools that have not evolved since biblical times and they are fixin to learn how to play nice with the rest of the world or get spanked and sent to bed without there dinner.
If the world is silly enough to let morinic countrys like Iraq and N korea get nukes then we all deserve what we get when they start showing off with there new toys.
Oh and who said we have to be the "leader" of the free world anyways?
Grow up and lead your own countrys it aint Americas responsability to tit feed all you whiny arsed europeon countrys.
Yup.. I hope you theach them a lesson.
-
Originally posted by Mister ED
This is an anti-American statement, you and Moore and Kerry should move to Vietnam where you all can be heros.
It's a superb "follow the party line" sentence ...
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
Not as useless to the world as Bush's administration is.
Bush is what stands between the free world and total chaos. We owe him alot actually.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Bush is what stands between the free world and total chaos. We owe him alot actually.
If Bush is what stands between the free world & total kaos then the world is in a heap of trouble.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
If Bush is what stands between the free world & total kaos then the world is in a heap of trouble.
The world is in a heap of trouble. We need George Bush and his ideology.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
The world is in a heap of trouble. We need George Bush and his ideology.
You mean idiotology...When he finally decides to cut & run(which is now the only option)...and an even nastier islamic govt takes over,what will your president have accomplished?
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
You mean idiotology...When he finally decides to cut & run(which is now the only option)...and an even nastier islamic govt takes over,what will your president have accomplished?
You need to have more faith in him and his exit strategy. He didnt make it all the way to the white house by beeing stupid. He has was it takes to get the job done.
-
I'm not good enough in the english language, so I'm hoping someone else can inform you of how its going to unfold, but I am confident.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
You mean idiotology...When he finally decides to cut & run(which is now the only option)...and an even nastier islamic govt takes over,what will your president have accomplished?
And this thread’s Ward Churchill Award goes to (Envelope Please) ………. SirLoin
If you had to wake up every morning and face the south – would you want to be thankful your parked next to us or would you want to kneel and pray to Mohommad?
-
Ah, SirLoin, Nilsen is not in America. Bush is not his president. :aok
*looks at watch*
Any time now and Chuck Norris and McGyver will save all of us!
-
Originally posted by straffo
It's a superb "follow the party line" sentence ...
"In Russia you may not always be able to find a party......
But THE party can ALWAYS find YOU" Zackoff Smirinoff
Sorry Im no party member. I just know commies when I see them.
Ive kilt better commies then, then they have now.
Moore is a self professed anti-American.
Kerry is one of two Americans in the People Hall of Heros in Hanoi.
"Hmm smells like dog ****..... Hmm, yuk tastes like dog ****!....
good thing we didnt step in it" Cheech & Chong
-
Originally posted by texace
Ah, SirLoin, Nilsen is not in America. Bush is not his president. :aok
*looks at watch*
Any time now and Chuck Norris and McGyver will save all of us!
I'm sorry to say that he is not, but I'm still impressed by him and he is the leader of the free world so I kinda feel like he is my president too. :)
-
Originally posted by texace
Ah, SirLoin, Nilsen is not in America. Bush is not his president. :aok
Canada, and Norway. Where even studmuffin gots can marry, go figure.
-
What is a studmuffin got? I'm not that familiar with your language.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
What is a studmuffin got? I'm not that familiar with your language.
studmuffin got is a English term, a small bundle of sticks. A studmuffin is one stick that is apart from the bundle of sticks.
In the old days it was a slang for a cigarette out of the packs
Now a days...
A slang word for a homosexual. You know Adam and Steve.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
What is a studmuffin got? I'm not that familiar with your language.
You better quit with the rubber band Nilsen, or the horse is gonna turn around and rip your face off.
shamus
-
Originally posted by Mister ED
studmuffin got is a English term, a small bundle of sticks. A studmuffin is one stick that is apart from the bundle of sticks.
In the old days it was a slang for a cigarette out of the packs
Now a days...
A slang word for a homosexual. You know Adam and Steve.
So.. do you have anything against these bum enthusiasts?
-
Originally posted by Shamus
You better quit with the rubber band Nilsen, or the horse is gonna turn around and rip your face off.
shamus
Would it not be easyer for the horse to kick me?
-
I was wondering... When was last time Iran attacked against any country ?
-
Originally posted by Mister ED
studmuffin got is a English term, a small bundle of sticks. A studmuffin is one stick that is apart from the bundle of sticks.
In the old days it was a slang for a cigarette out of the packs
Now a days...
A slang word for a homosexual. You know Adam and Steve.
I'm waiting for you to use the 'N' word to describe African Americans next!
-
Originally posted by Staga
I was wondering... When was last time Iran attacked against any country ?
do not think they would attack anyone up front or do you think they would finance and arm someone else do do their dirty work?
why do you make such statements when you already know the answers..
-
Using others to do your dirty work is just as bad as doing it yourself.
They have to be stopped.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
do not think they would attack anyone up front or do you think they would finance and arm someone else do do their dirty work?
why do you make such statements when you already know the answers..
Heh, did your precogs inform you of this future-crime? :O
-
Ultimately, the United Nations will do nothing to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
The United States will do nothing to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
The nations of Europe will do nothing to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
Iran will directly threaten Israel, Israel will respond with nuclear weapons.
The Arab world will attack Israel. Israel will be destroyed.
Military forces of Israel will retaliate against the entire Arab world.
After that Im not sure what happens.....could go one of several different ways..............
-
In other words...
"Is Israel worth World War III?"
-
I think some have forgotten to take their prozacs today.
There's still two countries between Iran and Israel (Yeah even if their names are close each other the countries aren't; there's Iraq and Syria/Jordania between those two).
So Yeager; what do you think would be the reason for a clash between Israel and Iran?
-
Just remember what happened the last time the Arab countries got together and tried to destroy Israel. Them Jewish-kine folks ended up with some extra property. Maybe this time they wont give it back.
-
You knew Iran is not an Arab country ?
-
what do you think would be the reason for a clash between Israel and Iran?
====
God
-
You knew Iran is not an Arab country ?
====
Yes, they are persian. Still muslim though...
-
This was your scenario; did you just pull it out from your arse or were you actually thinking there could be a reason why Iran would threat Israel and why Israel would use nukes?
Originally posted by Yeager
Iran will directly threaten Israel, Israel will respond with nuclear weapons.
The Arab world will attack Israel. Israel will be destroyed.
Military forces of Israel will retaliate against the entire Arab world.
-
Originally posted by Staga
You knew Iran is not an Arab country ?
Technically yes. The main population is not of Arab descent, they are Persian - although a sizeable portion of the population speaks Arabic. The term has come to be rather generic. Any more hairs you'd like to split?
-
Originally posted by Staga
This was your scenario; did you just pull it out from your arse or were you actually thinking there could be a reason why Iran would threat Israel and why Israel would use nukes?
In case you missed the link in my original post, go back and check. There are 2 story links there. Not only has Iran directly threatened Israel several times in the past, Israel came out with a direct statement saying if the UN did not stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, they would take matters into their own hands. Is that reason enough?
-
Splitting hairs? OK.
Did you knew Iran wasn't attacking Israel with Arabic countries?
Oh and Israel haven't "given back" all the property they took from Arabic countries so guess your post is bit misleading... maybe it was your intention? Or didn't you just knew about it ?
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Just remember what happened the last time the Arab countries got together and tried to destroy Israel. Them Jewish-kine folks ended up with some extra property. Maybe this time they wont give it back.
-
I looked thru you links but to tell the truth I couldn't find a reason for a war between Iran and Israel.
Fact is they don't have common border together but are quite far away from each other. Also Israel is already having a nuclear weapon and I find it quite hard to believe anyone would be such a fool and use nukes first against Israel; they would be sure getting few warheads back in return mail.
-
btw last time when Iran was in offensive there wasn't such a country as United States... Think about that.
-
Originally posted by Staga
Splitting hairs? OK.
Did you knew Iran wasn't attacking Israel with Arabic countries?
Oh and Israel haven't "given back" all the property they took from Arabic countries so guess your post is bit misleading... maybe it was your intention? Or didn't you just knew about it ?
Weeeelllll............. depends. Iran was not officially part of the 6 days war no. However, many countries organized troops in support of the invasion which never had a chance to see action. I'm sure if I had access to the proper records I could find mobilization orders for Iranian troops for that time period. Without proof though, I have to concede that no, Iran was not part of the attack on Israel then. However, they have threatened many times in the last year to do so. How many times do you have to listen to your neighbor threaten to jump over the hedge and kick your prettythang before you do something about it?
As for Israel "giving back" anything, I dont see why they should. They were under attack from the armed forces of multiple countries, and after soundly kicking their butts and sending them packing home, they occupied enough land around their country to provide proper buffers. International law condemns them for it, but doesnt condemn their attackers. Thats a load of BS. Still they've been willing recently to give up that land in an effort for peace, which is still being rejected. With Iran as one of the most vocal opponents of ANY peaceful settlement with Israel.
If you want to come out and state your support for Iran and its policies do so. You arent talented enough for sniping.
-
Iran has not been involved in any war since before the US was a country??
ROFLMAO
What world do you live in, and who writes its history books?
-
Iran has been in many wars but it hasn't started the war against any country in 300 years. Quite respectable history IMHO.
Oh and I have a reason to think my education is quite good, also history wise.
Let's see what Condoleezza Rice said:
"We (US) may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran, whose policies are directed at developing a Middle East that would be 180 degrees different than the Middle East we (US) would like to see developed," Rice said at a congressional hearing.
I wonder when US learns to keep its nose away from others businesses? There hasn't come much good from its foreign policy.
Hell you actually fubared the things with Iran yourself first... read your history books :)
-
Originally posted by Yeager
what do you think would be the reason for a clash between Israel and Iran?
====
God
Who cares..Why is there a clash between USA & Iraq?
answer the question...
-
Blah, blah, blah, blah. How many fish can the trolls catch today? Why is there air? What happens when I push this button? I gotta go to the bathroom, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Poke, poke, poke. Hmmm. Getting done. Not quite burnt enough.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Blah, blah, blah, blah. How many fish can the trolls catch today? Why is there air? What happens when I push this button? I gotta go to the bathroom, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Poke, poke, poke. Hmmm. Getting done. Not quite burnt enough.
hehehehehehehe
they cant help themselves.
-
Why is there a clash between USA & Iraq?
answer the question...
====
Fish
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
When phosphorous grenades are launched on women & children..really..Who cares..?
I don't:rofl
-
When phosphorous grenades are launched on women & children..really..Who cares..?
====
Fish
-
Originally posted by Yeager
I think Tormato is a great Yes album.
-
Originally posted by Staga
Iran has been in many wars but it hasn't started the war against any country in 300 years. Quite respectable history IMHO.
Oh and I have a reason to think my education is quite good, also history wise.
Let's see what Condoleezza Rice said:
"We (US) may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran, whose policies are directed at developing a Middle East that would be 180 degrees different than the Middle East we (US) would like to see developed," Rice said at a congressional hearing.
I wonder when US learns to keep its nose away from others businesses? There hasn't come much good from its foreign policy.
Hell you actually fubared the things with Iran yourself first... read your history books :)
Semantics is a beautiful thing isnt it? Why should the US keep its "nose" out of the middle east? No one else has. Other countries have been "meddling" in that real estate since the Greeks during the Persian wars. Iran and Iraq are two of the most oil rich countries in the world.
You may find Iran's history admirable because they havent started a war in a long time. There's more than one way to start a war. You can step into someone else's space and try to take their stuff, or you can stand in your own space and taunt someone until they jump over and knock your block off. Which one "started" it? Ever since 1979 things have been strained between Iran and just about everyone else in the world. They've managed to pi$$ off or alienate just about everyone. If we had been inclined to do so, we could have retaliated against Iran in 79 for their attack on our embassy, and its holding our people hostage. A embassy is considered "home soil". Technically they invaded US soil. While they may not have caused the Iran / Iraq war in the 80s, I dont remember too many folks siding with them. Almost everyone I can think of was either neutral or aiding Iraq. Not that we liked Saddam either, but he was easier to deal with than Khomayni.
-
Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
Not that we liked Saddam either, but he was easier to deal with than Khomayni.
The current little excursion in Iraq lays bare the error of that statement.
-
SoA2: Do you know what events led to the hostages being taken at the US embassy?
Here we have yet another nation and people who were friendly and supportive of the US, until misguided foreign policy and heavy-handed internal interference turned them into adversaries. The US has been turning allies into adversaries at an alarming pace.
-
I'm rooting for Trichoderma reesei to munch its way to the rescue.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
Damn haji's......
just wanted you to know I got it
and it made me laugh.
-
Originally posted by Rolex
SoA2: Do you know what events led to the hostages being taken at the US embassy?
Here we have yet another nation and people who were friendly and supportive of the US, until misguided foreign policy and heavy-handed internal interference turned them into adversaries. The US has been turning allies into adversaries at an alarming pace.
I do. At least I think I do, so correct me if I'm wrong. Even though I was a bit young still in 79, I was old enough to pay attention to the news. It was my first glimpse of what screwed up politics could do. It is my understanding that when Khomayni took over in Iran, and we gave asylum to the Shah, Khomayni began inciting people to protest against US involvement. A group of students calling themselves the Imam's Discipiles invaded the embassy grounds and took several people hostage, demanding the US return the Shah in exchange for the hostages.
I'm not defending our f***-ups there by any means. I wholeheartedly agree, our foriegn policy has exacerbated more than one bad situation. It just means we need to pay attention to the people setting those policys, and make them accountable when they screw up. I dont see that as a screw up. We gave the man asylum.
*Edit....
BTW, do you spell the man's name Khomayni or Khomieni? I've never been sure of that one.
-
1. Persia / Iran Iran as an non-arab country
Its IRAN - not PERSIA.
In its 2500 years of existance we never called our country Persia but Iran, which means "Land of the Aryans".
It was called Persia by ancient greek historicans because the dynasty of the Achemenids (Cyrus, Xerxes; Darius and so on) came from that province.
While it was called Persia by foreigners until the 20th century the iranians themself never called it so.
It would be the same if I would call the USA "Texas" because the ruling dynasty is from this province.
2. The religion
Once Iran was conquered by the arabs. But while other nations who suffered the same fate were assimilated and gave up their culture and language and became arabs (like egypt or syria) the iranians fought a bitter war and were successful. The iranian language was not replaced by the arab language. The arabs were finally driven out of iran. And even the religion was transformed by mixing elements of the old iranian religion with islam, creating the shi ´ite islam of today.
Never asked yourself why most of the shi ´ites live in the borders of the old sassanid iranian empire ? Made of today Iran, the eastern province of Iraq, and the western province of Afghanistan - which were once part of the Empire? The old sassanid capital is SE Bagdad.
And even the Mullahs of Shi ´ite islam have the same style of cloth like the old iranian priests.
There is great hate between sunnites and shi ´ites. Both sides consider each other as heretics. That was one reason why Iran supported the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan long before these creatures were defined as bad guys. In these days the Taliban were officially supported by the sunnite Pakistan.
And today the sunnite arab Al kaida is targeting shi ´ites in Iraq - defining them as heretics.
So dont make the mistake by putting these two groups together as allies.
3. Iran during Arab-Israeli War
Someone wrote that he could find march orders of the iranian army to support the arabs.
In fact Iran delivered to Israel oil during Israel-Arab war. The Iranians always considered the sunnite arabs as the enemy. So the construction of an iranian-arab-alliance is ridiculous.
The Shah of Iran made fun of arab guests by welcoming them in official visits in Iran in front of the iranian honor guard which was equipped with israeli UZIs.
Arabs and iranians will never be allies.
Best example was during the Kuwait-Gulf War. While many arab countries sent volonteers to Saddam not a single Iranian supported them (with the exception of the MEK-terrorist, iranian traitors who fought side by side with arabs in iran-Iraq War and still live today in iraq in their military bases).
4. The embassy thing
When the USA and GB destroyed the iranian democracy in the 50ties (Operation Ajay) their command post was the US embassy in Iran.
From there the democratic prime minister Mossadegh who had kicked out the Shah to italian exile in an unbloody revolution, was deposed.
That was a tracig day for Iran, which had managed to create a democracy by itself.
Then there came the decades of Shah-terror. With his Gestapo-like secret police, the SAVAK, he killed tenthousands of iranians per year. In the infamoud Evin-Prison in Teheran thousands of democrats were tortured and killed.
It was well known that the command centre of Operation Ajax was the US embassy in Teheran.
So - when finally the bloody revolution came and the people forced the Shah to leave their country they feared that the history would repeat itself. That another Operation would become reality and the Sha and his terror regime would be reinstalled.
That was one of the reasons why they attacked the embassy. Definitvly a wrong action but not a surprise.
5 Iran and wars
In the last 100 years Iran has not attacked another country. In contrary it was attacked.
In WW1 it declared itself neutral. And was attacked
In WW2 it was pro-german and declared itself neutral. It was occupied by UK and USSR, the Shah was deposed and his son was installed and it was forced to join the allies and declare war to Germany.
After WW2 foreign organisations destroyed our democracy and installed a terror-regime which tortured Iran for 30 years and the result was the next terror regime of the Mullahs
Iraq - in those days under control of the "good guy" Saddam attacked Iran and an 8 year war followed, in which Iraq used Gas-weapons. 130.000 iranian soldiers died because of the effect of these gas weapons.
But again: Iran has not attacked another country in the last 100 years.
-
Originally posted by Shamus
I can see it now, Hey First Sargent we got a good news bad news situation, the good news is we are rotating out of Iraq.......
shamus
"He's here all night folks!"
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Staga
I looked thru you links but to tell the truth I couldn't find a reason for a war between Iran and Israel.
Fact is they don't have common border together but are quite far away from each other. Also Israel is already having a nuclear weapon and I find it quite hard to believe anyone would be such a fool and use nukes first against Israel; they would be sure getting few warheads back in return mail.
The only reason for a war is the lunatic in charge of Iran. You can find it as hard to believe as you want, it wont stop it from happening.
handsomehunk troll
-
I hate to piss off the Muslims. But, I've already slept with the 70 Virgins.
Karaya
-
It really stems back to the 1950s, SoA2. Iran was, for all practical purposes, occupied by the Allies after WWII, without being an enemy. The British and the US had two purposes: They wanted the oil and its location as a buffer and place to monitor (spy) on the Soviet Union.
The British, as they had done in other oil colonizations of Arab nations, wanted the oil, but didn't want to actually pay for it, or share the revenues with countries or people whose land it came from. They just took it (well, they paid about 1% of the going rate) by bribing the leaders, and/or installing leaders who would repel uprisings by the people.
Iran was a democracy with a parliamentary government. The Shah replaced his father, who was pretty much a despot. His son was installed, but he wasn't the brightest guy politically. He was prone to indecision and became reliant on deception and strongarm tactics to maintain power. He knew that the US and the British would butter his bread better than the Russians, so he was easily led.
He was violating the Iranian constitution, since the power was not centered with the King, but with the Prime Minister and parliament. He imprisoned, tortured, expelled and murdered those who wanted Iran to remain a democracy, not a dictatorship, and also Islamic clerics who wanted to maintain their influence over the people also. And they were not 'radical' Islamics, at least not yet. We needed a few years to turn them into radicals.
The CIA and British orchestrated a coup of the premier, who was constitutionally in power, to strengthen the Shah's position. The premier and the people of Iran wanted the British to pay a reasonable amount for the oil and invest more into the building the economy of Iran, than just taking the oil. Negotiations were stalled, until it was realized that it was cheaper to overthrow the premier, than pay a fair price for the oil.
The CIA even went so far as to bomb a mosque to fuel tensions. I know that seems shocking, but, unfortunately, it is how the world works, sometimes.
In the 1960s, many Iranians emigrated to the US to escape the Shah's police state. The US played both sides of the coin - allowing the immigration to maintain a 'humanitarian' public image, while simultaneously helping the Shah remain in power by his brutal means. The problem came when Iranians learned of the double-cross by the US and British a decade later from newspaper reports from leaked CIA information.
Those documents are (reluctantly) unclassified now.
Here>> (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/summary.pdf) is the summary.
It's simply amazing how history repeats and repeats. Ironically, it was the NYT that broke the story and fought for decades to get the confirming documents de-classified.
And the ultimate irony is that the CIA conceived and executed a plan to bomb a mosque to give the Shah a plausible excuse to take a hard line against terrorists, who bomb mosques. Unfriggin'believable, isn't it?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Sure... and astrology and tarot cards and Revelation and any number of whack job predictions of the future. :rolleyes:
They say a lot of his predictions have come true. Personally I'm starting to believe it when my mom says the end is near, she hasn't been wrong so far in teh 24 years that I've been alive.
-
I'll promise "marm and pain" if you're at my house for breakfast.
(That'd be marmelade and bread.)
Deth To Somebodyeeka!
-
Toad....speaking of grub....when's the next lunch?
-
We are overdue... what day?
I'll have to "check my schedule" like a real working stiff now though.
Have your people call my people. ;)
-
Originally posted by Rolex
It really stems back to the 1950s, SoA2. Iran was, for all practical purposes, occupied by the Allies after WWII, without being an enemy. The British and the US had two purposes: They wanted the oil and its location as a buffer and place to monitor (spy) on the Soviet Union.
The British, as they had done in other oil colonizations of Arab nations, wanted the oil, but didn't want to actually pay for it, or share the revenues with countries or people whose land it came from. They just took it (well, they paid about 1% of the going rate) by bribing the leaders, and/or installing leaders who would repel uprisings by the people.
Iran was a democracy with a parliamentary government. The Shah replaced his father, who was pretty much a despot. His son was installed, but he wasn't the brightest guy politically. He was prone to indecision and became reliant on deception and strongarm tactics to maintain power. He knew that the US and the British would butter his bread better than the Russians, so he was easily led.
He was violating the Iranian constitution, since the power was not centered with the King, but with the Prime Minister and parliament. He imprisoned, tortured, expelled and murdered those who wanted Iran to remain a democracy, not a dictatorship, and also Islamic clerics who wanted to maintain their influence over the people also. And they were not 'radical' Islamics, at least not yet. We needed a few years to turn them into radicals.
The CIA and British orchestrated a coup of the premier, who was constitutionally in power, to strengthen the Shah's position. The premier and the people of Iran wanted the British to pay a reasonable amount for the oil and invest more into the building the economy of Iran, than just taking the oil. Negotiations were stalled, until it was realized that it was cheaper to overthrow the premier, than pay a fair price for the oil.
The CIA even went so far as to bomb a mosque to fuel tensions. I know that seems shocking, but, unfortunately, it is how the world works, sometimes.
In the 1960s, many Iranians emigrated to the US to escape the Shah's police state. The US played both sides of the coin - allowing the immigration to maintain a 'humanitarian' public image, while simultaneously helping the Shah remain in power by his brutal means. The problem came when Iranians learned of the double-cross by the US and British a decade later from newspaper reports from leaked CIA information.
Those documents are (reluctantly) unclassified now.
Here>> (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/summary.pdf) is the summary.
It's simply amazing how history repeats and repeats. Ironically, it was the NYT that broke the story and fought for decades to get the confirming documents de-classified.
And the ultimate irony is that the CIA conceived and executed a plan to bomb a mosque to give the Shah a plausible excuse to take a hard line against terrorists, who bomb mosques. Unfriggin'believable, isn't it?
TY for the history. I read some of this but the rest is new to me. Not that Iran has ever been my main focus of study, only peripherally as part of my study of the history of the region and the rise and fall of cultures there.
-
Originally posted by babek-
2. The religion
Once Iran was conquered by the arabs. But while other nations who suffered the same fate were assimilated and gave up their culture and language and became arabs (like egypt or syria) the iranians fought a bitter war and were successful. The iranian language was not replaced by the arab language. The arabs were finally driven out of iran. And even the religion was transformed by mixing elements of the old iranian religion with islam, creating the shi ´ite islam of today.
Never asked yourself why most of the shi ´ites live in the borders of the old sassanid iranian empire ? Made of today Iran, the eastern province of Iraq, and the western province of Afghanistan - which were once part of the Empire? The old sassanid capital is SE Bagdad.
And even the Mullahs of Shi ´ite islam have the same style of cloth like the old iranian priests.
There is great hate between sunnites and shi ´ites. Both sides consider each other as heretics. That was one reason why Iran supported the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan long before these creatures were defined as bad guys. In these days the Taliban were officially supported by the sunnite Pakistan.
And today the sunnite arab Al kaida is targeting shi ´ites in Iraq - defining them as heretics.
So dont make the mistake by putting these two groups together as allies.
The only thing I find to dispute is your origin of "Sunni" vs "Shi ' ite" Muslims. The religious of Persia were Zoroastrians. Not Islamic. You cannot combine the two. The Shi ' ites derive their name from the Arabic word shi ' at meaning 'party' or 'faction' of Ali, who was both cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad. The Shi ' ites refused to recognize the claims to authority of the first three Caliphs who succeeded Muhammad, a refusal which precipitated civil war in the early Islamic community. The Sunnis on the other hand recognize and revere the early caliphs and attribute no special status to Ali and his decendants. It has nothing to do with the prevailing religious beliefs of Persia before they were conquered by the Arabs and made part of the Dar al Islam, and converted to the Islamic faith. I agree though, with your final statement. Dont make the mistake of trying to put them together as allies. Note the current sectarian violence in Iraq as proof that old feelings die hard.
3. Iran during Arab-Israeli War
Someone wrote that he could find march orders of the iranian army to support the arabs.
In fact Iran delivered to Israel oil during Israel-Arab war. The Iranians always considered the sunnite arabs as the enemy. So the construction of an iranian-arab-alliance is ridiculous.
The Shah of Iran made fun of arab guests by welcoming them in official visits in Iran in front of the iranian honor guard which was equipped with israeli UZIs.
Arabs and iranians will never be allies.
Best example was during the Kuwait-Gulf War. While many arab countries sent volonteers to Saddam not a single Iranian supported them (with the exception of the MEK-terrorist, iranian traitors who fought side by side with arabs in iran-Iraq War and still live today in iraq in their military bases).
Obviously I was wrong in my beliefs about the Iran of that period. Rolex's post was very enlightening, as is your view. I have no problem with being educated when I'm wrong. Thank you for sharing.
4. The embassy thing
When the USA and GB destroyed the iranian democracy in the 50ties (Operation Ajay) their command post was the US embassy in Iran.
From there the democratic prime minister Mossadegh who had kicked out the Shah to italian exile in an unbloody revolution, was deposed.
That was a tracig day for Iran, which had managed to create a democracy by itself.
Then there came the decades of Shah-terror. With his Gestapo-like secret police, the SAVAK, he killed tenthousands of iranians per year. In the infamoud Evin-Prison in Teheran thousands of democrats were tortured and killed.
It was well known that the command centre of Operation Ajax was the US embassy in Teheran.
So - when finally the bloody revolution came and the people forced the Shah to leave their country they feared that the history would repeat itself. That another Operation would become reality and the Sha and his terror regime would be reinstalled.
That was one of the reasons why they attacked the embassy. Definitvly a wrong action but not a surprise.
More blanks filled in. Thanks again.
5 Iran and wars
In the last 100 years Iran has not attacked another country. In contrary it was attacked.
In WW1 it declared itself neutral. And was attacked
In WW2 it was pro-german and declared itself neutral. It was occupied by UK and USSR, the Shah was deposed and his son was installed and it was forced to join the allies and declare war to Germany.
After WW2 foreign organisations destroyed our democracy and installed a terror-regime which tortured Iran for 30 years and the result was the next terror regime of the Mullahs
Iraq - in those days under control of the "good guy" Saddam attacked Iran and an 8 year war followed, in which Iraq used Gas-weapons. 130.000 iranian soldiers died because of the effect of these gas weapons.
But again: Iran has not attacked another country in the last 100 years.
I never said Saddam was a "good guy". What I said was, you didnt see anyone jumping in to defend Iran. It was pretty clear even then that Saddam was a despot and a cruel dictator. He used the confusion in Iran to his benefit and rose quickly to prominence in Iraq. He used the fact that Iran's military equipment was mostly American and they could no longer get parts, along with the fact that the military in Iran was badly disorganized to further his plans for invasion. When two of the richest oil producing countries in the world go to war, the rest of the world wants the war over with quickly. Who to side with? The dictator or the religious zealot? Most people figured the dictator would be easier to deal with, and sided with Saddam. Nobody wanted to side with Iran. Perhaps, given some of the information above, I can see why they would be leery of outside "assistance", but how many Iranians were needlessly killed by Saddam when just a little bit of tolerance on their part would have opened the door to alot of aid from outside? How many possible allies are turned aside today because of the rhetoric coming out of Tehran? If they keep talking the talk they are now, they are going to end up buried in a big pile of rubble.
-
You said Saddam was easier to deal with than Kohmeni.....the facts say you are wrong.
Saddam invaded Kuwait.....Iran didn't.
We invaded Iraq to deal with Saddam, as of now, we have not invaded Iran.
-
(http://www.killsometime.com/pictures/images/pic1116.jpg)
-
(http://www.killsometime.com/pictures/images/pic1105.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
How many fish can the trolls catch today?
Lock the thread...
Besides, its not like it matters how any of us feel about the situation anyway, unless something dramatic happens, people are going to die before their time. Do any of us really have a say?
Yes, you can take my above statement both for, and against military action. I'm undecided... it is a theoretical 'damned if you do, damned if you don't.
None of us know...
-
Originally posted by babek-
1. Persia / Iran Iran as an non-arab country
Its IRAN - not PERSIA.
In its 2500 years of existance we never called our country Persia but Iran, which means "Land of the Aryans".
It was called Persia by ancient greek historicans because the dynasty of the Achemenids (Cyrus, Xerxes; Darius and so on) came from that province.
While it was called Persia by foreigners until the 20th century the iranians themself never called it so.
It would be the same if I would call the USA "Texas" because the ruling dynasty is from this province.
2. The religion
Once Iran was conquered by the arabs. But while other nations who suffered the same fate were assimilated and gave up their culture and language and became arabs (like egypt or syria) the iranians fought a bitter war and were successful. The iranian language was not replaced by the arab language. The arabs were finally driven out of iran. And even the religion was transformed by mixing elements of the old iranian religion with islam, creating the shi �ite islam of today.
Never asked yourself why most of the shi �ites live in the borders of the old sassanid iranian empire ? Made of today Iran, the eastern province of Iraq, and the western province of Afghanistan - which were once part of the Empire? The old sassanid capital is SE Bagdad.
And even the Mullahs of Shi �ite islam have the same style of cloth like the old iranian priests.
There is great hate between sunnites and shi �ites. Both sides consider each other as heretics. That was one reason why Iran supported the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan long before these creatures were defined as bad guys. In these days the Taliban were officially supported by the sunnite Pakistan.
And today the sunnite arab Al kaida is targeting shi �ites in Iraq - defining them as heretics.
So dont make the mistake by putting these two groups together as allies.
3. Iran during Arab-Israeli War
Someone wrote that he could find march orders of the iranian army to support the arabs.
In fact Iran delivered to Israel oil during Israel-Arab war. The Iranians always considered the sunnite arabs as the enemy. So the construction of an iranian-arab-alliance is ridiculous.
The Shah of Iran made fun of arab guests by welcoming them in official visits in Iran in front of the iranian honor guard which was equipped with israeli UZIs.
Arabs and iranians will never be allies.
Best example was during the Kuwait-Gulf War. While many arab countries sent volonteers to Saddam not a single Iranian supported them (with the exception of the MEK-terrorist, iranian traitors who fought side by side with arabs in iran-Iraq War and still live today in iraq in their military bases).
4. The embassy thing
When the USA and GB destroyed the iranian democracy in the 50ties (Operation Ajay) their command post was the US embassy in Iran.
From there the democratic prime minister Mossadegh who had kicked out the Shah to italian exile in an unbloody revolution, was deposed.
That was a tracig day for Iran, which had managed to create a democracy by itself.
Then there came the decades of Shah-terror. With his Gestapo-like secret police, the SAVAK, he killed tenthousands of iranians per year. In the infamoud Evin-Prison in Teheran thousands of democrats were tortured and killed.
It was well known that the command centre of Operation Ajax was the US embassy in Teheran.
So - when finally the bloody revolution came and the people forced the Shah to leave their country they feared that the history would repeat itself. That another Operation would become reality and the Sha and his terror regime would be reinstalled.
That was one of the reasons why they attacked the embassy. Definitvly a wrong action but not a surprise.
5 Iran and wars
In the last 100 years Iran has not attacked another country. In contrary it was attacked.
In WW1 it declared itself neutral. And was attacked
In WW2 it was pro-german and declared itself neutral. It was occupied by UK and USSR, the Shah was deposed and his son was installed and it was forced to join the allies and declare war to Germany.
After WW2 foreign organisations destroyed our democracy and installed a terror-regime which tortured Iran for 30 years and the result was the next terror regime of the Mullahs
Iraq - in those days under control of the "good guy" Saddam attacked Iran and an 8 year war followed, in which Iraq used Gas-weapons. 130.000 iranian soldiers died because of the effect of these gas weapons.
But again: Iran has not attacked another country in the last 100 years.
He shoots... he scores!
Good post.
-
Babek,
Thanks for your spin on Iranian history. Sounds reasonable to me.
So, whats up with the Iranian president talking such harsh smack about Israel, Europe, UN and and the USA?
Do the common people in Iran feel so militantly towards the world as does their president?
Would Israel be justified in defending itself against Iranian beligerance before it is attacked, rather then afterwards when there might not be an Israel to retaliate?
-
Ya know... they heard the "Axis of Evil" speech too.
They're not stupid. They saw what happened to Iraq. They will be more prepared.
**** happens when you telegraph a punch.
-
Originally posted by Staga
btw last time when Iran was in offensive there wasn't such a country as United States... Think about that.
*cough, cough bullchit* American Embassy, Tehran.
Think about that!
Mac
-
[/B][/QUOTE]
It would be the same if I would call the USA "Texas" because the ruling dynasty is from this province.
Ya don't wanna mess with Texas.
Mac
oh yeah almost forgot....
IN
-
in!
Karaya
-
Rule #5
-
Originally posted by babek-
1. Persia / Iran Iran as an non-arab country
Its IRAN - not PERSIA.
In its 2500 years of existance we never called our country Persia but Iran, which means "Land of the Aryans".
It was called Persia by ancient greek historicans because the dynasty of the Achemenids (Cyrus, Xerxes; Darius and so on) came from that province.
While it was called Persia by foreigners until the 20th century the iranians themself never called it so.
It would be the same if I would call the USA "Texas" because the ruling dynasty is from this province.
2. The religion
Once Iran was conquered by the arabs. But while other nations who suffered the same fate were assimilated and gave up their culture and language and became arabs (like egypt or syria) the iranians fought a bitter war and were successful. The iranian language was not replaced by the arab language. The arabs were finally driven out of iran. And even the religion was transformed by mixing elements of the old iranian religion with islam, creating the shi ´ite islam of today.
Never asked yourself why most of the shi ´ites live in the borders of the old sassanid iranian empire ? Made of today Iran, the eastern province of Iraq, and the western province of Afghanistan - which were once part of the Empire? The old sassanid capital is SE Bagdad.
And even the Mullahs of Shi ´ite islam have the same style of cloth like the old iranian priests.
There is great hate between sunnites and shi ´ites. Both sides consider each other as heretics. That was one reason why Iran supported the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan long before these creatures were defined as bad guys. In these days the Taliban were officially supported by the sunnite Pakistan.
And today the sunnite arab Al kaida is targeting shi ´ites in Iraq - defining them as heretics.
So dont make the mistake by putting these two groups together as allies.
3. Iran during Arab-Israeli War
Someone wrote that he could find march orders of the iranian army to support the arabs.
In fact Iran delivered to Israel oil during Israel-Arab war. The Iranians always considered the sunnite arabs as the enemy. So the construction of an iranian-arab-alliance is ridiculous.
The Shah of Iran made fun of arab guests by welcoming them in official visits in Iran in front of the iranian honor guard which was equipped with israeli UZIs.
Arabs and iranians will never be allies.
Best example was during the Kuwait-Gulf War. While many arab countries sent volonteers to Saddam not a single Iranian supported them (with the exception of the MEK-terrorist, iranian traitors who fought side by side with arabs in iran-Iraq War and still live today in iraq in their military bases).
4. The embassy thing
When the USA and GB destroyed the iranian democracy in the 50ties (Operation Ajay) their command post was the US embassy in Iran.
From there the democratic prime minister Mossadegh who had kicked out the Shah to italian exile in an unbloody revolution, was deposed.
That was a tracig day for Iran, which had managed to create a democracy by itself.
Then there came the decades of Shah-terror. With his Gestapo-like secret police, the SAVAK, he killed tenthousands of iranians per year. In the infamoud Evin-Prison in Teheran thousands of democrats were tortured and killed.
It was well known that the command centre of Operation Ajax was the US embassy in Teheran.
So - when finally the bloody revolution came and the people forced the Shah to leave their country they feared that the history would repeat itself. That another Operation would become reality and the Sha and his terror regime would be reinstalled.
That was one of the reasons why they attacked the embassy. Definitvly a wrong action but not a surprise.
5 Iran and wars
In the last 100 years Iran has not attacked another country. In contrary it was attacked.
In WW1 it declared itself neutral. And was attacked
In WW2 it was pro-german and declared itself neutral. It was occupied by UK and USSR, the Shah was deposed and his son was installed and it was forced to join the allies and declare war to Germany.
After WW2 foreign organisations destroyed our democracy and installed a terror-regime which tortured Iran for 30 years and the result was the next terror regime of the Mullahs
Iraq - in those days under control of the "good guy" Saddam attacked Iran and an 8 year war followed, in which Iraq used Gas-weapons. 130.000 iranian soldiers died because of the effect of these gas weapons.
But again: Iran has not attacked another country in the last 100 years.
Nice post!..Same to Rolex.
Unfortunately a lot of people in here only read what they want to see.
-
Rule 5.
-
I think Staga is late for his weekly American Flag burning...
If you dislike America so much, why are you trolling a US forum, that belongs to a US game?
Make your Euros count and don't patronize a US company.
(sorry Skuzzy, that last line was facetious)
-
Just a reminder, I still slept with the 70 virgins. The sooner we say "yer on your own Middle East, the better".
Develop, and alternative to Gasoline and royally screw them over (pun intended). They will be so hurting, they'll have to play nice, until then, screw em.
Karaya