Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: OZkansas on July 12, 2002, 05:44:05 PM
-
Sounds like Iran is going to pop and come back to the 21st century!! Would be nice to have them back:)
-
Ain't that strange: 10 years ago they were enemies of U.S, now they are neutral and maybe in ten years they're allies of U.S? Heck same happened with russia thouht it took little longer...
What next? Libya in NATO?
-
libya has said they are against arab terrorists and is making nice- nice talk with USA (libya has oil they want to sell )
-
sigh..... can't trust anyone if a guy who lost his daughter to U.S bombers is putting his anger away...
-
cross yer fingers..
the less that has to die in this war the better..
-
Guyz... if you think Iran is our friend, or even nuetral.... you are sadly mistaken.
Tumor
-
See what an air strike on a dictators home (Libya) can do. Now thats real change for ya. And for the better I think.
Great work...
-
Oh yeah and where was France, they made the strike fly around them didnt they. Just an important point on that matter.
-
Iran has quickly began liking more western culture however.
They're getting more western stuff there and what do you think that people likes?
People there have began to enjoy life in a new way in recent years.
So what does that do? they're getting more positive about western culture and more people are wanting to have parts of western culture.
Bit like China, which has become much more open to outside world than it has been in the past and even adapted some things from western culture.
Hey, it's all good, so why to oppose the good things when the alternative would bring nothing but problems at most.
but it is a progress that will take still many years to come.
Iran might not be friend of the west, but how about opposition? decreasing I would figure.
Does anyone here know how things were in Afganistan before Talibans and russians?
That would be quite interesting history for some of you.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Does anyone here know how things were in Afganistan before Talibans and russians?
That would be quite interesting history for some of you.
Even before the 1973 coup it was cruel. Someone is reported to say something against the king - and next morning he's gone, and all his family, including all kids and relatives who possibly could have any reason for blood revenge... If this state of affairs is OK for you - then everything was beautiful.
-
Originally posted by Tumor
Guyz... if you think Iran is our friend, or even nuetral.... you are sadly mistaken.
Tumor
If the CIA (working on behalf of US oil companies) hadn't overthrown Iran's elected leaders to install the Shaw as dictator, maybe they would like us better.
-
Iran's elected leaders?!
Are you sure you are talking about the country that is on the southern shore of Caspian sea and on the eastrn shore of Persian gulf?
And who the hell is Shaw? Or maybe you are speaking about Shakh of Iran? If so - what does the CIA have to do with the Persian royal dynasty?
-
If this state of affairs is OK for you - then everything was beautiful.
is it beautiful? No, but IMO it appeared stable wether one likedx it or not. IMO I'd rather see the Soviet Union and U.S. tradin threats scareing the crap outta each other than what's going on now. Did I like it? No, but for me there was a sense of stability. Heck I had a blast buzzin those Soviet freighters bound for Cuba.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Iran's elected leaders?!
Yes, after world war II, Iran had a short lived Parliamentary government. Prime Minister Musaddeq (spelling?) nationalised the Oil industry, and the west dropped a load in their shorts
Are you sure you are talking about the country that is on the southern shore of Caspian sea and on the eastrn shore of Persian gulf?
Indeed.
And who the hell is Shaw? Or maybe you are speaking about Shakh of Iran? If so - what does the CIA have to do with the Persian royal dynasty?
Yeah, the Shah (Mohomed Shah, Or was is Mohomed Reza, I think these are two different people, father and son maybe?) was who took over as part of the coup that MZ was alludeing too. The CIA has everything to do with Persian Royal Dynasties, when the help those dynasties wrest control of a nation from the hands of a democraticly elected government.
This is probably what I'm least proud of as an American. I understand the reasons for our choices in areas such as Chile, and Iran, but I still don't agree with the decisions.
-Sikboy
-
Originally posted by Boroda
If so - what does the CIA have to do with the Persian royal dynasty?
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html
Or just type Mohammad Mossadegh into the seach engine of your choice.
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html
Or just type Mohammad Mossadegh into the seach engine of your choice.
I have it on good authority that the NY Times supports terrorism ;)
-Sikboy
-
Great sig. Monty
-
Originally posted by Montezuma
If the CIA (working on behalf of US oil companies) hadn't overthrown Iran's elected leaders to install the Shaw as dictator, maybe they would like us better.
and this has what bearing on things now??
-
It is relevant to Iran American relations . That is the topic .
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Even before the 1973 coup it was cruel. Someone is reported to say something against the king - and next morning he's gone, and all his family, including all kids and relatives who possibly could have any reason for blood revenge... If this state of affairs is OK for you - then everything was beautiful.
Erm... where did I say what kind of times those were?
I only said the history would be good read, nothing of what it was like.
You're simply assuming way too much..
Top of it all, you could just as well say "If this state of affairs is OK for you - then everything was beautiful" to yourself, since you believe in Soviet honesty so blindly - you become yourself as well guilty of things you accuse westerners about.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Erm... where did I say what kind of times those were?
I only said the history would be good read, nothing of what it was like.
You're simply assuming way too much..
Top of it all, you could just as well say "If this state of affairs is OK for you - then everything was beautiful" to yourself, since you believe in Soviet honesty so blindly - you become yourself as well guilty of things you accuse westerners about.
I don't think it was good.
Just tried to answer the question. The source is one of my Father's friends who was an advisor in Afghanistan for some time.
And I don't accuse Westerners of that state of affairs. Afghanistan was more a mistake of Soviet diplomacy...
-
Its helpful to check the history of Iran.
Iran is a very old culture.
Its 2500 years old history didnt ended, when Alexander the Great destroyed the Achaemenid Dynasty in the 4th century BC.
Soon after Alexanders death the macedonian dynasty of the Seleucids in Iran lost their power to the iranian Parthian dynasty which existed until the year 250. The the Sassanid dynasty came to power - a very mighty power which was a major rival of the Roman Empire. More than one roman emperor died in battle against the heavily armored knights of the iranian Sassanids - but finally they were overrun in the 7th century by the islamic arabs.
And again Iran was succesful to avoid to be assimilated. They saved their own iranian language - the Farsi - while other old cultural nations like Egypt or Syria gave up their original language and became assimilated by the Arabs.
They even changed the islamic religion and developed the Shiite Islam.
After the Arabs were kicked out of iranian territories, iranian dynasties ruled again - like the Safawid-dynasty.
But after the 18th century Iran became a puppet of other major powers in the region. The Zand and the Kadjar dynasty had weak Shahs and so iranian policy was dictated by the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire and the British Empire.
In WW1 - when Iran wanted to be neutral - its neutrality was ignored and it became a battlefield and marching zone for british, russian and turkish troops.
After WW1 in the 1920ties the father of the 1979-deposed Shah deposed the last Kadjar Shah and became the first Shah of the shortliving Pahlevi dynasty.
He wanted to make Iran to a modern and western- oriented country like Turkey under Ataturk.
Also Iran and the German Reich worked together before and during the early phase of WW2. Iranian troops even weared german-style uniforms and helmets.
In WW2 - like in the WW before - Iran declared its neutrality.
Nevertheless in 1941 it was occupied by british and soviet forces, the Shah was deposed, sent to exile to South Africa, where he died and he was replaced by his son who was nothing more than a puppet who finally declared war against Germany in 1943.
During WW2 Iran was a marching zone for allied supplies for the USSR.
After WW2 the USA diplomacy forced the british and the soviets to retreat from Iran.
So it was logical that there were very close ties between the USA and Iran. By order of the Shah the whole society should change in a US-american style.
Also the army and the equipment was changed and Iran got the finest US-weapons - including later the F14.
But in the 50ties something happened which fueled the hate of the people against the USA.
The elected prime minister Mossadegh - a highly respected man - deposed in an unbloody coup the Shah and sent him to exile to Italy.
But the CIA reinstalled the Shah and deposed Mossadegh who died under house arrest. The coordination of this CIA actions was done in the US-embassy in Teheran.
The Shah was paranoid after his return and built - again with help of the CIA - the feared SAVAK. This was the secret police of the Empire - much like the GeStaPo. Many people - most of them moderate democrats - just vanished.
Also many innocent peole - who never have been politically active - were tortured or simply killed.
So the anger of the people was growing and finally escalted in the revolution against the Shah in 1979.
The moderate opposition forces have been crippled effectivly by the SAVAK so radicals could get the power in Iran.
Also the attack of Iraq against Iran stopped the inner political fightings in Iran and Khomeini had the absolute power in Iran.
The fact that Carter was such a weak president and that the superpower USA was dishonored by the iranian radicals who were taking hostages from the embassy for such a long time and without an effective US counter operation helped the radicals to believe that they were invincible.
Over 1 million iranians had to pay with their lifes for this during the war against Iraq.
But today Iran is changing again. Its actual leader - President Chatami - a moderate politician - has been elected the second time - although the radical mullahs under the successor of Khomeini, Ajatollah Khamenei, demanded from the people to vote for the other candidate.
So the power of the radical mullahs is shrinking. Its a long a complicated operation Chatami and the moderate iranian politicians have started. They have to fear counter operations from the radicals.
But they have the support of their people.
So there is really hope that Iran will change its political system within the next decade.
-
Originally posted by babek-
Its helpful to check the history of Iran.
Thanks Babek, that was a pretty nice summation :)
-Sikboy
-
That history of Iran makes that country look like it changes sides more often than I change my underwear...which isn't often..."I rarely wear underwear..and when I do it's usually something pretty exciting." (Bill Murray - Stripes);)