|
It's a Clash of Ideas. (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
IN OTHER WORDS BUSH DIDN'T LIE.:rolleyes:
you found out about all this crap about the Shah and the CIA back in the 50's now your'e an apologist for the Mullahs. brilliant.
because the Mullahs were the victims right?
got it. anything else? |
Perhaps saying they lied is a little too far, but when are you going to accept that there was a major intelligence failure that sent everyone into a war frenzy? The lie comes in when we commoners speculate the motives for such a failure. Some people think it was all a flat out deception, and other just an intelligence failure. But I honestly don't think our government is THAT stupid. Which is why me and many others don't trust what information they release to us for .
I'm an apologist for the mullahs? What a ty ass argument. No point made, nothing to argue against. My argument stands to be corrected. And if you missed the point... There is a reason why there is a proliferation of this radical islamism in the Middle East. You honestly think Osama or these radicals just think up their philosophies for fun? They send people to blow themselves up, and to do that, they must have a grave grievance that convinced them this method is the way to fight back what they view as oppression. There is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. That problem is foreign intervention, throughout the 20th century.
I've stated many times that I totally dispise the current Iranian elite. I am not making excuses for them. What I'm trying to make clear to you and others is that this radicalism is a reaction to what they view as oppression from foreigners. No one flys a plane into a building, or blows themself up, or fights to the death for nothing.
| quote: | | gee, let me think. perhaps because it is a democracy with changing leadership? who said a country's policies have to remain static? do you care that the US government isn't still maintaining a hard line against the germans? how can you blame anyone in the current administration for what previous admins did 50 years ago? |
Where in my statement did I even mention Bush? Please don't take me out of context. I blame western and US meddling in Iranian affairs, and for support for the Shah for the coming of the Iranian Revolution. I see it as their independence day and it was. Iran finally became Iran instead of a puppeted regime supported by the west. Additionally, the US claims to be a champion of freedom, but does not obey the UN charter, specifically, sovereignty which grants the right of a nation to develop its own customs, government, and social order.
------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody should be taking me or my opinions as anti-US. But I will not just go along with the status quo that has culminated in an enraged middle east, and seemingly more and more violence coming as the result. A fundamental change in foreign policy is needed. And I have my ideas for fundamental changes I believe should happen here at home, but that's another thread. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
IN OTHER WORDS BUSH DIDN'T LIE.:rolleyes:
you found out about all this crap about the Shah and the CIA back in the 50's now your'e an apologist for the Mullahs. brilliant.
because the Mullahs were the victims right?
got it. anything else? |
wow dude you truly are an idiot.
With the help of the U.S Ayatollah khomaini came back to Iran from exile in France.The british and and the American finger prints were all over this.Shah was just becoming way too powerful in the region and the Americans werent happy with that.
So they introduced Khomaini to the people and the people wanted freedom and freedom of speach and wanted to express their religious beliefs and khomaini promised the people just that.Once he took over the country everything changed and did the exact oposite.
Thats how the people of Iran got ed in the ass and thats why they ll never ever would want the U.S to to anything with the future of their country.
The U.S and the British fully supported of Ayatollah Khomiani but once again their foriegn policy back fired and they created another enenmy for themselves in the region.
After that they wanted to get rid of the Mullahs so what do they do? they go and support Saddam with all sorts of weapons to try to wipe the mullahs off of Iran and again they failed.
Now STFU and go back to Iraq and fight the war on terror.:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
wow dude you truly are an idiot.
With the help of the U.S Ayatollah khomaini came back to Iran from exile in France.The british and and the American finger prints were all over this.Shah was just becoming way too powerful in the region and the Americans werent happy with that.
So they introduced Khomaini to the people and the people wanted freedom and freedom of speach and wanted to express their religious beliefs and khomaini promised the people just that.Once he took over the country everything changed and did the exact oposite.
Thats how the people of Iran got ed in the ass and thats why they ll never ever would want the U.S to to anything with the future of their country.
The U.S and the British fully supported of Ayatollah Khomiani but once again their foriegn policy back fired and they created another enenmy for themselves in the region.
After that they wanted to get rid of the Mullahs so what do they do? they go and support Saddam with all sorts of weapons to try to wipe the mullahs off of Iran and again they failed.
Now STFU and go back to Iraq and fight the war on terror.:rolleyes: |
Actually, the shah were supported by the US and UK while the ayatollah khomeni was the west's enemy...
{{{ Mohammad Reza Pahlavi returned to power greatly strengthened and his rule became increasingly autocratic in the following years. With strong support from the U.S. and U.K., the Shah further modernized Iranian industry, but simultaneously crushed all forms of political opposition with his intelligence agency, SAVAK. }}} wiki |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| wow, people in the middle east sure are easily manipulated :rolleyes: |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Actually, the shah were supported by the US and UK while the ayatollah khomeni was the west's enemy...
{{{ Mohammad Reza Pahlavi returned to power greatly strengthened and his rule became increasingly autocratic in the following years. With strong support from the U.S. and U.K., the Shah further modernized Iranian industry, but simultaneously crushed all forms of political opposition with his intelligence agency, SAVAK. }}} wiki |
You are right but all that changed when Iran was the most powerful country in the region.Believe Ayatollah didnt just come to Iran without outsiders help. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
wow, people in the middle east sure are easily manipulated :rolleyes: |
Colonialism ring a bell? It definately took over the Middle East more than 100 years ago, and the colonialists are just reaping what they sowed all those years ago. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
wow, people in the middle east sure are easily manipulated :rolleyes: |
I can say that exact same thing about the west.Look how easily they fell for going to war with Iraq. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
You are right but all that changed when Iran was the most powerful country in the region.Believe Ayatollah didnt just come to Iran without outsiders help. |
Uh, you have me confused. Not really, but...
The Ayatollah spent most of his time in exile in Najaf - Iraq, a little time in Turkey, and 4 months in France. The man was never pro-western. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
With the help of the U.S Ayatollah khomaini came back to Iran from exile in France.The british and and the American finger prints were all over this.Shah was just becoming way too powerful in the region and the Americans werent happy with that.
So they introduced Khomaini to the people and the people wanted freedom and freedom of speach and wanted to express their religious beliefs and khomaini promised the people just that.Once he took over the country everything changed and did the exact oposite.
Thats how the people of Iran got ed in the ass and thats why they ll never ever would want the U.S to to anything with the future of their country.
The U.S and the British fully supported of Ayatollah Khomiani but once again their foriegn policy back fired and they created another enenmy for themselves in the region.
After that they wanted to get rid of the Mullahs so what do they do? they go and support Saddam with all sorts of weapons to try to wipe the mullahs off of Iran and again they failed.
|
do you just make this up?
the Ayatollah was the West's symbol of freedom to the Iranians, but he was a poseur and he flipped the script on them?
from 1963 to 1978 he lived in Iraq, but youre saying he was exiled to France? who was he Napoleon? f**k you're a dumb.
i'm an idiot?
"their fingerprints are all over it" = paranoid douche-cock |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
I can say that exact same thing about the west.Look how easily they fell for going to war with Iraq. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Colonialism ring a bell? It definately took over the Middle East more than 100 years ago, and the colonialists are just reaping what they sowed all those years ago. |
you both miss my point.
there is no doubt that the US has backed some pretty despicable horses. but have a look at the mess in iraq and ask yourself how the US managed to be the super manipulator (apparently) in previous manipulative missions in the mid east. do you really think the US prevailed so easily in iran all by themselves? where are your cries of outrage against those inside iran that benefitted from US support? Who do you think had more power in iran in the latter half of the decade? if you answer "the US" then you're clearly deluded.
this idea that the US is the puppet master, controlling all, knowing all etc is just nonsense. it might be a shock to both of you, but there are other interests in the world that actually make a difference to the outcome of political issues.
yes yes, i know its all very chic to blame the US for everything. and in some cases its more than accurate. but ignoring everyone else to focus only on the role the US has played is rather disingenuous, and dismissing the power/influence/interests of the mullahs or the ayatollahs is pretty naive. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| I did say foreign influence. I wasn't focusing US or any specific country's expeditions. British, French, Italian, German, and most recently the US have all decided they needed a piece of the middle east. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
do you just make this up?
the Ayatollah was the West's symbol of freedom to the Iranians, but he was a poseur and he flipped the script on them? |
you stupid Yank.here let me give you something a litle bit more easier for your filled of brain of yours,remember Bin Laden?how did he get his power?who supported him? and why is he the great enemy of the America now?
I never said the ayatollah was the west symbol of freedom,I said they used him to get rid of shah.
| quote: | | from 1963 to 1978 he lived in Iraq, but youre saying he was exiled to France? who was he Napoleon? f**k you're a dumb. |
where da do you get these so called facts from ? I said he came to Iran from France yes he was LIVING IN FRANCE.Clearly he wasnt the enemy back in those days and he had the support from the west.
Please stay the hell away from politcs and just stay in the army.
| quote: | i'm an idiot?
"their fingerprints are all over it" = paranoid douche- |
I dont know the they are feeding you rednecks but it is working good. |
|
|
|
|
