Friday, March 06, 2009

The History of the Iranian-American Standoff

An amazing series on Youtube. h/t The Spirit of Man

Notice at the 1:52 to 2:02 mark of the last video:

"It soon became clear. The whole world was arming Saddam."

In fact, leftards should play the first 2 minutes and 16 seconds of the sixth video over and over until they fully understand the complexities of that event, just as every event in history is multifaceted. How many times have leftard idiots repeated the meme that the US and the US alone armed Saddam Hussein during the Iraq-Iran war or worse yet that the American's "created Saddam Hussein"? What fools!!!















7 Comments:

Blogger Peter Dodson said...

I think you need to look at the bigger picture - being one of the many who armed Saddam needs to be put into context of what occurred in 1953, when the U.S. government helped to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran, bringing in the Shah and his 26 year reign of terror. When did this end you might ask? With the '79 Revolution.

So, why do some Iranians perhaps distrust, or worse, hate Americans? Because their actions led to 26 years of secret police and other atrocities, which led to the Islamic Revolution. Then they helped to arm Iraq who used those weapons to wage war for years and years. Question is, how would you feel about another state who had meddled in your affairs for so long?

Sincerely,

Leftard Idiot

March 09, 2009 9:50 pm  
Blogger Louise said...

Dear Peter. Please come up with something original. This canned statement is repeated by so many automatons it is as boring as it is predictable. The repetition of it is a dead giveaway that whoever utters it is simply repeating something memorized at the feet of a university professor like Zinn or Chomsky. Think for yourself, fer Christ's sake.

And besides, hanging on to "resentments" for 53 years is a phenomenon that only happens in the minds of leftard idiots, who have been taught by their indoctrinators to keep hate alive. Yes the Shah of Iran may have been brutal, but the regime that is there now, is hardly any better.

March 10, 2009 2:13 am  
Blogger Peter Dodson said...

Hi Louise,

Thanks for your response.

The repetition of it is a dead giveaway that whoever utters it is simply repeating something memorized at the feet of a university professor like Zinn or Chomsky. Think for yourself, fer Christ's sake.

I notice however, that you don't dispute the facts as stated. That's because they are not in dispute - where we differ is in terms of the long-term effect of those actions. Unless I'm mistaken and you do dispute the facts as stated?

Also, why are you so mad at me? All I've done is disagree with you (and only to an extent as we seem to agree on the basic facts). I've never visited here before and never spoken with you, ever. I do think for myself. Really, I do. In fact, we seem to think alike in that we agree on the basic facts of the timeline of events that occurred between 1953 and the modern day in Iran.

And besides, hanging on to "resentments" for 53 years is a phenomenon that only happens in the minds of leftard idiots, who have been taught by their indoctrinators to keep hate alive.

I don't hang on to resentments. And plus, in this case, I'm not the one hanging onto resentments - it would be the Iranians who are. So, in your estimation, how long would be reasonable to hang on to something that occurred within many Iranians lifetimes? If you saw your brother or parents killed by a regime that the U.S. backed, what is a reasonable length of time to hate the U.S. for it?

Yes the Shah of Iran may have been brutal, but the regime that is there now, is hardly any better.

And again, I don't disagree - but one was the direct response to the other. You most likely don't get the Islamic Revolution without the reign of the Shah.

So again, I ask the question - if Iranians helped to overthrow a democratically elected Canadian government in 1953 which helped march in a despotic regime, which led to a fanatical regime, and then the Iranians supported the Americans in a war with us that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands, would you be so quick to forgive the Iranians, especially if your families died as a result?

And please, I'm trying to be respectful. We can be adults here and not call each other names.

March 10, 2009 8:41 am  
Blogger Louise said...

Peter, a linear "A causes M fifty years later" is a very shallow and naive way of interpreting world events. It totally ignores a multitude of events that happen before and during that time frame which influence events.

You come across as one of these dupes who believe all the troubles in the world are directly and solely due to past American actions. The arguments you make are stale and bankrupt, not to mention patronizing, in that you presume to speak on behalf of people you do not know and cannot claim to represent.

Typical leftist academic BS.

March 11, 2009 4:42 am  
Blogger Louise said...

I'll answer you when I get home from work later today. I'm just on my lunch break now.

March 11, 2009 1:24 pm  
Blogger Peter Dodson said...

Hi Louise,

Peter, a linear "A causes M fifty years later" is a very shallow and naive way of interpreting world events. It totally ignores a multitude of events that happen before and during that time frame which influence events.

To be fair, it wasn't fifty years later. The Islamic Revolution started 26 years after the Shah illegally came to power with the help of the U.S, not 50. I'm not saying that it was the only cause, just one of the chief causes. I would be interested, as well, in hearing what other causes you think led to the '79 Revolution.

You come across as one of these dupes who believe all the troubles in the world are directly and solely due to past American actions.

How do I come across as this when this is the first topic we've ever discussed? Do I think the American intervention has a lot to do with some Iranians dislike of them - yes. But I don't think America is responsible for all the troubles in the world. There is plenty of blame to go around for all of those issues.

The arguments you make are stale and bankrupt, not to mention patronizing, in that you presume to speak on behalf of people you do not know and cannot claim to represent.

OK, so let me ask you a question then Louise. Do you believe that the '53 overthrow and the U.S. support of Saddam have had no impact on the Iranian people? And do you think in similar circumstances, that you would just forgive and forget if a foreign country had interfered in your affairs much to the detriment of you and your loved one's?

And I don't intend to speak for others - there is plenty of research out there which speaks to these links, some of which is from an Iranian perspective. It was like after 9/11 - if you listened to what bin Laden and others actually said, you would heard the actual reasons they attacked America, not this "they hate us for our freedom." The information is out there, we just need to listen to it.

Typical leftist academic BS.

Have you read Chomsky or Zinn, Louise? If so, which one's?

March 11, 2009 4:27 pm  
Blogger Louise said...

"I think you need to look at the bigger picture - being one of the many who armed Saddam needs to be put into context of what occurred in 1953,..."

Please elaborate. You have made a statement here that you seem to leave hanging. Also, if you actually watched the video, you would know what was meant by that statement about arming Saddam. It is not referring to actual armaments or other tools of war. It refers to the decision by the large number of countries to let those two countries go after each other so that Iran would be weakened. It was the same tactic as was used during WWII when Germany and the Soviet Union were at war on the Eastern front, while the allies dallied around waiting for the inevitable to happen, ie) both countries moving closer to exhaustion and collapse (the origins of the Cold War, BTW).

"So, why do some Iranians perhaps distrust, or worse, hate Americans?"

Presumptuous on your part to say that Iranians distrust or hate Americans. Even more presumptuous on your part to assume your interpretation of history is identical to those held by Iranians. Lends credence to my initial assessment of your stance on this issue - very American-centric. Why not blast the Brits equally? They had as much to do with the overthrow of the Mosaddeq government as the Americans did. And you also seem to be completely oblivious to the temper of the times, ie. the great ideological contest between the West and Soviet Union for influence in the world, such as Mosaddeq, which third world leaders played to the hilt.

"I do think for myself. Really, I do."

Sorry, not much evidence of that in your comments so far. It's just old leftist rhetoric warmed over and served up again and again.

"I don't hang on to resentments. And plus, in this case, I'm not the one hanging onto resentments - it would be the Iranians who are."

You misunderstood my comments. I am referring to Iranians, the vast, vast majority of whom were not even born when Mossadeq was overthrown. If they are still "resentful" today, as you presume, then there is obviously some indoctrination aimed at keeping hate alive being drilled into their heads and one has to ask, whose interests does such indoctrination serve? It wouldn't be the mad Mullahs now, would it?
In fact, I suspect nearly half of the population has no living memory of the 1979 revolution, since that is thirty years ago now and those that do remember it are likely very disillusioned. All you have to do is read the reports about demonstrations and revolts that are leaking out.

"but one was the direct response to the other. You most likely don't get the Islamic Revolution without the reign of the Shah."

Again with the "all things happen in the world because of past American behaviour, regardless of who else and what else was happening at the time or since." This is called projection, Peter. You shouldn't do it. It reflects badly on you and disallows the Iranian people their own voices.

"To be fair, it wasn't fifty years later. The Islamic Revolution started 26 years after the Shah illegally came to power with the help of the U.S, not 50."

Your logic escapes me. You started out in your very first comment blaming the US for helping to overthrow Iran's government in 1953 which led directly, in your opinion, to the '79 Revolution 30 years later, and they are still resentful today about Mossadeg's overthrow, some 55 years after. But now you are changing your tune.

"How do I come across as this when this is the first topic we've ever discussed? Do I think the American intervention has a lot to do with some Iranians dislike of them - yes. But I don't think America is responsible for all the troubles in the world. There is plenty of blame to go around for all of those issues."

Right there in your own words is the reason why you come across as a dupe.

"if Iranians helped to overthrow a democratically elected Canadian government in 1953 which helped march in a despotic regime, which led to a fanatical regime, and then the Iranians supported the Americans in a war with us that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands, would you be so quick to forgive the Iranians, especially if your families died as a result?"

If my country had ushered in a theocracy to replace a king, and if that theocracy turned out to be magnitudes times worse, I wouldn't be too obsessed with what happened 50+ years ago. I would look for help wherever I could find it to get rid of the current regime. I don't live in the past in order to dull the pain of the present. Nor do I entertain the silly notion that one can predict year into the future what the outcome of actions taken today might be.

And as far as Chomsky and Zinn are concerned, I have read a little of Chomsky and seen him interviewed on TV. Fifteen minutes is all it take to size him up accurately. Zinn, I have heard interviewed and I have read reviews about his books and (cough) scholarship. I have no appetite for reading indoctrination posing as academic research. If you are a fan, then that would explain a lot of the statements you have posted here, so far.

March 11, 2009 6:47 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home