Iran Captures British Sailors

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
241

[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
They voted for a jackass who was going to confiscate investments w/o any compensation.

So he’s a jackass because he puts his own people’s interest above that of corporations? I understand better how someone like Bush is president in the US. By you definition, Bush is for from being a jackass.

Did Washington, Jefferson and the gang compensate the Brits and French for the investments they made to discover the new continent? Didn’t think so…[/quote]

Mossadegh saw that the British were no longer powerful. He thought he could confiscate their investments w/o compensation. He thought wrong.

Prior to WWII, anyone nationalizing British investments paid for them (such as in Argentina) or the British Navy showed up on your coast.

Brits lost their investments in America. They tried twice to get them back. Unlike Mossadegh, THEY miscalculated.

242

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Brits lost their investments in America. They tried twice to get them back. Unlike Mossadegh, THEY miscalculated. [/quote]

You call Mossadeq a jackass for standing up to the British empire while your idolized forefathers did the same.

Does the end result ultimately determines how noble a cause is?

One thing to keep in mind while answering that: Post-WWII US was more powerful than any other country ever was. Far more influential than Brits in the 18th century.

243

[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Brits lost their investments in America. They tried twice to get them back. Unlike Mossadegh, THEY miscalculated.

You call Mossadeq a jackass for standing up to the British empire while your idolized forefathers did the same.

Does the end result ultimately determines how noble a cause is?

One thing to keep in mind while answering that: Post-WWII US was more powerful than any other country ever was. Far more influential than Brits in the 18th century.[/quote]

Get your history straight and don’t omit the important facts.

Mossadeq wasn’t elected by the Iranian people. He was chosen by the parliament and appointed by the Shah. Shortly thereafter he clashed with the shah and disbanded parliament and suspended civil liberties. Eisenhower chose between two despots.

After his fall Kohmeini preached a sermon thanking Allah for his downfall and denouncing him as a socialist. Most likely the resaon lixy worships him… Iranian textbooks today portray Mossadegh as a betrayer of Muslims. Big MO had no popular or religious support and was a dictator looking for the best deal he could get. Arguably they did get what they deserve.

The Soviets were driven out of Iran in the 40’s when Truman threatened them if they did not vacate the country. He had no plans to occupy Iran…just wanted the Soviets out as they agreed to do at Yalta.

244

[quote]hedo wrote:
Mossadeq wasn’t elected by the Iranian people.
[/quote]

I beg to differ. He had total support of the Iranian people who re-elected him despite the Abadan Crisis.

Mossadeq stood up for the Iranian people and was a moderate Muslim; The very reason his character is not very popular with the extremist radicals.

In March 2000, then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stated her regret that Mossadegh was ousted: “The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America.”

245

[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
Mossadeq wasn’t elected by the Iranian people.

I beg to differ. He had total support of the Iranian people who re-elected him despite the Abadan Crisis.

After his fall Kohmeini preached a sermon thanking Allah for his downfall and denouncing him as a socialist. Most likely the resaon lixy worships him… Iranian textbooks today portray Mossadegh as a betrayer of Muslims.

Mossadeq stood up for the Iranian people and was a moderate Muslim; The very reason his character is not very popular with the extremist radicals.

In March 2000, then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stated her regret that Mossadegh was ousted: “The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America.”[/quote]

From the same Wikpedia reference:

“The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.”

Curiously you left that little portion out of your argument.

Try again. Wikpedia has been contaminated by the cyber-Jihad as I’m sure you know.

Your wrong. Do a little reading beyond an internet encyclopedia.

246

[quote]hedo wrote:
Your wrong. Do a little reading beyond an internet encyclopedia. [/quote]

It took years of debate to arrive at the current page on Mossadeq with arguments flowing from all sides of the political spectrum.

The concensus is that Mossadeq should be refered to as “democratically elected” because of the amount of credible sources that refer to him that way. We could debate on that for a long time, but the most appropriate place to do so would be the Wiki’s talk page.

Apologists of the CIA’s coup came up with a variety of ways to demonize the guy, but the legitimacy of his rule has never been in question. Once more, we arrive at the crossing point where the US claims to defend Iranians against themselves. The premise being that the US knows better what’s good for Iran.

If you want to defend that position, go ahead; I recommend you don’t as it sounds awfully similar to the “white guys” bringing civilization to the savages who can’t be trusted to determine their own destiny.

247

[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
Your wrong. Do a little reading beyond an internet encyclopedia.

It took years of debate to arrive at the current page on Mossadeq with arguments flowing from all sides of the political spectrum.

The concensus is that Mossadeq should be refered to as “democratically elected” because of the amount of credible sources that refer to him that way. We could debate on that for a long time, but the most appropriate place to do so would be the Wiki’s talk page.

Apologists of the CIA’s coup came up with a variety of ways to demonize the guy, but the legitimacy of his rule has never been in question. Once more, we arrive at the crossing point where the US claims to defend Iranians against themselves. The premise being that the US knows better what’s good for Iran.

If you want to defend that position, go ahead; I recommend you don’t as it sounds awfully similar to the “white guys” bringing civilization to the savages who can’t be trusted to determine their own destiny.[/quote]

I recommend you don’t either since you are quoting a disputed source as your reference and it sounds a lot like “muslim guys” telling people what’s best for them, whether they like it or not.

248

[quote]hedo wrote:
I recommend you don’t either since you are quoting a disputed source as your reference and it sounds a lot like “muslim guys” telling people what’s best for them, whether they like it or not. [/quote]

My disputed sources has a thorough fact-checking process which would put to shame anything you read. I’m sick of people downplaying the role of millions of educated people constantly on the watch to compile the best info available.

The Wiki’s policy of Non-Point-of-View has a motivated crew dissecting every single sentence to try and make it as neutral as possible.

Your reply is a joke. The point I made stands on its own without needing to be backed by the Wiki article. I said that Mossadeq had popular support and unless you can refute that claim, stop making an ass out of yourself by comparing me to irrational people. I welcome open debate and don’t think anybody’s word should be taken without question.

Now, which is it? Didn’t the US go against the will of the majority of Iranians when it backed the coup against Mossadeq? And do you think it was appropriate to do so because they were not smart enough to know what was good for them?

249

[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
I recommend you don’t either since you are quoting a disputed source as your reference and it sounds a lot like “muslim guys” telling people what’s best for them, whether they like it or not.

My disputed sources has a thorough fact-checking process which would put to shame anything you read. I’m sick of people downplaying the role of millions of educated people constantly on the watch to compile the best info available.

The Wiki’s policy of Non-Point-of-View has a motivated crew dissecting every single sentence to try and make it as neutral as possible.

Your reply is a joke. The point I made stands on its own without needing to be backed by the Wiki article. I said that Mossadeq had popular support and unless you can refute that claim, stop making an ass out of yourself by comparing me to irrational people. I welcome open debate and don’t think anybody’s word should be taken without question.

Now, which is it? Didn’t the US go against the will of the majority of Iranians when it backed the coup against Mossadeq? And do you think it was appropriate to do so because they were not smart enough to know what was good for them?[/quote]

“The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.”

Dude your a troll, stop trying to claim your anything else.

I’m not comparing you to anything. I’m pointing out the lack of validity to your source and how your bias invalidates anything you have to say. Your posts demonstrate that your are irrational. I ususally call you a bigot.

It’s an internet encyclopedia, try harder. I’m a lot more highly educated then you are so your whining simply makes me laugh. It’s a bodybuilding site sparky. Get over yourself.

When will you understand that?

250

[quote]hedo wrote:
…
“The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.”

…[/quote]

Pretty much says it all. It is amazing to see lixy try to spin it.

There is no doubt jihadists are playing these games on the internet. They have been revising Wiki to suit their needs.

Of course it is OK to deceive the infidel.

251

[quote]hedo wrote:
I’m not comparing you to anything. I’m pointing out the lack of validity to your source and how your bias invalidates anything you have to say. Your posts demonstrate that your are irrational. I ususally call you a bigot.[/quote]

You tried to picture Mossadeq as someone who didn’t have the support of the Iranian people. That’s wrong! The Wiki cites many sources that refute your statement and all those sources are respectable and pass the “credibility” test.

Unless you can provide better sources than the BBC or the Independent that support your claim, I’ll ask you politely to shut the fcsk up about the tag on Mossadeq’s Wiki page which is absolutely not relevant in this issue.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20030616/ai_n12691139

There’s no discussion about him being “democratically elected”. The debate on the Wiki’s talk page have nothing to do with that.

Someone who regularly quotes the MEMRI, IranFocus and the Murdoch conglomerate would be laughed at in most “educated” circles.

Also, knowing the difference between “then” and “than” would make you look a lot more credible as far as education is concerned…

252

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Pretty much says it all. It is amazing to see lixy try to spin it. [/quote]

What’s amazing is that with all your talk, I’m yet to see a source that backs hedo’s claim that Mossadeq wasn’t democratically elected.

That’s the issue we’re discussing in case you just skipped the whole debate.

253

[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
I’m not comparing you to anything. I’m pointing out the lack of validity to your source and how your bias invalidates anything you have to say. Your posts demonstrate that your are irrational. I ususally call you a bigot.

You tried to picture Mossadeq as someone who didn’t have the support of the Iranian people. That’s wrong! The Wiki cites many sources that refute your statement and all those sources are respectable and pass the “credibility” test.

Unless you can provide better sources than the BBC or the Independent that support your claim, I’ll ask you politely to shut the fcsk up about the tag on Mossadeq’s Wiki page which is absolutely not relevant in this issue.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20030616/ai_n12691139

There’s no discussion about him being “democratically elected”. The debate on the Wiki’s talk page have nothing to do with that.

It’s an internet encyclopedia, try harder. I’m a lot more highly educated then you are so your whining simply makes me laugh.

Someone who regularly quotes the MEMRI, IranFocus and the Murdoch conglomerate would be laughed at in most “educated” circles.

Also, knowing the difference between “then” and “than” would make you look a lot more credible as far as education is concerned…[/quote]

Your a troll…why do I even bother with someone who is here spreading lies and is clearly a bigot.

Where is your broad support lixy? Do you get high before you post…certainly seems like it.

Arguing spelling on an internet board is the ultimate mark of a troll. It reinforces the fact that your arguments are silly and you have nothing else.

Kind of hard to get past this part of your internet encyclopedia reference isn’t it:

“The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.”

Your point lol.

Learn a little history. You have an opinion nothing more. Your opinion is completely biased and based on your hatred of the US not the actual facts of the event. I’m sure you didn’t learn a lot of critical thinking at the Madrassa did you?

Shut the fuck up…since when do the newbie trolls who don’t lift tell the veterans what to do? Too fuckin funny.

Hey how are your workouts going…that’s why you come to the Biotest board isn’t it? Got a favorite supp…besides posting on the political forum? What a tool.

254

[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Pretty much says it all. It is amazing to see lixy try to spin it.

What’s amazing is that with all your talk, I’m yet to see a source that backs hedo’s claim that Mossadeq wasn’t democratically elected.

That’s the issue we’re discussing in case you just skipped the whole debate.[/quote]

Common kwoledge…broaden your reading.

You are rather predictable, and boring, you try and discredit any reference posted and claim Wikpedia as the end all resource. Just like a high school kid. That’s why most of us just ridicule you. Not really much point to arguing with a bigot who has a one sided view of every situation.

By the way, which one of you is posting today using the lixy account? Seems like at least two disctinct writing styles use this account. You must be the dumb one.

Why does a POS like you not like to see translations of Arab hate sites so much?

Not proud of your brothers?