[quote]will to power wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Yeah, we shouldn’t kick out a repressive dictatorship. See what happens.
Now, what should we do about The Saudi’s again?
Stop sending them money and guns, remove your military and make it clear you won’t stamp down a revolution against them. Do not invade the country. [/quote]
They have enough money. They sell oil to get it. We could stop selling weapons but don’t you think the Chinese and Russians would happily fill that gap?
[quote]Sikkario wrote:
So what you are saying is we should have left Saddam, who gassed Kurds, invaded Iran and Kuwait, and defied the UN, alone and focused on the Saudis?
He gassed the kurds with our weapons, and at the time he gassed them, Iran was occupying that region, so he was technically attacking enemy forces.[/quote]
You are an idiot.
[quote]will to power wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Americans installed?
Yes. The democratic government was overthrown by the US and Britain using troops loyal to the Shah with the understanding that the Shah would be their puppet.
… [/quote]
Which democratic government was that?
It was overthrown by the US and Britain with Iranian troops loyal to the Shah? Doesn’t that mean the Shah did it?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
will to power wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Yeah, we shouldn’t kick out a repressive dictatorship. See what happens.
Now, what should we do about The Saudi’s again?
Stop sending them money and guns, remove your military and make it clear you won’t stamp down a revolution against them. Do not invade the country.
They have enough money. They sell oil to get it. We could stop selling weapons but don’t you think the Chinese and Russians would happily fill that gap?[/quote]
Your backing the regime with your military is the worst part of it, and I doubt Russia or China would do that. Also, you’re comfortable selling them guns because, well, someone else would do it?
Iran dropped the Shah in '44 I think, and instituted a republic.
The CIA and British intelligence bribed officials, news media etc, planned the operation, and supplied them. The Shah just took over at the end. Operation Ajax isn’t exactly a secret.
[quote]will to power wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
will to power wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Yeah, we shouldn’t kick out a repressive dictatorship. See what happens.
Now, what should we do about The Saudi’s again?
Stop sending them money and guns, remove your military and make it clear you won’t stamp down a revolution against them. Do not invade the country.
They have enough money. They sell oil to get it. We could stop selling weapons but don’t you think the Chinese and Russians would happily fill that gap?
Your backing the regime with your military is the worst part of it, and I doubt Russia or China would do that. Also, you’re comfortable selling them guns because, well, someone else would do it?
[/quote]
Do you mean stopping Saddam Hussien from over running them? It is not like our military is patrolling the streets of Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile China continues to send arms to the murderers in Darfur.
[quote]
Which democratic government was that?
It was overthrown by the US and Britain with Iranian troops loyal to the Shah? Doesn’t that mean the Shah did it?
Iran dropped the Shah in '44 I think, and instituted a republic.
The CIA and British intelligence bribed officials, news media etc, planned the operation, and supplied them. The Shah just took over at the end. Operation Ajax isn’t exactly a secret.[/quote]
You mean kicking out the thief that stole the oilfields from the people that developed them and was moving Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence?
The whole Mossadeq thing gets tiresome. Everyone blames the US for deposing him but no one wants to talk about the assassination that put him in power in the first place.
I guess that is OK.
[quote]lixy wrote:
So, reporting a story where dozens of Iraqis get blown up and updating the tally is becoming a nut?[/quote]
Mentioning the story once is ok. To keep updating it as it develops… yeah, kinda nuts.
We all have the internet you know.
Bush’s approval ratings weren’t hovering in the low 20s in 2004.
[quote]You think that’s going to happen without any violence?
That’s not what I claimed, now did I?[/quote]
It’s not at rock bottom yet, then. If it going to split up in pieces, there will be war and dying aplenty.
Bullshit. You don’t know that any more than anyone else does.
“It doesn’t make the tragedy any worse.” See? You get it.
No, I wouldn’t. At least, not unless I have something more to add to the discussion at the same time. This isn’t a “current news” site; it’s a discussion forum.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
You mean kicking out the thief that stole the oilfields from the people that developed them and was moving Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence? [/quote]
Apart from the fact that fascism or socialism were the only two economic systems that were seriously considered at that time and that everybody was doing it, how does the redistribution of wealth from the British to the Iranians justify implementation of a brutal dictator by the US when at the same time, or a few years earlier, the US was doing pretty much the same?
You had to fight Roosevelt in Iran because you could not fight him at home?
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
You mean kicking out the thief that stole the oilfields from the people that developed them and was moving Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence?
Apart from the fact that fascism or socialism were the only two economic systems that were seriously considered at that time and that everybody was doing it, how does the redistribution of wealth from the British to the Iranians justify implementation of a brutal dictator by the US when at the same time, or a few years earlier, the US was doing pretty much the same?
You had to fight Roosevelt in Iran because you could not fight him at home?[/quote]
I do not agree with many of FDR’s actions. Just because he did something does not make it right.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
will to power wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
will to power wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Yeah, we shouldn’t kick out a repressive dictatorship. See what happens.
Now, what should we do about The Saudi’s again?
Stop sending them money and guns, remove your military and make it clear you won’t stamp down a revolution against them. Do not invade the country.
They have enough money. They sell oil to get it. We could stop selling weapons but don’t you think the Chinese and Russians would happily fill that gap?
Your backing the regime with your military is the worst part of it, and I doubt Russia or China would do that. Also, you’re comfortable selling them guns because, well, someone else would do it?
Do you mean stopping Saddam Hussien from over running them? It is not like our military is patrolling the streets of Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile China continues to send arms to the murderers in Darfur.
[/quote]
What does that have to do with anything? I’m sure you’re not trying to say ‘China does it, so it’s okay for us to do it’.
As for Saddam, supporting an ally against a foreign invasion I’m not going to argue against. It’s helping a despotic ally prevent its people from standing up for their rights that I’m talking about, which your government has guaranteed to do.
Also, I’m pretty sure your troops are patrolling the streets of Saudi Arabia. Or maybe not patrolling literally anymore. I know they stopped in the Emirates, because the populace was complaining, but they are there and your government has made it clear they will preserve the House of Saud as monarch of Arabia.
[quote]
Which democratic government was that?
It was overthrown by the US and Britain with Iranian troops loyal to the Shah? Doesn’t that mean the Shah did it?
Iran dropped the Shah in '44 I think, and instituted a republic.
The CIA and British intelligence bribed officials, news media etc, planned the operation, and supplied them. The Shah just took over at the end. Operation Ajax isn’t exactly a secret.
You mean kicking out the thief that stole the oilfields from the people that developed them and was moving Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence? [/quote]
As I understand it, the Soviet sphere of influence thing was actually a mistake by British intel, but even so, what’s the problem if they want to move into their influence? What gives you the right to oppress them over who they want to ally with or what government they want? Remember they were not your enemies at this point.
Mossadeq isn’t the one who did the assassination I don’t think, he was just who was elected to replace the previous prime minister. At any rate, I don’t see what that has to do with anything. Of course it is a terrible act, just like the assassination of JFK was, but are you trying to say it excuses your toppling their government?
[quote]will to power wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
will to power wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
will to power wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Yeah, we shouldn’t kick out a repressive dictatorship. See what happens.
Now, what should we do about The Saudi’s again?
Stop sending them money and guns, remove your military and make it clear you won’t stamp down a revolution against them. Do not invade the country.
They have enough money. They sell oil to get it. We could stop selling weapons but don’t you think the Chinese and Russians would happily fill that gap?
Your backing the regime with your military is the worst part of it, and I doubt Russia or China would do that. Also, you’re comfortable selling them guns because, well, someone else would do it?
Do you mean stopping Saddam Hussien from over running them? It is not like our military is patrolling the streets of Saudi Arabia.
Meanwhile China continues to send arms to the murderers in Darfur.
What does that have to do with anything? I’m sure you’re not trying to say ‘China does it, so it’s okay for us to do it’.
As for Saddam, supporting an ally against a foreign invasion I’m not going to argue against. It’s helping a despotic ally prevent its people from standing up for their rights that I’m talking about, which your government has guaranteed to do.
Also, I’m pretty sure your troops are patrolling the streets of Saudi Arabia. Or maybe not patrolling literally anymore. I know they stopped in the Emirates, because the populace was complaining, but they are there and your government has made it clear they will preserve the House of Saud as monarch of Arabia.
[/quote]
I am pointing out that China does far worse than us. If we stopped selling arms to SA the Chinese would fill the gap. The world would not be a better place, likely a worse one.
You need to show me our troops patrolling the streets. As far as I can tell our troops are virtual prisoners on base and are rarely let out and when they are they have to meet strict Saudi codes.
[quote]
Which democratic government was that?
It was overthrown by the US and Britain with Iranian troops loyal to the Shah? Doesn’t that mean the Shah did it?
Iran dropped the Shah in '44 I think, and instituted a republic.
The CIA and British intelligence bribed officials, news media etc, planned the operation, and supplied them. The Shah just took over at the end. Operation Ajax isn’t exactly a secret.
You mean kicking out the thief that stole the oilfields from the people that developed them and was moving Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence?
As I understand it, the Soviet sphere of influence thing was actually a mistake by British intel, but even so, what’s the problem if they want to move into their influence? What gives you the right to oppress them over who they want to ally with or what government they want? Remember they were not your enemies at this point.
The whole Mossadeq thing gets tiresome. Everyone blames the US for deposing him but no one wants to talk about the assassination that put him in power in the first place.
I guess that is OK.
Mossadeq isn’t the one who did the assassination I don’t think, he was just who was elected to replace the previous prime minister. At any rate, I don’t see what that has to do with anything. Of course it is a terrible act, just like the assassination of JFK was, but are you trying to say it excuses your toppling their government?[/quote]
He didn’t pull the trigger but he shared the same goals as the ones that did. If JFK was assassinated by the republicans and the republicans were elected to take over and they proceeded to steal from foreign investors and court an enemy foreign power I would expect repercussions.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I am pointing out that China does far worse than us. If we stopped selling arms to SA the Chinese would fill the gap. The world would not be a better place, likely a worse one.
[/quote]
That makes no sense. How would it be worse if they were buying Chinese arms? It’s not like you’re posing restrictions.
Anyway, the biggest problem is with you providing your army to oppress any potential revolution. The Chinese are too busy oppressing their own people, I think.
As I said, same thing may have happened as in the Emirates. The important thing though is they are stationed there to protect the Saudis, not just from foreigners but from a change of government too.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
He didn’t pull the trigger but he shared the same goals as the ones that did. If JFK was assassinated by the republicans and the republicans were elected to take over and they proceeded to steal from foreign investors and court an enemy foreign power I would expect repercussions.[/quote]
Would you be cool with them installing a dictator?
There are appropriate responses for this kind of thing, overthrowing the government is not one of them. The British blocked the ocean lanes and banned British technicians from working for the Iranians, preventing them from selling their oil. And this is assuming they did actually steal the plants. I’ve never seen mention on whether or not the British oil company was compensated by the Iranians.
Also, the assassination was carried out by a fundamental Islamic group where as Mosaddeq was relatively secular.
[quote]will to power wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
I am pointing out that China does far worse than us. If we stopped selling arms to SA the Chinese would fill the gap. The world would not be a better place, likely a worse one.
That makes no sense. How would it be worse if they were buying Chinese arms? It’s not like you’re posing restrictions.
Anyway, the biggest problem is with you providing your army to oppress any potential revolution. The Chinese are too busy oppressing their own people, I think.
[/quote]
The US certainly has conditions on the arms it sells. If they were to be used as the Chinese arms are used in Darfur we would stop selling them.
[quote]
You need to show me our troops patrolling the streets. As far as I can tell our troops are virtual prisoners on base and are rarely let out and when they are they have to meet strict Saudi codes.
As I said, same thing may have happened as in the Emirates. The important thing though is they are stationed there to protect the Saudis, not just from foreigners but from a change of government too.
Zap Branigan wrote:
He didn’t pull the trigger but he shared the same goals as the ones that did. If JFK was assassinated by the republicans and the republicans were elected to take over and they proceeded to steal from foreign investors and court an enemy foreign power I would expect repercussions.
Would you be cool with them installing a dictator?
There are appropriate responses for this kind of thing, overthrowing the government is not one of them. The British blocked the ocean lanes and banned British technicians from working for the Iranians, preventing them from selling their oil. And this is assuming they did actually steal the plants. I’ve never seen mention on whether or not the British oil company was compensated by the Iranians.
Also, the assassination was carried out by a fundamental Islamic group where as Mosaddeq was relatively secular.[/quote]
That is correct but they shared the same goals. Who is to say that the fundamental group wasn’t manipulated by Mossadeq or the Soviets or both? Those were very shady times in Iran and blaming the US and the British for the shady actions is unfair.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
You mean kicking out the thief that stole the oilfields from the people that developed them and was moving Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence?
Apart from the fact that fascism or socialism were the only two economic systems that were seriously considered at that time and that everybody was doing it, how does the redistribution of wealth from the British to the Iranians justify implementation of a brutal dictator by the US when at the same time, or a few years earlier, the US was doing pretty much the same?
You had to fight Roosevelt in Iran because you could not fight him at home?
I do not agree with many of FDR’s actions. Just because he did something does not make it right.
[/quote]
What makes you think the US had any right to go after a thief in another country when the US was doing a lot of similar stealing at that time?
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
You mean kicking out the thief that stole the oilfields from the people that developed them and was moving Iran into the Soviet sphere of influence?
Apart from the fact that fascism or socialism were the only two economic systems that were seriously considered at that time and that everybody was doing it, how does the redistribution of wealth from the British to the Iranians justify implementation of a brutal dictator by the US when at the same time, or a few years earlier, the US was doing pretty much the same?
You had to fight Roosevelt in Iran because you could not fight him at home?
I do not agree with many of FDR’s actions. Just because he did something does not make it right.
What makes you think the US had any right to go after a thief in another country when the US was doing a lot of similar stealing at that time?
[/quote]
What makes you think we didn’t have the right?
By what right was the previous PM assassinated?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Well, what should the US do?
How about learning from its own mistakes?
I agree that most of the harm has already been done. There is no way of knowing if getting out of Iraq will increase the violence in the short term. However, I am positive that if your troops stay there, it will make things worse for everyone in the long run.
Why when the troops are fighting al-Qaeda. If we leave, AQ will not go away. What should be done to stop them if we leave? Is Iran going to move in to fill the void? Do you think Iran can defeat AQ?[/quote]
The troops are fighting much more than Al-Qaeda. That group represents a tiny portion of what has been termed “the insurgency”. Saying that the Americans are fighting Al-Qaeda is as dishonest as the Beijing saying their troops are fighting the criminals who attack the Chinese people in Tibet.
You don’t seem to understand that Al-Qaeda cannot be defeated. It’s a network and it’s global. There is no possible way to “defeat” it. You can curb its activity, anticipate their next move, make it harder for it get financing (while slowly losing your own freedoms), decapitate it and watch its head replaced instantaneously, but you cannot defeat it. Not anymore than Spain can defeat ETA, Iran the MEK or Colombia the FARCs. It ain’t gonna happen.
You take Washington at its word, assume good faith and hand your money to them while thinking that they’re fighting the good fight. Al-Qaeda is only part of the big picture. The US will always find an excuse to remain there and you know it. You’d have to be really naive to think that the billions spent on bases over there will be offered to the Iraqis (and their new best buddies - the Iranians).
[quote]pookie wrote:
No, I wouldn’t. At least, not unless I have something more to add to the discussion at the same time. [/quote]
Well, suck it up then. The toll just turned 52, with 75 injured.
And in other news:
[i]Six youths were killed in Baghdad when mortars hit their sports field.
Two US soldiers were also killed in a roadside bombing north of Baghdad. [/i]
[quote]lixy wrote:
pookie wrote:
No, I wouldn’t. At least, not unless I have something more to add to the discussion at the same time.
Well, suck it up then. The toll just turned 52, with 75 injured.
And in other news:
[i]Six youths were killed in Baghdad when mortars hit their sports field.
Two US soldiers were also killed in a roadside bombing north of Baghdad. [/i]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7302406.stm[/quote]
Don’t you think it is time you start denouncing the actions of these scum rather than celebrating them?
As long as we don’t forget it was the British and Russians who deposed the Shah’s father in the first place. Everyone always forgets about the British.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
As long as we don’t forget it was the British and Russians who deposed the Shah’s father in the first place. Everyone always forgets about the British.[/quote]
The Brits have been fucking up the world for a long time and the Russian for a good bit of the 20th century. Whenever the US tries to clean up the Brits mess or stop the Russians everything becomes our fault.