Democrats at Heart of Middle East Problems

Galveston Daily News ^ | January 31, 2006 | Shawn Christopher Phillips

[FreeKeys]

In either case, there was absolutely no reason for the U.S. government to basically help serve as the guarantor of British Petroleum's investments in the Middle East.

That makes sense. But you don't see ANY truth to the suggestion that Iran had become our strongest ally in the Muslim world? Or that Iran was showing more modernity than the rest of the Muslim world? At all? Do you think past mistakes, Ike's or whoever's, absolves Carter of his?

[odds]

"Iranians from that era will tell you that he wrested control of the nation's oil assets from the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) -- a construct of post-WW2 British colonialism. In either case, there was absolutely no reason for the U.S. government to basically help serve as the guarantor of British Petroleum's investments in the Middle East."

Have these Iranians also mentioned the other reason(s) why the CIA was ordered to intervene ?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Nasty little fact in this article:

IAEA Says Iran Received Black Market Uranium Documents (PART OF BLUEPRINTS FOR A NUCLEAR WARHEAD!) --in 1987

*********************************

The document given to Iran in 1987 showed how to cast “enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms,” said a confidential IAEA report. IAEA officials refused to comment on the implications of the finding.

[odds]

Here is a link if anyone is interested to learn more about Mossaddegh and the CIA coup in Iran during Eisenhower Administration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

[concrete is my business]

IMHO, anyone who believes that the CIA was responsible and that Iranians were not involved has no credibility on the subject.

I wish the CIA were that good. sarc.

I think the Shahs dynasty is very old.

[concrete is my business]

Thanks for the link odds.

It seems that there were many different interests competing in Iran at that time.

The CIA provided 1 million dollars for propaganda and Kermit Roosevelt and somehow this leads everyone to conclude that America controlled the outcome.

I think America got the outcome it preferred and so did millions of others.

[Alberta's Child]

Iran was "showing more modernity" than the rest of the Muslim world because the combination of British colonialism and Persian culture made the country more conducive to modernity.

Do you think past mistakes, Ike's or whoever's, absolves Carter of his?

Carter was really in a no-win situation on this particular issue. Do the Clinton administrations blunders in the 1990s absolve the Bush administration of its responsibilities for 9/11? I think they do, for the most part.

[Alberta's Child]

Of course the Iranians were involved. The U.S. basically supported one side in an internal Iranian political conflict -- a scenario that has been played out repeatedly over the last 50 years in any number of countries around the world.

[odds]

I would like to correct you on something: Iran was never actually "colonized" by the British. It was only occupied for a while during and just after WWII by British and Russian soldiers.

Modernization of Iran began during Reza Shah (The late Shah's father) and due to his initiatives.

[anymouse]

odds - Since Jan 10, 2006

And we know how reliable/nonpartisan Wikipedia is. /sarcasm

[anymouse]

a scenario that has been played out repeatedly over the last 50 years in any number of countries around the world.

Yes, the rest of us call that the Cold War.

We won. Do you have a problem with that?

[odds]

The content of what is mentioned in the link I gave is pretty much the same as others I've read on the web.

If you have a website that is vastly different in key points or otherwise, please supply it.

What is your point is by "odds - Since Jan 10, 2006" ?

[Alberta's Child]

Some of us call it "business as usual," since it really began far earlier than 50 years ago. The first case of U.S. military intervention outside North America was the Spanish-American War in the Philippines, which took place before the Soviet Union even existed.

[anymouse]

What, you aren't going to complain about U.S. interventionism in Canada during the War of 1812 as well? (/sarcasm)

Thankfully your fellow countrymen are growing impatient with liberals like you and the grownups are back in charge. Maybe you can run away to Seattle. :)

[anymouse]

The point is that you are obviously a clueless liberal trolling on FR under a new handle. Don't let the Viking Kitties get you. :)

[odds]

"The point is that you are obviously a clueless liberal trolling on FR under a new handle. Don't let the Viking Kitties get you."

Firstly, I'm not a liberal. Obviously, it is you who doesn't have a clue.

Secondly, You have no right to personally attack people, especially when you don't know me, and falsely accuse me for no reason whatsoever.

New handle?!! Keep your paranoia in check as well.

Don't message me again.

[odds]

"I think America got the outcome it preferred and so did millions of others."

True. Personally, I believe that it was absolutely necessary for America to intervene at that time.

I wish the Carter administration was as vigilant as Eisenhower but obviously it wasn't and now we have this Mullah problem in Iran, which was largely created by Carter administration.