Posted on 05/01/2006 10:43:03 PM PDT by FairOpinion
The only way the Left would support a war against Iran would be if the country was pro-American.
I was a child but family members were there and active in the matter and others I know closely are related to General Bakhtiar who set up SAVAK.
You just keep blathering away based on limited CIA documents that malign the late Shah just as others recently leaked try to destroy OUR own President.
You really don't have a clue! Though I defend your right to spout your misleading nonsense, I wish you spoke from fact and not your emotions which clearly do not like the late Shah and know nothing of his reign inside Iran.
You constantly refer to the Mossadegh era, without knowing that Mossyface turned looney and went pro-Soviet. But that's OK as long as you can bash the late Shah, right?
And as far as the Shah leaving the country, no sane army astands its ground against insurmountable odds, prefering to retreat to fight another day. But this doesn not fit the profile you posit, so you ignore tactics, strategy all in the name of your baseless attack.
A new one, very nice Phil - in a gruesome kind of way, lol.
The guy doesn't sound like he wants to be Ivan the Terrible. I don't see anything wrong with Muslim dictatorships becoming constitutional monarchies. If France had become a constitutional monarchy after their Revolution, I'm sure they would have had happier 19th and 20th centuries.
I think it would be great for the Persians to go to a Constitutional Monarchy and restore the "Peacock Throne!"
=================================================
Utter nonsense. he was dragged into it then fled the very first day only to be drageed back when those insurmountable odds you mention were defeated two days later.
Do not presume to know what I know. Not mentioning something does not indicate ignorance of it. This thread is not about Mossedegh. It is about the ersatz royalty that was lead by a weakling whom you want us to admire. And, btw...being tied to the founder of SAVAK is not something to brsag about, at least in America.
Still Trolling, I see.
This thread is about Reza Pahlavi, the current Iranian regime and Reza's efforts to overthrow it.
Hijacking it with your anti-Shah propaganda and insults is Troll behavior.
the game plan is to try to isolate the radical minority government from the more rational, broadminded people. Anything that will bring down the current government would be good. The people need to know there are options.
It's likely that bombings would only strengthen their hold in the short run.
cry me a river
You are coming across as such an arrogant ignoramus.
I certainly presume to know what you know and a 100 times more - ON THIS SUBJECT - than you ever will. With top security clearances into everything in Iran beyond anything you could dream of, it would take you a couple of lifetimes to know a fraction of what I know and what went on there by having been there ON THE GROUND and having access to classified (at that time) information which you hint at now that it's declassified.
I'm actually for the LATE Shah on its merits and believe me unless you also knew him and family members personally, had free access to every palace, every government office, total access to the Prime Ministry, the military and security and police organizations you don't have a leg to stand on with your arrogance. Oh! And helped train and trained with his personal bodyguards, the three innermost circles out of the six.
Come down a few notches to where you may possibly belong from what you infer and stop living in your alluded past which cannot hold a candle to real life people active at that time at the highest levels with clearances you might wish to have had.
For some reason - mostly ignorance - you clearly hate the late-Shah - without the wherewithal to reach an accurate analysis about him based on detail far in excess of what you point to.
You are one of those Americans you mentioned, who knows almost nothing about him or Iran except some negative comments you have culled from within your own contacts in the USA - and think you know it all.
And General Bakhtiar's reputation in America has few negative connotations you imply except about his anti-Shah activities out of Iraq for which he died - AGAINST the direct orders of the Shah to NOT, repeat NOT kill him.
OK? Enough said.
"It's likely that bombings would only strengthen their hold in the short run".
That's a fallacy that falls neatly into place with Western thinking and norms but not with the Iranian mentality and mindsets that exist in Iran today.
Recent airwave broadcast research polls into Iran with direct feedback by phone have indicated that over 50% welcome a bombing that would remove the Mullahs.
Considering that a large part of the other 50% were probably Islamic Regime adherents and Regime employees pretending to be Iran Joe Six Pack and slanting responses to prevent such an air intervention, the majority sides with the air strikes.
It's a myth that this will circle the wagons for the Mullahs.
The only wagons they have to circle are their military ones. The populace will not side with them against anyone. Against America or anyone else. Remove the military and see the Mullahs eradicated in a wave of retribution.
The only reason the Mullahs are still there is the fear that has been deeply imbedded by violent suppression over the last 25-years. Arrest, death, torture, rape of female relatives to discorage opposition are the tip of the iceberg.
wtc911 should realize that the Shah's SAVAK was Kintergarten compared to the thugs who are there, yet he attacks the Shah but favors the Mullahs. How sad.
I'm beginning to agree with Nuconvert that he may be actually shilling for the Mullahs (trolling?) - or is plainly ignorant and has other personal agendas that have little to do with reality or history. Revisionist? Definitely as revised and presented by wtc911 planting disinformation.
The word of caution I would add to your belief that if we "Remove the military and see the Mullahs eradicated in a wave of retribution" is this.
We did that in Iraq. When the governing force was gone, there was a power vacuum left that produced chaos and violence.
It has been described above that Iran is a conglomerate of mafia chiefdoms in an uneasy truce with each other under the mullahs.
If they all go to the mattresses after the military is rendered ineffective at keeping them in their uneasy truce, then the average citizen is just going to see chaos and violence after we bomb without our presence there to try to reestablish order.
This was the one thing we sorely underestimated in our Iraq invasion. We got a lot of other things right, and we eventually started to get this error corrected, too.
But I don't think the populace is going to like the chaos and violence that will follow our bombing, and I think they will eventually come to blame us and hate us for violating their country.
I can't come up with an alternative. I hope the CIA has.
"You are one of those Americans you mentioned, who knows almost nothing about him or Iran except some negative comments you have culled from within your own contacts in the USA - and think you know it all."
As an Australian, I have been following this discussion with great interest. Your truth cannot fall upon fertile ground for obvious reasons - illustrated by the above observation. An American may criticise Carter ad nauseum, but it's a rare American that's prepared to accept his/her nation's complicity - therefor the Shah must continue to be vilified.
I commend your courage. Truth needs her champions more than ever now.
"I'm beginning to agree with Nuconvert that he may be actually shilling for the Mullahs (trolling?) - or is plainly ignorant and has other personal agendas..."
I don't believe he's shilling for the mullahs.
A troll is a troublemaker; a disrupter; someone who comments on a thread to start an argument and has no positive input; a thread hijacker who does so in order to spew forth ideas supporting his own agenda.
That being said, I agree with the latter part of your assessment.
I see you are vehemently criticizing, bashing the Shah -- but have NOT a single bad word or criticism of the radical Islamist Mullahs ruling Iran now, who are about to acquire nukes and plan to nuke Israel and us with it, or a bad word about the Ayatollah who grabbed power after the Shah left.
I think that speaks volumes.
We all understand very well, where you are coming from.
"but it's a rare American that's prepared to accept his/her nation's complicity -"
I've spoken with a number a Americans on FR who do so.
Then again, FR is a rare place. ; ~ )
compared to the fascists in charge, the Shah was a Saint.
an autocrat for sure, however, the endless good he did for Iran can not be forgotten.
the clerical regime has the blood of at least 100,000 young iranians on its hands.
Javid Shah.
The regime in Iran is Arab, their government a theocracy having been hijacked aided by Carter.
My best wish , my best guess is that Iran's future will be solved internally. We are reacting continued threats weakly, trying to be diplomatic and going the UN route (which is ultimately futile. The current Iranian regime will threaten Israel, which the UN could care less about. who is our greatest ally in the Mideast.)
I hope this latest remark by Pahlavi is indicative that something is going on below the radar.
US policy is clear on the executive side; Israeli policy is firm as well. But this has to be a one.....two punch combination, militarily and politically.......leaving Israel out of the fight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.