Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The U.S. should have sided with the Shah of Iran
FSM ^ | 7/13/2016 | Slater Bakhtavar

Posted on 05/12/2017 6:50:09 PM PDT by freedom44

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: freedom44

I have been saying that since 1979.


21 posted on 05/12/2017 7:26:08 PM PDT by left that other site (You shall know the Truth, and The Truth Shall Set You Free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Well thankfully they didn’t turn Commie, or we might have sent our manufacturing base there instead of China.


22 posted on 05/12/2017 7:28:13 PM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DIRTYSECRET

“Carter’s luggage was empty. The Shah was in big trouble. Carter didn’t help but it wouldn’t have mattered.”

Not only was the Shah in big trouble with his own people, he was in big trouble with his own mortality.

Had the revolution not occurred in 1979, the monarchy would have collapsed in 1980 when the Shah died.


23 posted on 05/12/2017 7:28:32 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Carter did an outstanding job of destroying South Africa, too. A fine, stable country is now a cesspool.


24 posted on 05/12/2017 7:29:00 PM PDT by ArtDodger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WatchungEagle

Spot on.


25 posted on 05/12/2017 7:29:30 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: left that other site

“I have been saying that since 1979.”

The question is not how we would have kept the Shah in power, the question is, how would we have kept the Shah alive?


26 posted on 05/12/2017 7:31:13 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

‘Had the revolution not occurred in 1979, the monarchy would have collapsed in 1980 when the Shah died.”
Maybe.. hard to tell if the Shah could have lived longer had Carter not denied him entrance into the US for medical treatment...


27 posted on 05/12/2017 7:31:36 PM PDT by ArtDodger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
Truman lost China

Kennedy lost Cuba

LBJ lost Vietnam

Carter lost Iran

Clinton lost Osama

I see a trend.

28 posted on 05/12/2017 7:34:12 PM PDT by ealgeone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

Unfortunately, he had cancer. However, peaceful transfer of power within the system that was in place would have been preferable to the islamic revolution, which Carter encouraged.


29 posted on 05/12/2017 7:35:04 PM PDT by left that other site (You shall know the Truth, and The Truth Shall Set You Free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: left that other site

Anything would be better than what is now, but I don’t think the monarchy would have withstood the death of the Shah.

I think they would have ended up in the same place.


30 posted on 05/12/2017 7:40:03 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ArtDodger

I meant to say, ‘had not Carter delayed (not denied) him entrance into the US for treatment.’


31 posted on 05/12/2017 7:41:33 PM PDT by ArtDodger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ArtDodger

Apparently, the Shah also kept his cancer secret from his doctors and that is usually not a great idea.


32 posted on 05/12/2017 7:41:46 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Timpanagos1

Well, probably, as the Ayatollah was gathering his forces.


33 posted on 05/12/2017 7:42:26 PM PDT by left that other site (You shall know the Truth, and The Truth Shall Set You Free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: freedom44
The U.S. should have sided with the Shah of Iran

Yeah, No ship Sherlock!

34 posted on 05/12/2017 7:44:27 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (The fear of stark justice sends hot urine down their thighs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

It is difficult to side with a dead man.


35 posted on 05/12/2017 7:48:05 PM PDT by Timpanagos1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

That’s right. Jimmy’s masterful management of foreign affairs destabilized that region for nearly 40 years now. He also give away the Panama Canal without so much as a negotiation to keep it. Then he inserted himself into the North Korean nuclear weapons program situation, gifting the North with the ability to develop nuclear weapons. Then they shared information with Iran.

As if this wasn’t enough, he occasionally toured the world meeting with Marxist dictators. He also prided himself on validating elections where Marxists were involved, always declaring them valid when the Marxists won. Leaving the nation soon after.

Carter, Clinton, and Obama have thoroughly screwed up global dynamics. I’d like to say they alone did so, but our trade with China supported by both parties will lead to massive problems over time.

We’re on a countdown there. It’s just a matter of time.


36 posted on 05/12/2017 7:53:04 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Happy days are here again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedom44

Just goes to show elections have consequences...Jimbo was elected only because he wasn’t a Republican, and turned out to be a horrible mistake!


37 posted on 05/12/2017 8:05:03 PM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soycd

The choice wasn’t between a communist and an Islamist in 1953. It was between a Soviet ally and a friendly monarch.


38 posted on 05/12/2017 8:10:57 PM PDT by Hugin (Conservatism without Nationalism is a fraud.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hugin

?The choice wasn’t between a communist and an Islamist in 1953. It was between a Soviet ally and a friendly monarch.

Fair enough. Never, ever allow islam or any dogma “religion” filth control the weak minds.

When the retards get to believing dogma or filthy mohamhead filth they will eventually need to be eliminated if they don’t suicide first.


39 posted on 05/12/2017 8:21:59 PM PDT by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: WatchungEagle
This article is baloney. The Shah was not a real king, let alone a successor to the ancient Persian kings. He was a puppet dictator installed by the UK and US in a coup that overthrew a democratically elected President who defied British Petroleum. There was nothing the US could have done to keep the Shah in power, he had very few supporters among the Iranian people. It’s retarded and pointless to keep rehashing these Cold War era lies about world events.

Regardless of the historical mythology the article proposes for the Shah, his downfall and the negligence of the Carter Administration in not supporting another "puppet" in place of the Shah was a huge mistake.

In private life, since losing to Reagan, I don't think Carter has been on the correct side of any foreign policy issue.

40 posted on 05/12/2017 8:24:36 PM PDT by stig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson