RE: Iran 2010

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Iran 2010

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Iran 2010

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Iran 2010 - 1/1/2010 7:57:54 AM

Jeffff

Posts: 12600
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline

Thats weak dude. How many Iranian girls did you meet? Is it possible they were happy under the Shah because they were upper class? You met them in college right?

You would deny the human and civil rights violations under the Shah?

I am not defending the Islamist revolution. I am not defending extremists of any stripe.

All I am saying is, if you back a tyrant, don't be surprised if the populace hates you?

Just imagine what will happen if the Kingdom of Saud ever gets out from under that thumb?

Jeff

_____________________________

"If you don't live it, it won't come out your horn." Charlie Parker

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Iran 2010 - 1/1/2010 8:00:46 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

Were our national interests better served by the Shah, or by the Ayatollah. And how about freedom, who were the Iranians more free under.

By "our national interests" You mean the interests of U.S. comercial enterprises not the U.S. government or the people of the U.S. right?

quote:

Back then the Soviet Empire was ruled by thugs who would deliberately kill entire nations of people through starvation or any other means that gave them their jollies,

Kinda like we did to the native americans and the Vietnamese, just to name a couple.

quote:

and the Mid East was of strategic importance because of the Suez Canal, the various sea ports there, and the oil.
We were at war, and I'm glad that our leaders at the time did what was necessary to win it, I am thankful every day.

War???really????the last time the U.S. was legally at war was 1945.

T.

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Iran 2010 - 1/1/2010 8:12:32 AM

Sanity

Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

It didn't all happen in a vacuum Jeff. The Shah wasn't as bad as your liberal friends need you to believe, and the guys who threw him out aren't popular with anyone thats of a sound mind.

We had our reasons for backing the shah of Iran, some of which should be fairly obvious to you by this point.

As to your point about the Kingdom of Saud, it should be our hope that as few nations as possible fall to Islamic extremists. Our best hope is that Saudi Arabia moderates over time and gradually democratizes itself, and that would have been the ideal scenario for pre-revolutionary Iran, as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff

Thats weak dude. How many Iranian girls did you meet? Is it possible they were happy under the Shah because they were upper class? You met them in college right?

You would deny the human and civil rights violations under the Shah?

I am not defending the Islamist revolution. I am not defending extremists of any stripe.

All I am saying is, if you back a tyrant, don't be surprised if the populace hates you?

Just imagine what will happen if the Kingdom of Saud ever gets out from under that thumb?

Jeff

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Jeffff)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Iran 2010 - 1/1/2010 8:37:56 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

War???really????the last time the U.S. was legally at war was 1945.

T.

Ok, that's a little silly.

Technically correct, but Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan--sure as shit closely resemble war enough to casually call them that.

They still take soldiers, equipment and money.

< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 1/1/2010 8:38:24 AM >

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Iran 2010 - 1/1/2010 8:45:01 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

War???really????the last time the U.S. was legally at war was 1945.

T.

Ok, that's a little silly.

Technically correct, but Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan--sure as shit closely resemble war enough to casually call them that.

They still take soldiers, equipment and money.

How bout we call it by its real name...international thugery.
There is an interesting little book called "war is a racket". It is a small book, about half of it is pictures. What is even more interesting is who wrote it.
It was written by General Smedley Butler, USMC,MOH, who at the time of his death was the most highly decorated man in the history of the U.S. military.

T.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Iran 2010 - 1/1/2010 8:49:51 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

No argument there.

After all, the U.S. is the world's largest arms dealer.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Iran 2010 - 1/1/2010 9:44:09 AM

TheHeretic

Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff

I would argue that the execesses of the Shah, backed by us, lead to the Iranian revolution. Had we stepped on him in reguards to human rights it is possible things would be a bit better now.....

Possible?

Not a bit of doubt that we set ourselves up to be the devil any mass movement needs, Jeff, but the roots of the revolution go a lot deeper. Religious fanaticism was in the driver's seat. The desire for more freedom drove a portion of the revolutionaries, but their faction lost to the theocrats. More civil rights wasn't going to stop people demanding their freedom to become dictatorial assholes.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.

(in reply to Jeffff)

Profile

Post #: 27