quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

If anyone has evidence to refute what is acknowledged by knowledgeable historians to have happened in Iran in 1953, let's have it.

Torturing of another's presentation of facts won't suffice.

I'm tired of the silliness.

So show me where America acted "at Britains request" somehow I think I am in for a long wait.

Tweakable, I am not disputing the UK and US were both involved, just the notion that America were doing this at our request. Nothing in your link corroborates this.

quote:

Tweakable, I am not disputing the UK and US were both involved, just the notion that America were doing this at our request. Nothing in your link corroborates this.

quote:

But in any case, only someone who's only apparent purpose in life is to await opportunity to puke more of his plenitude of such fatuous notions as Eisenhower being a "puppet" of the UK, out of all that, would find objection to anything resembling historical accuracy.

quote:

Wiki
With a change to more conservative governments in both Britain and the United States, Churchill and the U.S. Eisenhower administration decided to overthrow Iran's government though the predecessor U.S. Truman administration had opposed a coup.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

But in any case, only someone who's only apparent purpose in life is to await opportunity to puke more of his plenitude of such fatuous notions as Eisenhower being a "puppet" of the UK, out of all that, would find objection to anything resembling historical accuracy.

Laughable stuff Edwynn, just laughable. I never suggested Eisenhower was a puppet of the UK, quite the opposite.

None of your dubious links make it a fact that America acted because the UK asked them too. Your Wiki link even agrees with me !

quote:

Wiki
With a change to more conservative governments in both Britain and the United States, Churchill and the U.S. Eisenhower administration decided to overthrow Iran's government though the predecessor U.S. Truman administration had opposed a coup.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

Tweakable, I am not disputing the UK and US were both involved, just the notion that America were doing this at our request. Nothing in your link corroborates this.

Fair enough PoliteSub. I am unable to recall from memory precisely who asked who to do what to Mossedagh's Govt. Unfortunately I won't be home for another week or so to check the text. I am certain that the British initiated moves to get rid of the democratic Iranian Govt and that the USA become involved after those initial efforts failed to deliver the required results.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

of course, they are all puppets of the uk, accrding to uk law!

we only had one el prazze dante that was NOT british, all the rest were, are and continue to be british!

No surprize the original 13th amendment magically dissapeared, ( but not the proof it existed ), that barred all brits from office in the US.

quote:

quote:

But in any case, only someone who's only apparent purpose in life is to await opportunity to puke more of his plenitude of such fatuous notions as Eisenhower being a "puppet" of the UK, out of all that, would find objection to anything resembling historical accuracy.

Laughable stuff Edwynn, just laughable. I never suggested Eisenhower was a puppet of the UK, quite the opposite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53Anyone who thinks Eisenhower was some British pawn, and not acting in Americas interests needs a head test. The same goes for all the other American involvements during the fifties.

quote:

None of your dubious links make it a fact that America acted because the UK asked them too. Your Wiki link even agrees with me !

quote:

Wiki
With a change to more conservative governments in both Britain and the United States, Churchill and the U.S. Eisenhower administration decided to overthrow Iran's government though the predecessor U.S. Truman administration had opposed a coup.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

of course, they are all puppets of the uk, accrding to uk law!

we only had one el prazze dante that was NOT british, all the rest were, are and continue to be british!

No surprize the original 13th amendment magically dissapeared, ( but not the proof it existed ), that barred all brits from office in the US.

Good to see you bullshit is indeed, still bullshit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I never came up with any such notion,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Anyone who thinks Eisenhower was some British pawn, ...

quote:

anyone able to read can see that.

quote:

The Assertion was the US acted at Britians request, this was never the case [creditable historians and firsthand accounts say otherwise], America acted in Americas own interest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The Assertion was the US acted at Britians request, this was never the case [creditable historians and firsthand accounts say otherwise], America acted in Americas own interest.

There was no such "Assertion" that the US had no potential interests, I merely pointed out how the US became involved in this particular episode. This is far different than saying the US otherwise had no interest in the matter. That's all yours.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The Assertion was the US acted at Britians request, this was never the case [creditable historians and firsthand accounts say otherwise], America acted in Americas own interest.

There was no such "Assertion" that the US had no potential interests, I merely pointed out how the US became involved in this particular episode. This is far different than saying the US otherwise had no interest in the matter. That's all yours.

I don't think that anyone said that Eisenhower was either a pawn or puppet of Britain, [well then I will say it, he was british bloodlines like all the other prazzie dantes and all brits have an obligation to the king] so I agree with your position here. What appears to be more likely is that the U.S. may have been duped, especially if (as your link above suggests) "Britain persuaded US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles that Iran was falling to the Soviets—effectively exploiting the American Cold War mindset."

Part of the problem was really our own fault, though, since our own perceptions of the world were still limited at that point. When the Tehran Conference of 1943 took place, our government had very few people who actually knew much of anything about Iran. We were totally dependent on Britain for any intelligence on Iran or the Middle East in general. They had much more extensive experience in dealing with that area of the world, and one can manipulate perceptions by controlling information.

The only American "interest" involved in any of this had to do with our anti-communist ideological position in the Cold War, which was more of a shared interest with Britain and other Western powers - not something that was exclusively and solely a U.S. interest, which is what certain Brits in this thread are implying. If we really were working solely for our own interests, then it's unlikely that we would have shared any of the spoils of war with them, and our "alliance" with them would have had a analogous to our "alliance" with the Soviet Union during World War II, characterized by wary mistrust and suspicion. But we were obviously closer to Britain as an ally than the Soviet Union, and the reasons were primarily ideological, since Britain was a Western democracy and the USSR was not. The US is crown land

That was my whole point all along, and my proposed solution to our current geopolitical dilemmas was to deemphasize ideology altogether. That, I think, is probably the best way to move forward in today's world, but I can see that the Brits (at least the ones posting here) don't want to hear stuff like that. They'd rather deflect the issue and make it seem like it's all America's fault, as if we're nothing more than a bunch of uncultured, greedy pirates and barbarians out for loot and plunder. And when we call them on that, all they can do is make jokes about Mary Poppins.

I'm not really bashing the Brits here, but sometimes, I think they're just as naive and misguided as far too many Americans are.

But at least I can see some Americans starting to wise up and advocating changing our direction. I don't really see that coming out of Britain these days.

They keep saying that America is more right-wing than they are, but they're the ones who keep coming across as a bunch of pompous, stuffy conservatives, sticking to an ideology just for the sake of sticking to an ideology. It's easier for them to bash America than it is to challenge the sacred cows in their own country, and that's what seems to drive their perceptions and commentary about America's role in the world. Their position is far too one-sided and oversimplified to be taken seriously.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Alright, so what we are saying is that the great powers of Europe, i.e Great Britain, France, Germany, Spain fucked up the planet and screwed indigenous populations over by expanding their empires and turning every second rate country into colonies.

So by my calculations, Spain owes me just over 123 trillion in repatriations for what they did to my Apache Ancestors, Great Britain owes me 12 trillion dollars for what they did to my Cherokee ancestors, and the royal family owes me whatever 320 years of income from my Shelton ancestors would have gotten off their holdings that was taken from them, and then chasing them out of England.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Alright, so what we are saying is that the great powers of Europe, i.e Great Britain, France, Germany, Spain fucked up the planet and screwed indigenous populations over by expanding their empires and turning every second rate country into colonies.

quote:


So by my calculations, Spain owes me just over 123 trillion in repatriations for what they did to my Apache Ancestors, Great Britain owes me 12 trillion dollars for what they did to my Cherokee ancestors, and the royal family owes me whatever 320 years of income from my Shelton ancestors would have gotten off their holdings that was taken from them, and then chasing them out of England.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

LOL. That is asswipe beyond the pale. The revolutionary war was financed almost singlehandedly by Robert Morris. It was a virginian (one Thos Jefferson) who first promulgated the law changing from the English fee tail to fee simple, and banned the law of primogeniture.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Alright, so what we are saying is that the great powers of Europe, i.e Great Britain, France, Germany, Spain fucked up the planet and screwed indigenous populations over by expanding their empires and turning every second rate country into colonies.

Well, we did it, too, but at least we're willing to admit it. I think that many Americans have tried to view their history honestly and come to terms with it. We're not some monolithic one-dimensional entity that so many Europeans try to make us. They view us as some kind of bastard step-child while insinuating that their shit don't stink.

quote:


So by my calculations, Spain owes me just over 123 trillion in repatriations for what they did to my Apache Ancestors, Great Britain owes me 12 trillion dollars for what they did to my Cherokee ancestors, and the royal family owes me whatever 320 years of income from my Shelton ancestors would have gotten off their holdings that was taken from them, and then chasing them out of England.

I live close to Apache country, and even though I'm not Apache myself, I agree with handing this territory back to the Apache and other indigenous peoples of this region. I think they'd do a much better job of running this state than the current bunch of clowns we have in Phoenix right now. And if they get $123 trillion in reparations, then that would be a tremendous boon for the local economy. I'm all for it.