History of Iran

[☭proletarian☭]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy3KDYE5KQE]YouTube - History of Iran- (a must see for any Ron Paul Supporter) WW3 Russia[/ame]

Just found this.

thoughts?

 

[Sunni Man]

An excellent video that basically covers U.S. and Israeli involvement in Iran's internal affairs over the last 60 years.

 

[AkronGuy]

And for how many millenia did they involve themselves in other countries ?

 

[Sunni Man]

And for how many millenia did they involve themselves in other countries ?

Iran has not attacked anyone in 300 years.

 

[AkronGuy]

And the couple millenia before that ?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

And for how many millenia did they involve themselves in other countries ?

Well, that was a stupid comment.

 

[AkronGuy]

And for how many millenia did they involve themselves in other countries ?

Well, that was a stupid comment.

How is it stupid ? It's true. The Persian people have brutally oppressed it's neighbors for millenia and for the last few centuries they're getting a taste of their own medicine.

 

[Sunni Man]

And for how many millenia did they involve themselves in other countries ?

Well, that was a stupid comment.

How is it stupid ? It's true. The Persian people have brutally oppressed it's neighbors for millenia and for the last few centuries they're getting a taste of their own medicine.

So during this milenia you are refering to.

When did Iran oppress the United States, modern Israel, or the U.K ?

 

[AkronGuy]

Well, that was a stupid comment.

How is it stupid ? It's true. The Persian people have brutally oppressed it's neighbors for millenia and for the last few centuries they're getting a taste of their own medicine.

So during this milenia you are refering to.

When did Iran oppress the United States, modern Israel, or the U.K ?

The United States didn't exist, nor did modern Israel and the UK either.

But they sure had no problem attempting to destroy Western civilization though.

But all hail Alexander the Great !

 

[eagleseven]

And for how many millenia did they involve themselves in other countries ?

Iran has not attacked anyone in 300 years.

Incorrect.

Nader Shah, who ruled Iran from 1736–47, conquered parts of Pakistan, Turkey, and Iraq. He started the Afsharid Dynasty, which ruled until 1750. They were replaced by the short-lived Zand dynasty.

The Zand Dynasty gave way to another monarchy, the Qajar dynasty, which ruled from 1794-1925. During this period, the Persian Empire conquered territory from the Mughal Empire in Pakistan, but lost territory to the Russians.

In 1925, the Qajar dynasty was overthrown by Reza Khan, the father of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Reza Khan was overthrown by the USSR in World War II.

In 1951, Mossadegh was elected prime minister. In 1953 (where the video conveniently starts), Mossadegh was overthrown by Reza Pahlavi, son of the old monarch, in a US-sponosred coup.


As you can see, Iran has a very violent history. The myth of a "peaceful Iran" dies here.

 

[eagleseven]

Which brings me to 1979, when the pro-US Pahlavi Dynasty (aka the shah) was overthrown by Khomeini...

We should have supported the Shah against Khomeini when we had the chance. Carter was a fool.

 

[Dr Grump]

Nader Shah, who ruled Iran from 1736–47, conquered parts of Pakistan, Turkey, and Iraq. He started the Afsharid Dynasty, which ruled until 1750. They were replaced by the short-lived Zand dynasty.



In 1925, the Qajar dynasty was overthrown by Reza Khan, the father of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Reza Khan was overthrown by the USSR in World War II.

In 1951, Mossadegh was elected prime minister. In 1953 (where the video conveniently starts), Mossadegh was overthrown by Reza Pahlavi, son of the old monarch, in a US-sponosred coup.


As you can see, Iran has a very violent history. The myth of a "peaceful Iran" dies here.

There was no Pakistan, Iraq or modern Turkey in 1736.
The other two were internal conflicts...

Why should the US have backed a dictator?

 

[enigmablue]

I watched the video presentation, and while my knowledge of the Middle East is at best spotty, the presenter expresses concern about the guilt and responsibility of America in Iran and elsewhere. It's about how this needs to be owned and then positive outcomes created. Positive outcomes for the people in Iran - putting their welfare foremost in the light of what America significantly contributed to in destroying their lives. Do I have this wrong?

 

[eagleseven]

There was no Pakistan, Iraq or modern Turkey in 1736.

But there was an Ottoman Empire, Russian Empire, and Mughal Empire. The Persians fought them all.

Why should the US have backed a dictator?

Because Mohammad Mosaddegh stole the British oil wells.

 

[eagleseven]

I watched the video presentation, and while my knowledge of the Middle East is at best spotty, the presenter expresses concern about the guilt and responsibility of America in Iran and elsewhere. It's about how this needs to be owned and then positive outcomes created. Positive outcomes for the people in Iran - putting their welfare foremost in the light of what America significantly contributed to in destroying their lives. Do I have this wrong?

It depends upon your perspective.

The monarchy we supported ruled Iran for roughly 30 years before we supported them. Most Iranians, at the time, grew up under his rule.

Further, the video says that the Prime Minister we overthrew "Nationalized" the oil wells. What does that mean? It means that the oil wells that the British built were stolen by the Iranians, by force.

If you were to lend me your laptop, and I nationalized (stole) it, would you call the cops? That's what the British did...by calling the US.

 

[Charles Stucker]

And for how many millenia did they involve themselves in other countries ?

Iran has not attacked anyone in 300 years.

A couple of Facts
1739 Nader Shah (or Persia/Iran) invades India and sacks Delhi
1779 starts era of bloody civil wars in Iran
1803 - 1828 wars against Russia, started by Iran attacking.
1856 - War against England

So it seems Iran was not so peaceful as you believe.

 

[enigmablue]

So eagleseven, you say that America's actions and intent in Iran has been, and remains, justifiable? It's not a matter of conscience? I seem to be hearing all this quibbling about just cause and it's a bit thin on the ground, in my eyes. To put it simplistically, either America ought to have stayed out [hypothetical now], or balanced their interest with the nationals' instead of forwarding their own? Having done neither, what's justifiable in the eyes of the American public and other's around the globe?

 

[editec]

Persia became a power about 2600 years ago when Cyrus II overthrew the Medes.

Thinking that the people who stood down the Romans for nearly 1000 years are some kind of backward people who are easily intimidated by the West is a huge miscalculation.

I went to college with enough of the Shah relatives to understand that those people are no less sophisticated than we are, that's for damned sure.

 

[Kalam]

Further, the video says that the Prime Minister we overthrew "Nationalized" the oil wells. What does that mean? It means that the oil wells that the British built were stolen by the Iranians, by force.

Nothing can be unjustly "stolen" from an imperial power.

If you were to lend me your laptop, and I nationalized (stole) it, would you call the cops? That's what the British did...by calling the US.

If you stole a toy from me that I had taken earlier, what would you think if I went crying to daddy to beat you up? I think that would make me a bit of a pussy.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Further, the video says that the Prime Minister we overthrew "Nationalized" the oil wells. What does that mean? It means that the oil wells that the British built were stolen by the Iranians, by force.

Nothing can be unjustly "stolen" from an imperial power.

IN this case the Wells were nationalized WITH COMPENSATION
The Iranian government paid for the wells because they believed (probably rightly) that British Oil was cheating them on their original agreement.
Things can be "unjustly" stolen from "Imperial powers" but in this case it was not theft. The entire action was done in accordance with international law.