The West Shouldn't Allow Georgia To Be A Sacrificial Lamb For Russia

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I believe Shah was more of a ceremonial title at the time, much like the Queen of England.

 

[DiveCon]

I believe Shah was more of a ceremonial title at the time, much like the Queen of England.

if so, how did he already had the authority to dismiss the PM?
the PM that had already completed his term and was refusing to step down
HMMMMMM

 

[Dr Grump]

yeah, we did Iraq alone :eyeroll:

You practically did. The Brits were there for a while, but it cost the Labour Party a lot of MPs being kicked out of parliament.

 

[Dr Grump]

I believe Shah was more of a ceremonial title at the time, much like the Queen of England.

No, he was an autocrat and had absolute rule (with the help of the army and secret police)

 

[DiveCon]

You practically did. The Brits were there for a while, but it cost the Labour Party a lot of MPs being kicked out of parliament.

yeah, the brits helps a little, and just forget about those 29 other countries


:eyeroll:

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yes, he had absolute rule after the CIA removed an elected government for him.

 

[Dr Grump]

yeah, the brits helps a little, and just forget about those 29 other countries


:eyeroll:

Yeah, like that great fighting nation Albania...and let's not forget the Estonians. Now, take out all those countries that were only doing it to curry favour with the US, and how many do you think REALLY gave a stuff about Iraq?

 

[DiveCon]

Yes, he had absolute rule after the CIA removed an elected government for him.

WRONG
the CIA only advised the Shah to do what he already had the power to do
we didnt remove ANYONE

 

[Dr Grump]

Who cares, the Shah was an arsehole...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

WRONG
the CIA only advised the Shah to do what he already had the power to do
we didnt remove ANYONE

Did you not check out the link I posted? It's been proven that America and Britain put the Shah back in power.

 

[DiveCon]

Did you not check out the link I posted? It's been proven that America and Britain put the Shah back in power.

no it didnt
the shah was ALREADY IN POWER
:wall:

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So their elected government that was removed in 1953 was a myth?

 

[DiveCon]

So their elected government that was removed in 1953 was a myth?

the only thing that was removed was the PM

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

An elected Prime Minister was removed by the United States and Great Britain, and in his place was put a military dictator, the Shah. This was done because the Prime Minister wanted to nationalize Iranian oil, which posed a problem for Great Britain.

Mohammed Mosaddeq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[DiveCon]

An elected Prime Minister was removed by the United States and Great Britain, and in his place was put a military dictator, the Shah. This was done because the Prime Minister wanted to nationalize Iranian oil, which posed a problem for Great Britain.

Mohammed Mosaddeq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

incorrect


and did you notice the warning at the top of that wiki page?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

incorrect


and did you notice the warning at the top of that wiki page?

Please feel free to go into detail about what actually happened then. As far as I can tell the story goes as follows:

The Prime Minister nationalized the Iranian oil industry which Great Britain had owned previously. The Shah fled the country after asking the PM to leave his position and the PM refused. Great Britain and America remove the Prime Minister, and the Shah is returned to power. The Prime Minister was an elected official, whereas the Shah was royalty and became a military dictator.

As I said, feel free to correct any mistakes.

 

[DiveCon]

Please feel free to go into detail about what actually happened then. As far as I can tell the story goes as follows:

The Prime Minister nationalized the Iranian oil industry which Great Britain had owned previously. The Shah fled the country after asking the PM to leave his position and the PM refused. Great Britain and America remove the Prime Minister, and the Shah is returned to power. The Prime Minister was an elected official, whereas the Shah was royalty and became a military dictator.

As I said, feel free to correct any mistakes.

why dont you try reading the actual "operation Ajax" document

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Everything I'm reading continually backs up everything I said, other than my false assumption that at any point was the Shah simply a "ceremonial" position.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

As Pat Buchanan has said, Georgia started it, Russia finished it. People have the right to alter or abolish their governments. We shouldn't be supporting either side of course.

 

[mightypeon]

yeah, the brits helps a little, and just forget about those 29 other countries


:eyeroll:

Like Micronesia, Palau, Eritrea and Albania?
Although there were some decent minor powers like f.e. Denmark or Poland, and some actual entitiys like Japan and Great Britain, a significant amount of the coalition does not even have an army. It would have been nice if all those tiny-island states would give free accomodation for Irak Vets, they have really nice beaches.