Is it time to end the U.S. embargo of Cuba?

[Dachs]

He could equally be referring to Mohammad Mossadeq, a decidedly contrary character to the present regime.

Formaldehyde does love to pull out the specter of Musaddiq without actually understanding that he doesn't work too well as a champion of democracy and self-determination in the face of Western imperialism.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I am Iranian from my dad's side, and what I think you are referring to is the Shah. The Shah had his flaws, but wasn't near as evil as the current regime of Iran.

Right. Of course not. At least to all those he wasn't exploiting, like nearly everybody but the rich and powerful. And let's not forget about the SAVAK which were trained in torture tactics by the CIA.


Link to video.

 

[caketastydelish]

Right. Of course not. At least to all those he wasn't exploiting, like nearly everybody but the rich and powerful. And let's not forget about the Savak.


Link to video.

The current regime is also very violent against its own people. Do I even need to prove links for proof?

And at least women were not forced to wear Burkas. In general, the Shah gave women more rights.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Formaldehyde does love to pull out the specter of Musaddiq without actually understanding that he doesn't work too well as a champion of democracy and self-determination in the face of Western imperialism.

Perhaps not, seeing as his removal followed so quickly his rise to prominence. However, it would be an equal mistake to assume that the 1979 revolution was grounded in considerably different motives from 1951. The coalescence of the various groups around the Khomeini and the radical anti-American element was more the result of the US Embassy situation than it was some national anti-Western movement masterminded against the Shah by the Ayatollah, which seems to be how the event is regarded in American minds. So the Islamic Republic might not be the liberal champion that replaced the Shah, but the movement that undid him, for the most part, was, as was the movement which undid him a generation afore.

And at least women were not forced to wear Burkas. In general, the Shah gave women more rights.

Do you know what a burka is?

 

[Formaldehyde]

No country likes to be the victims of imperialism and hegemony, even when the chosen puppet ruler is their own supposed king. Under the Shah, the British petroleum profit was twice as much as the amount that Iran received from their own oil.

But the biggest mistake the Shah made was thinking that he was a popular ruler when he was anything but. His greatest mistake was not acting the part of the tyrannical ruler which the US and the UK originally cast him to be. When Jimmy Carter insisted he bring basic human rights to his own people, his own downfall was eventually assured.

 

[Takhisis]

Don´t forget Iraq, China, Russia, etc.

The US has no history of refusing to trade with Communist or dictatorial regime. Indeed, as the latter concerns, US foreign policy has generally been in favour of imposing dictatorial regimes.

C'mon, USA#1 can't have done such things.

Perhaps not, seeing as his removal followed so quickly his rise to prominence. However, it would be an equal mistake to assume that the 1979 revolution was grounded in considerably different motives from 1951. The coalescence of the various groups around the Khomeini and the radical anti-American element was more the result of the US Embassy situation than it was some national anti-Western movement masterminded against the Shah by the Ayatollah, which seems to be how the event is regarded in American minds. So the Islamic Republic might not be the liberal champion that replaced the Shah, but the movement that undid him, for the most part, was, as was the movement which undid him a generation afore.

The Shah had to go, one way or another. The US simply never noticed in time.