Nuclear deal reached with Iran!

If anything, Israel certainly didn't see them as an "ally". They saw it as a way to destroy two countries they perceived as being enemies by having them fight each other for as long as possible. That is if you believe the reports that apparently came from one person alleging this "secret" support they provided to Iran.

Yitzak Rabin saw Iran as a potential geostrategic partner, as did Ariel Sharon. You can find this for yourself.

And trying to blame Jimmy Carter for what eventually had to occur in Iran due to completely inept US foreign policy decisions for decades is beyond absurd. You might was well try to blame him for the weather or the global economy.

I did not blame Jimmy Carter for everything. Indeed, I already made clear that I agreed with you that US mishandling of Iran went back to operation Ajax.

Jimmy Carter was an oddity in American politics. He became president because he was the candidate who was the furthest removed from either political party due to fallout from Watergate. As a result, he had virtually no political power at all. But he has subsequently become the scapegoat of many Republicans for just about anything that went wrong during the late 70s through the 80s.

Jimmy Carter is ranked fairly low in most academic presidential rankings, both conservative and liberal. While this itself does not prove he was a terrible president, it does make quick work of your assertion that Jimmy Carter was just a Republican scapegoat.
 
The deal ends in 6 months so, as things stand, Iran has agreed to only temporarily halt enrichment beyond 5%.

Yeah. Of course the fact that the U.S. simply unfroze assets that were rightfully Iranian to begin with makes it less generous than it would have been otherwise... I wouldn't trust the Iranian government for anything, but I still think we (the U.S.) aren't going about this the right way...

Iran interests run counter to the United States. And they cause massive chaos.

lol_wut.jpg


Many countries refuse to have diplomatic relations with Israel and many other countries as well. That is hardly any issue at all. Besides, what diplomatic efforts has Israel made in this regard?

And, again, the Israeli government wishes to overthrow the Iranian government, just as the Iranians do with Israel.

When did they say this?
Who would have possibly guessed that actual diplomacy has a place in the region after all, despite the saber rattling ever since Iran took back control of their own government from the US?
The C.I.A definitely made a mistake, to say the least in helping overthrow the shah, but they definitely don't own the post 1979 government now, nor have they ever.

And what proof do you offer that they tried to be "friendly" with Iran while the US government was supporting Iraq during the very same war?

Form actually has a valid point with this one. The U.S. had no business in that war.

Again, what utter nonsense. Even Ahmadinejad made it quite clear that he thinks Israel should exist, but as a country which accepts all its citizens as equals and who can live together in harmony, including the Jews. How abominable can you possibly get?

So? The K.K.K. pretends to not be a hate organization. The B.N.P. insists they aren't really a racist party. The general pattern makes the truth obvious though, doesn't it?
 
I have looked everywhere and found no hard examples of pro-Zionism being a death penalty in Iran as official government policy.

I was wrong and I apologize.

I just want to say that this post restored my faith in humanity a little. It's very hard to find someone brave enough to admit when they're wrong after a debate (not that I had any part in it).:goodjob:
 
Jimmy Carter is ranked fairly low in most academic presidential rankings, both conservative and liberal.
What in the world is an "academic presidential ranking"? And how could it possibly have anything at all to do with what was being discussed?

While this itself does not prove he was a terrible president, it does make quick work of your assertion that Jimmy Carter was just a Republican scapegoat.
The two are completely unrelated, even though the notion that he was a "terrible president" is patently absurd.

If Jimmy Carter had no effective political power how could he possibly be blamed for what transpired? The same thing would have occurred in Iran if Ronald Reagan had been president. It was the acts of the Shah which finally caused the revolution to occur.
 
Yeah. Of course the fact that the U.S. simply unfroze assets that were rightfully Iranian to begin with makes it less generous than it would have been otherwise... I wouldn't trust the Iranian government for anything, but I still think we (the U.S.) aren't going about this the right way...

So? Property rights don't mean much in international relations. You might as well argue that giving people tax relief isn't really so generous because it was their money to begin with.



Here's a brief summary (he's not that good at English, so don't judge on account of the overuse of bolding or the spelling errors).

Form actually has a valid point with this one. The U.S. had no business in that war.

They did it in order to stop one power from dominating the Persian Gulf. My understanding is that they deliberately kept the pot boiling in order to keep either side from winning.

So? The K.K.K. pretends to not be a hate organization. The B.N.P. insists they aren't really a racist party. The general pattern makes the truth obvious though, doesn't it?

Ahmadinejad doesn't think that Israel should exist. He thinks that one "Palestine" should exist (with, of course, a substantial Arab majority). Anyway, it's really irrelevant, given that most of the rhetoric done for the Palestinians is politically motivated. Anyone who wants influence in the Arab world does it.
 
Back
Top Bottom