R.I.P. Ariel Sharon (a tribute thread)

[Senethro]

Shame on them for forcing the Arabs on the Palestinians. http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/i-was-wrong-there-really-are.html#disqus_thread

Wow what a great link. An attempt to sweep Israeli ethnic cleansing policies under the carpet by redefining the term Palestinian. After all, a nameless people can't possibly belong anywhere!

 

[Masada]

Another way of saying it would be that the Parliament granted him emergency powers to try to deal with the economic boycott and prevent the upcoming coup.

Here's what happened. Mosaddegh stopped counting votes when he had a quorum in Parliament which disenfranchised rural voters whose votes took longer to count. The sole purpose of this was to stop the Royalists winning the election and ousting him via democratic means. Tensions then ratcheted up during his period of emergency rule which he bullied out of a hostile Parliament through extra-parliamentary activities e.g. strikes. For a lot of Royalists a coup became attractive precisely because Mosaddegh had made it clear that they could never win an election. All of which can be traced back to his electoral and parliamentary coups in 1952. Dude only liked democracy when he manipulate the results in his favor.

 

[Formaldehyde]

What makes you think I'm not familiar with the basic history?

The Parliament voting incident occurred long before he started losing support from the vast majority of people. It is really just used as a rationalization to try to justify the economic sanctions and eventual foreign-backed military coup.

You can also hardly show that there was any tangible "bullying" by Mossadeq specifically, instead of pressure from various groups due to the economic sanctions. The public had long ago lost favor with the Royalists who wished to restore it to its former corrupt state, and had had grown tired of being exploited by both them and foreign corporations.

There was much propaganda which was specifically developed to try to spin this incredible foreign policy blunder by both the US and UK governments, all because a few corporations were finally kicked out where they didn't belong in the first place while being fed by fear and paranoia that the Soviets would somehow control the oil instead. When the details about the CIA and MI6 led coup were finally released, there were a number of prominent historians and others who had to beat a hasty retreat from their previous rationalizations. But some of it still exists.

The US and UK governments created the current mess by meddling in affairs which were none of their affairs. Trying to claim that Mossadeq was some sort of nefarious hypocritical mastermind, instead of someone who was merely trying to do what he thought was best for the country, is disingenuous at best.

 

[classical_hero]

Wow what a great link. An attempt to sweep Israeli ethnic cleansing policies under the carpet by redefining the term Palestinian. After all, a nameless people can't possibly belong anywhere!

Obviously Sarcasm escapes you. The point is that the native people's of the area has always been the Jews, not the Arabs.

 

[Winston Hughes]

Then I'm sure you will have no problem providing substantial support of these allegations from reliable sources, instead of using the same argument some conservatives use to label "anti-racists" as racists.

Your supposedly reliable "rule of thumb" is also conflating racism with prejudice. You can have preconceived notions about others without feeling superior to them. I also don't remember anybody claiming to be totally free from any prejudice. Do you?

My word, but that's a weasely post. I mean, there's nothing there but misdirection. You make no attempt whatsoever to engage with my argument. Please stop wasting my time with this drivel.

 

[Masada]

The Parliament voting incident occurred long before he started losing support from the vast majority of people. It is really just used as a rationalization to try to justify the economic sanctions and eventual foreign-backed military coup.

No, it isn't and obviously so. If it was, Mosaddegh would have won the election. Instead, he lost an election he had rigged in his favor. The National Front garnered just under 40% of the seats available. His response to losing was to suspend future elections (because obviously he couldn't win them) and ask a hostile Parliament to allow him to rule by decree.

You can also hardly show that there was any tangible "bullying" by Mossadeq specifically, instead of pressure from various groups due to the economic sanctions.

He made a speech on Radio Tehran just after his resignation where he asked people to take to the streets. The National Front also made a number of calls asking people to take the streets.

It's also nonsense to claim 30 Tir was a spontaneous response to the sanctions. It wasn't and was quite obviously an attempt to get Mossadeq back in power. It was also amusingly something Mossadeq instigated as a means of working around a hostile Parliament.

Basically, he claimed that he should, as Premier, have the right to appoint the war minister and by extension have control over the military. When the Shah and Royalist deputies rebuffed that, he quit and used his urban base to force the two into acceding to his wishes.

The public had long ago lost favor with the Royalists who wished to restore it to its former corrupt state, and had had grown tired of being exploited by both them and foreign corporations.

And yet they won his rigged election...

There was much propaganda which was specifically developed to try to spin this incredible foreign policy blunder by both the US and UK governments, all because a few corporations were finally kicked out where they didn't belong in the first place while being fed by fear and paranoia that the Soviets would somehow control the oil instead. When the details about the CIA and MI6 led coup were finally released, there were a number of prominent historians and others who had to beat a hasty retreat from their previous rationalizations. But some of it still exists.

You'd have to provide some actual, you know, academic citations to back that up. Because I don't think the consensus was ever quite as simple "Mossadeq did it all!"

The US and UK governments created the current mess by meddling in affairs which were none of their affairs. Trying to claim that Mossadeq was some sort of nefarious hypocritical mastermind, instead of someone who was merely trying to do what he thought was best for the country, is disingenuous at best.

Sure, they certainly didn't help matters and arguably precipitated the crisis. I happen to agree that Mossadeq's decision to nationalize the oil industry was the right one. What I dislike though is the claim that he was a democrat. He wasn't and obviously so after 1952. Dude literally ruled by decree after 30 Tir until his murder.

Obviously Sarcasm escapes you. The point is that the native people's of the area has always been the Jews, not the Arabs.

Nope. It was Caanite first (Num 34:1-12).

 

[Traitorfish]

Obviously Sarcasm escapes you. The point is that the native people's of the area has always been the Jews, not the Arabs.

So I take it that you're a member of the Whadjuk people, yes?

 

[Cutlass]

Obviously Sarcasm escapes you. The point is that the native people's of the area has always been the Jews, not the Arabs.

Except, of course, for that 15 centuries or so when someone else lived there, and they did not.

 

[Shaihulud]

He has a girls name

 

[Formaldehyde]

My word, but that's a weasely post. I mean, there's nothing there but misdirection. You make no attempt whatsoever to engage with my argument. Please stop wasting my time with this drivel.

We seem have completely different notions of what constitutes "weasely" posts. Or even if it is a real word for that matter.

And I see you didn't provide any source to support your statements.

No, it isn't and obviously so. If it was, Mosaddegh would have won the election. Instead, he lost an election he had rigged in his favor. The National Front garnered just under 40% of the seats available. His response to losing was to suspend future elections (because obviously he couldn't win them) and ask a hostile Parliament to allow him to rule by decree.

Only it isn't "obvious" at all regarding what really occurred:

According to Ervand Abrahamian: "Realizing that the opposition would take the vast majority of the provincial seats, Mosaddegh stopped the voting as soon as 79 deputies – just enough to form a parliamentary quorum — had been elected."[35] An alternative account is offered by Stephen Kinzer. Beginning in the early 1950s under the guidance of C.M. Woodhouse, chief of the British intelligence station in Tehran, Britain's covert operations network had funneled roughly £10,000 per month to the Rashidian brothers (two of Iran's most influential royalists) in the hope of buying off, according to CIA estimates, "the armed forces, the Majlis (Iranian parliament), religious leaders, the press, street gangs, politicians and other influential figures".[36] Thus, in his statement asserting electoral manipulation by "foreign agents", Mosaddegh suspended the elections. His National Front party had made up 30 of the 79 deputies elected. Yet none of those present vetoed the statement, and the elections were postponed indefinitely. The 17th Majlis convened on February 1952.

The National Front didn't even have a majority, yet the Parliament still decided to cancel the elections.

Again, this was hardly the work of one man.

He made a speech on Radio Tehran just after his resignation where he asked people to take to the streets. The National Front also made a number of calls asking people to take the streets.

What does that have to do with anything? Don't you think the people in a democracy can protest?

It's also nonsense to claim 30 Tir was a spontaneous response to the sanctions. It wasn't and was quite obviously an attempt to get Mossadeq back in power. It was also amusingly something Mossadeq instigated as a means of working around a hostile Parliament.

Mossaddegh apparently resigned because the Shah refused to provide the Parliament with the real control of the country.

On 16 July 1952, during the royal approval of his new cabinet, Mosaddegh insisted on the constitutional prerogative of the Prime Minister to name a Minister of War and the Chief of Staff, something the Shah had done up to that point. The Shah refused, and Mosaddegh announced his resignation appealing directly to the public for support, pronouncing that "in the present situation, the struggle started by the Iranian people cannot be brought to a victorious conclusion".[37]

Basically, he claimed that he should, as Premier, have the right to appoint the war minister and by extension have control over the military. When the Shah and Royalist deputies rebuffed that, he quit and used his urban base to force the two into acceding to his wishes.

Do you find anything wrong with that? Don't you think Mosadegh and many others were quite reasonable in trying to wrest military control from the Shah and the Royalists, especially given what eventually occurred?

You'd have to provide some actual, you know, academic citations to back that up. Because I don't think the consensus was ever quite as simple "Mossadeq did it all!"

Yet that is apparently what you are arguing here. Mossaddegh has the approval of the Parliament, and apparently the vast majority of the people, for all of his actions.

Sure, they certainly didn't help matters and arguably precipitated the crisis. I happen to agree that Mossadeq's decision to nationalize the oil industry was the right one. What I dislike though is the claim that he was a democrat. He wasn't and obviously so after 1952. Dude literally ruled by decree after 30 Tir until his murder.

"Dude" was trying to save his own country from the royalists and the foreign exploiters. As it turned out, he had more than sufficient reason to fear that they would overthrow the legitimate sovereign (and reasonably democratic) government. Now didn't he?

Mossadegh didn't seize power to do this. The Parliament voted to give him emergency powers.

More popular than ever, a greatly strengthened Mosaddegh convinced parliament to grant him emergency powers for six months to "decree any law he felt necessary for obtaining not only financial solvency, but also electoral, judicial, and educational reforms".[41] Majlis deputies elected Ayatollah Abol-Ghasem Kashani as House Speaker. Kashani's Islamic scholars, as well as the Tudeh Party, proved to be two of Mosaddegh's key political allies, although relations with both were often strained.

With his emergency powers, Mosaddegh tried to strengthen the democratic political institutions by limiting the monarchy's powers,[42] cutting the Shah's personal budget, forbidding him to communicate directly with foreign diplomats, transferring royal lands back to the state and expelling his politically active sister Ashraf Pahlavi.[40]

Again, the reason he and the Parliament did so should now be quite clear given what occurred.

 

[classical_hero]

Nope. It was Caanite first (Num 34:1-12).

Whom God judged for their gross sinful behaviour.

Except, of course, for that 15 centuries or so when someone else lived there, and they did not.

There has always been a continual presence of Jews in the land, even if they were a minority. There has always been an affinity for the land even when the majority of Jews weren't in the land and many trekked hard to at least die in the land of their forefathers.

 

[Traitorfish]

Do you not imagine that the Palestinians also have an "affinity" with the region?

 

[Zack]

Whom God judged for their gross sinful behaviour.

Well the Jews crucified Jesus. What's as sinful as that?

 

[Senethro]

Classical Hero, do you spend as much time or concern about how Australia should be returned to the Aborigines?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Indeed.

I wonder when the same will be true with Australia, Africa, and the Americas. When will all those of European ancestry finally return to their original homelands?

 

[useless]

C_H you never answered my question in some other Israel Vs Palestine thread; when will you be giving up your home/land for the original peoples who lived in Australia; the Aborigines? Or do you think that's a stupid question? If so, please tell us why it isn't when applied to Jews going "back" to Israel.

 

[Senethro]

I thought ignoring questions so that he doesn't have to examine his own beliefs was his main deal?

 

[JollyRoger]

Moved to non-RD thread.

 

[timtofly]

Well the Jews crucified Jesus. What's as sinful as that?

That was God working through the Jews, and Romans, and Jesus. They were all obeying God's will. There was no sin involved, yet humans seem to view everything they feel is sin as a sin. Breaking the law is not as much of a sin to God as it is to humans themselves. Why do you think that capital punishment gets a bad rap?

 

[Cutlass]

There has always been a continual presence of Jews in the land, even if they were a minority. There has always been an affinity for the land even when the majority of Jews weren't in the land and many trekked hard to at least die in the land of their forefathers.

So all of Australia should be given back to the Aborigines?