Saudi Arabia to give women the vote and right to run in elections

The revolution in Iran, which is overwhelmingly Shia, "radicalized" the overwhelmingly Sunni Saudi Arabians? How so?
Click to expand...
The Saudis were terrified of an Islamic revolution being exported to their country, never mind that they were Sunni and the Iranians were Shia. An Islamic revolution would see the Saudis off the throne so they began to emphasize Wahabism (which, in a bizzare state of affairs, focuses on both revolution and loyalty to your leaders) with all the baggage that entails.
It wasn't like Saudi Arabia was a particuarly nice place to be before the Iranian Revolution, but the fear generated by that (and Iraq's lingering Pan-Arabism) didn't help liberalize the country.

It doesn't change the obvious fact that the CIA and MI6 helped greatly to topple the legitimate sovereign government of Iran and install a brutal dictator in its place, merely because Mosaddiq didn't feel like being the victims of their imperialism any longer.
Click to expand...
Nobody denies that Operation Ajax took place. The question is what role it played. Mossadeq was already circling the drain managing to piss off every possible avenue of support he had with some rather dictatorial actions. It is hard to know to what degree Operation Ajax got Mossadeq out, but it was useful in getting the Shah in.
Additionaly, despite the brutality of the SAVAK, the Shah was not necesarily bad for Iran as he was rather secular and pushed through quite a bit of land reform (which really annoyed the imams) and extended more rights to women. He was sort of similar to your average aging Baathist dictator in the Middle East at the time. It wasn't like we put a Pol Pot in charge by removing a Gandhi.
 
Small wonder. The Saudis strongly backed the Shah and pledged $25 billion to Hussein to help invade the country during the Iran-Iraq War. They even ramped up oil production to try to weaken Iran's ability to pay for the war.

But I don't think the Saudis were "moving along nicely" towards any sort of improvement in the country. The Saudi royalty have always ruled with an iron fist.

And the importance of the "role" the CIA and MI6 played was revealed when classified documents were finally released in 2000 due to the Freedom of Information Act.

http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html

Written in 1954 by one of the coup's chief planners, the history details how United States and British officials plotted the military coup that returned the shah of Iran to power and toppled Iran's elected prime minister, an ardent nationalist.

The document shows that:

Britain, fearful of Iran's plans to nationalize its oil industry, came up with the idea for the coup in 1952 and pressed the United States to mount a joint operation to remove the prime minister.

The C.I.A. and S.I.S., the British intelligence service, handpicked Gen. Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and covertly funneled $5 million to General Zahedi's regime two days after the coup prevailed.

Iranians working for the C.I.A. and posing as Communists harassed religious leaders and staged the bombing of one cleric's home in a campaign to turn the country's Islamic religious community against Mossadegh's government.

The shah's cowardice nearly killed the C.I.A. operation. Fearful of risking his throne, the Shah repeatedly refused to sign C.I.A.-written royal decrees to change the government. The agency arranged for the shah's twin sister, Princess Ashraf Pahlevi, and Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the father of the Desert Storm commander, to act as intermediaries to try to keep him from wilting under pressure. He still fled the country just before the coup succeeded.
Click to expand...
 
Winner said:
I agree. I hope I'll see the day when Saudi Arabia reverts to a poor desert wasteland, preferably when their oil runs out.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, in the real world, the Saudis have been aware of this problem for some time and have been doing the legwork to solve it. They've launched a number of projects to diversify their economy, including opening up new sectors for investment, routing oil profits into non-oil-based industries, and investing massively in green technology.

On the last point, Saudi Arabia will probably continue to produce energy in the form of solar power even after its oil runs out; it simply won't any longer be at the helm of an energy regime that dwarfs the rest of humanity.

They may still not succeed, but I wouldn't have unshakable confidence in your self-indulgent dreams of social collapse leading to genocide if I were you.
 
Ajidica said:
It is hard to know to what degree Operation Ajax got Mossadeq out, but it was useful in getting the Shah in.
Click to expand...
So you admit that the CIA is responsible for the Shah's reinstatement? Great, because that is all what is needed for the point. Everything else is just chattering to draw attention from the important.
Which is - democratic movement in Iran --> democratic revolution --> new democracy becomes shaky (not without essential "help" from abroad) --> US jumps in and gets the dictator back --> further oppression of freedom bore radicalism.

I advise you to have a look at the movie "Persepolis". It vividly describes political and social conditions in Iran through-out the years.
 
Yes, Ajax was responsible for getting the Shah back in. However, Mossadeq was already on the way out because of his rather dictatorial moves against his supporters. The situation was not as simple as "America overthrows democratic anti-Imperialist to install undemocratic imperialist lapdog".
Also, it is highly unlikely that after Mossadeq was overthrown by popular opinion there would be another democrat in Iran. More then likely it would either be a military government or a collapsed government. The Anglo-American operation was to ensure that our prefered autocrat got in control, rather then some other autocrat.
 
asbestos said:
They may still not succeed, but I wouldn't have unshakable confidence in your self-indulgent dreams of social collapse leading to genocide if I were you.
Click to expand...

Genocide? By whom? Extinction caused by internal collapse without foreign interference has nothing to do with a pre-meditated genocide.

Saudi population is totally unsustainable - 25+ million people living literally in a desert where historically only fewer than a million people could survive. This sand castle exists only because of the influx of money from oil. There is nothing else there of any value. The regime is a typical Middle Eastern corrupt kleptocracy that will ensure nothing will be left to sustain the country once the oil is gone.

And I hope I'll be there to watch how that country goes down.
 
Winner said:
Genocide? By whom? Extinction caused by internal collapse without foreign interference has nothing to do with a pre-meditated genocide.

Saudi population is totally unsustainable - 25+ million people living literally in a desert where historically only fewer than a million people could survive. This sand castle exists only because of the influx of money from oil. There is nothing else there of any value. The regime is a typical Middle Eastern corrupt kleptocracy that will ensure nothing will be left to sustain the country once the oil is gone.

And I hope I'll be there to watch how that country goes down.
Click to expand...
I don't have high hopes for the future of Saudi Arabia either, but have you considered how 20 million Saudi immigrants/refugees will fit into Europe?
 
I'm more worried by Winners apparent delight at seeing the catastrophe resulting from a collapse of a country and the suffering among the people that will result.
 
Cheetah said:
I don't have high hopes for the future of Saudi Arabia either, but have you considered how 20 million Saudi immigrants/refugees will fit into Europe?
Click to expand...

They won't, because they'll never get here. They can try other Muslim countries, I am sure they'll be delighted to take in 20 million people whose only skill is to be unemployed and receive a monthly rent from the state...

(On the other hand, the people who actually do all the work in SA - foreigners - will just return to their home countries.)
 
A lot of Saudis are at least university educated. It is interesting how much the society changed after oil was developed. Some of the Saudis I know, their parents were completely illiterate or learned how to read as adults and many older Saudis don't know the year they were born in and therefore have no idea how old they are.
 
The USA delivered on its part of the deal to kill Osama rather than capture him and have him reveal embarassing facts about support from Saudi princes at his trial, so the Saudi government have honoured their part in making a step towards women' rights.

And no doubt Hilary Clinton has explained that if they don't, Osama's computer record of funding might end up on Wiki-Leaks.
 
Winner said:
They won't, because they'll never get here. They can try other Muslim countries, I am sure they'll be delighted to take in 20 million people whose only skill is to be unemployed and receive a monthly rent from the state...

(On the other hand, the people who actually do all the work in SA - foreigners - will just return to their home countries.)
Click to expand...

I've pretty sure a Saudi civilizational collapse would negatively impact the whole world. They're not going to go meekly to their doom.
 
El_Machinae said:
I've pretty sure a Saudi civilizational collapse would negatively impact the whole world. They're not going to go meekly to their doom.
Click to expand...

The Middle East, Africa, India, and other parts of the world will collapse in any case. In the end, the demise of Saudi Arabia will be like a grain of sand in a desert, so to speak. It's just I am going to wait for it and enjoy it unapologetically, because unlike most other places, Saudi Arabia deserves to collapse.
 
@Ajidica

Yes, you don't have a story of white knights and black nights, but that doesn't make the US-role more justifiable. The democracy was unstable and the country's future uncertain. That is no excuse for installing the old dictator who just had been tossed with public support and for whom the public had no desire to be returned. It in deed means to spit on democracy and the sovereignty of a nation, for the sake of power over said nation. A power used to betray this nation of its greatest treasure - oil.
That is sort of like trying to defend Italy for joining the Axis because war was going to break out anyway... No it is actually worse, because in this case we have certainty, while in the case of Iran we have little to none regarding it's alternate future.
 
I'm not defending the Anglo-American intervention in Iran, I think it was a really bad idea both morally and politicaly. That said, it is better to criticize something factualy then with lies.
 
Could we stop moaning about things America did 50 years ago or does someone have another dead horse? And why do I keep getting Iranian advertisements in the upper right hand corner?
 
The reason you have to keep mentioning it is that a whole new generation is ready to make the same mistakes in Iran yet again. This is why you study history because it is always relevant.
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Zardnaar
Who To Vote For?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
2K
Zardnaar
Zardnaar
Crezth
  • Locked
Why Should the security of Ukraine cause the U.S. government to shut down?
4 5 6
Replies
101
Views
5K
Birdjaguar
Birdjaguar
Askthepizzaguy
[RD] The threat to American Democracy
15 16 17
Replies
328
Views
16K
Sommerswerd
Sommerswerd
Aiken_Drumn
Israel heading to polls as coalition moves to dissolve parliament
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
r16
r16
Zardnaar
  • Locked
Why the Left Doesn't Need to Be Woke
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
4K
Arakhor
Arakhor
Top Bottom