Has Trump just started WW3?

[Mike Sales]

The West has been appeasing Iran for many years; it is a pretty vicious theocracy which has sponsored no end of terrorist groups and would happily wipe Israel off the map. The West has a confused policy in the Middle East and a poor record but there is no doubt the overall problem is that after 50 years or more of independence nearly none of these countries are even close to achieving democracy, and as the saying goes, democracies don't go to war against each other.

Er... The USA (with British support) overthrew the last democratic government in Iran https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/30/th ... ic-leader/

How shall they achieve democracy, then? (cross-posted with Mike Sales)

Very true. Hence the word 'poor'. But that overthrow was in 1953 and the Shah was deposed in 1979. A theocracy was installed and on the domestic front there has been essentially no change since that time. The regime is very repressive and happily hangs gay men and political opponents. Its military has an all-pervading influence, is also corrupt and prosecutes Iran's foreign strategy through terrorism.

A significant number of people on this forum like to berate Americans for their belief in 'my country right or wrong', their apparent naif religious fervour and their reliance on a strong military. Iran does all that and more.

Consider that since 1953 (and often closer to 1979) the following countries have rid themselves of dictatorships for democracy: South Korea, Portugal, Spain, Brazil, Argentina... plus other countries in South America and Europe. Somehow Iran can't and it's symptomatic of the Middle East. Yes, there have been external influences and intrigues; but as many in-depth studies of the region show - the main problem has been their own rulers who have no interest in promulgating a fairer, better government.

I'm afraid you will find that our meddling in Iranian and middle Eastern affairs did not end with the Mossadegh coup.
It was discussed in the US senate.

American support for Ba'athist Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War, in which it fought against post-revolutionary Iran, included several billion dollars' worth of economic aid, the sale of dual-use technology, non-U.S. origin weaponry, military intelligence, and special operations training.

It has been a constant since (and before). This has tended to unify the Iranian people behind their leaders, even when they are not keen on theocrats. This assassination is having the same effect.
The countries you mention are not oil producers, so maybe that is why they get less US. attention.
Unlike Iraq and Iran, amongst others.
Saudi Arabia has taken a different course, using its oil to maintain its nasty regime with the help of the west

[dim]

watch this old video from 2018:

[youtube]HnMv_V30wX0[/youtube]

there's more but thats enough for now ... if you understand what the guy is saying, you are on the right track

[Vorpal]

Very true. Hence the word 'poor'. But that overthrow was in 1953 and the Shah was deposed in 1979. A theocracy was installed and on the domestic front there has been essentially no change since that time. The regime is very repressive and happily hangs gay men and political opponents. Its military has an all-pervading influence, is also corrupt and prosecutes Iran's foreign strategy through terrorism.

A significant number of people on this forum like to berate Americans for their belief in 'my country right or wrong', their apparent naif religious fervour and their reliance on a strong military. Iran does all that and more.

Consider that since 1953 (and often closer to 1979) the following countries have rid themselves of dictatorships for democracy: South Korea, Portugal, Spain, Brazil, Argentina... plus other countries in South America and Europe. Somehow Iran can't and it's symptomatic of the Middle East. Yes, there have been external influences and intrigues; but as many in-depth studies of the region show - the main problem has been their own rulers who have no interest in promulgating a fairer, better government.

You won't find me arguing that Iranian government is not repressive.

However, our interference in the region encourages this sort of thing. The removal of the democratic government set democracy back generations.

what 'many in-depth studies' have shown what the problems are and who did them?

[Stradageek]

You won't find me arguing that Iranian government is not repressive.

However, our interference in the region encourages this sort of thing. The removal of the democratic government set democracy back generations.

what 'many in-depth studies' have shown what the problems are and who did them?

As usual, it's complicated. The USA and Iran are in fact very similar, for hard-line religious leaders in Iran substitute corporate oligarchs in the USA, for a repressive security regime in Iran substitute Guantanamo Bay water boarding and illegal rendition by the USA, for Iranian support for Hezbollah substitute US support for Israel and the totally repressive Saudi regime.

Two such similar countries should have much common ground and indeed diplomacy (an art that has died under Trump's tutelage) was making progress under Obama.

For the full story I highly recommend 'Confronting Iran - The failure of American Foreign Policy and the Next Great Conflict in the Middle East' by Ali M. Ansari (St Andrew's University), prophetically written in 2006.

[Oldjohnw]

Not very subtle.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion ... -crusades/

[RickH]

Not very subtle.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion ... -crusades/

I'm afraid the corporate oligarchs won't let me read it without signing up.

[Oldjohnw]

Not sure what I can do. You could Google:

Donald Trump jnr with crusader gun.

[Mike Sales]

Donald Trump jnr with crusader gun.

It is interesting that "crusade" and "jihad" have the same meaning, but that the connotations are vastly different.

[Ben@Forest]

You won't find me arguing that Iranian government is not repressive.

However, our interference in the region encourages this sort of thing. The removal of the democratic government set democracy back generations.

It has been two generations since the overthrow in 1953 and more than one since the Iranian Revolution. Many countries which have suffered far more grievously either internally or through external actors. Vietnam's a pretty good example, it has made a better fist of rebuilding, restructuring and greater economic freedoms than Iran despite nominally being a one party socialist state. 20% of its exports go to the USA.

what 'many in-depth studies' have shown what the problems are and who did them?

At the time of the Arab Spring (though most Iranians do not consider themselves Arabs) plenty of informed commentators reported on reasons why it happened, many amongst them from the Middle East. Chiefly, as well as repression and lack of representation, was that the countries mostly ran command economies which could not keep up or satisfy the population. And the rulers, of whatever ilk did that to keep power to themselves. Around the time and before Syria descended into chaos was a great TV documentary about how Assad's strategies and corruption would deter outside investors and ultimately frustrate improvement for the people. Iran has been the same, look up a few good books.

[Oldjohnw]

Looks like WW3 has been deferred.

[dim]

LOL ... it's a lot more complex than what you read in books or what the TV is telling you

watch this youtube clip .... this guy is regarded (by many) as very knowlegable about what has happened and what is happening now:

[youtube]ga95NrJu8WE[/youtube]

to be honest, I don't really understand what he is saying

[Cyril Haearn]

No war! Thank you Mr president!

Tests post for Mr pdq

[al_yrpal]

Hmmm, locked not so. Blocked possibly

Al

[Mick F]

I can post to it.

Not that I want to.
It's just yet another political (boring) thread in Tea Shop.

[PDQ Mobile]

You won't find me arguing that Iranian government is not repressive.

However, our interference in the region encourages this sort of thing. The removal of the democratic government set democracy back generations.

It has been two generations since the overthrow in 1953 and more than one since the Iranian Revolution. Many countries which have suffered far more grievously either internally or through external actors.
(Snip)
At the time of the Arab Spring (though most Iranians do not consider themselves Arabs) plenty of informed commentators reported on reasons why it happened, many amongst them from the Middle East. Chiefly, as well as repression and lack of representation, was that the countries mostly ran command economies which could not keep up or satisfy the population. And the rulers, of whatever ilk did that to keep power to themselves. Around the time and before Syria descended into chaos was a great TV documentary about how Assad's strategies and corruption would deter outside investors and ultimately frustrate improvement for the people. Iran has been the same, look up a few good books.

But upthread you wrote that:-

The West has been appeasing Iran for many years; it is a pretty vicious theocracy which has sponsored no end of terrorist groups and would happily wipe Israel off the map. The West has a confused policy in the Middle East and a poor record but there is no doubt the overall problem is that after 50 years or mbore of independence nearly none of these countries are even close to achieving democracy, and as the saying goes, democracies don't go to war against each other.

I replied that I thought this was a distortion of the truth.

The West's long term meddling in the politics of Iran is still relevant.
We forcfully deposed their democratically elected leader because he wanted to nationalise their oil which at the time was owned by BP!
Then we (UK and US) installed a puppet leader and Govt.
It was a pretty disgraceful abuse of power.
And bore no resemblance to what I understand as "appeasement".
The fact that this occurred in 1953 is still relevant, I imagine, to many Iranians, much as 1939 is still relevant to many in the UK!

Trump (who I thought sounded very strange and asthmatic at his press conference yest) has authorized this other assassination.
This time on the foreign soil of Iraq; a country at least partially under US military control and at an International Airport where Soleimani presumably thought he was relatively safe.
This has nothing to do with his impeachment of course!
How many people died in the assassination of Suleimani? Anyone know?

You, Ben, always entreat us to read more books if our view does not coincide with yours.
Your superior knowledge in so many areas derives from being so well read perhaps?

I am less well read but I have read this:-
"Wer den Wind sät- Was westliche Politik im Orient anrichtet."
By
Michael Lüders

It paints a rather more bleak picture of the West's involvement in Iran than Wiki.
I recommend it.
.......

East is East and West is West- never the twain shall meet.
I do not wish to impose Western values and thinking on Iran. Why should I?
Their history and culture is venerable, developed and complex.
Somewhat at odds with Trump's simplistic Twittering USA.
Our ("Western") political meddling and economic greed has been a big driver of the present dreadful state of affairs.
All IMHO.