Article Israel maneuvering to involve US in wider conflict

[confused2]

I have to admit I am surprised .. this is Syne, who can quote the American Constitution word for word - defending a dictator, albeit a benevolent one, who left his country with no way forward - nothing to fight for except making a dictator rich. I am actually appalled.

[Syne]

The appalling thing is your ignorance of history. You seem to be under the delusion that communists are any less authoritarian than dictators, or that communism has ever supported "democratic elections," freedom, or prosperity. The Shah of Iran certainly seemed better than the theocratic authoritarianism of the Ayatollahs.

You're also laboring under the misguided belief that things are absolute. That democracy can be an absolute good or monarchy (a Shah is a king, not dictator...there is a difference) an absolute evil. The world isn't black and white, and the results are what matter. Under the Shah, people prospered, but under communism, throughout history, people have always suffered, and under theocracy today, they continue to.

John Adams said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
So it's expected that few countries are even capable of successfully emulating the US Constitution. But we still wish them to be free and prosper in a peaceful manner.


But we all know you're either a moron or trolling. Take your pick.

[confused2]

John Adams said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

It is almost as though you understand 'something' - and then it becomes clear - nothing.

America was a new country - at least once you'd killed most of the natives and the food they relied on. In the civilised world we have to grow up surrounded by the pressures of Empires and big oil. Edit - and theocracy.

[Syne]

Apparently empires and big oil just make a people immoral and areligious. 9_9

[confused2]

Asshole.

[Syne]

Hey, you're the one trumpeting communists and ignoring history while trying to sling mud.
Can't handle being corrected? Educate yourself before spewing garbage.

[C C]

Even further back (1953) - Iran had a democratically elected government - overthrown by some axis of evil.

The 1953 Iranian coup d'état .. was the U.S.- and British-instigated, Iranian army-led overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favor of strengthening the monarchical rule of the shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi  .. It was aided by the United States .. (Operation Ajax) .. and the United Kingdom .. (Operation Boot) .. The Shi'a clergy also played a considerable role.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Irani...7%C3%A9tat

Yah, Britain became apoplectic about Mosaddeq's nationalization of the oil industry. The UK appealed to the US for help, but the latter initially didn't care for the former's approach and methods.

But when Eisenhower became POTUS, he was more receptive. The US's concerns had shifted to whether or not Mosaddegh was actually strong enough to keep the state from eroding or collapsing, potentially leaving a vacuum for Marxist takeover. (He was also deemed a bit too tolerant of the Tudeh Party, despite friction between the two.)

Ultimately it was the determination that Mosaddegh was too weak, along with Churchill's "seductive whispers" that Mosaddegh would acquire growing dependence on Soviet aid (mediated via the Tudeh Party), that clinched the putsch agenda to oust him.

And for US assistance and blessing, toss in that additional benefit slash stipulation of AIOC's monopoly being mitigated and allowing US petroleum companies into the region. 

Tudeh Party of Iran (1953 coup): As Americans gave up hope on Mosaddeq, their propaganda and covert action campaign against the Tudeh, called TPBEDAMN, expanded to include him. In 1953, American CIA and British intelligence agents, began plotting to overthrow Mosaddeq in a coup d'état, in large part because of their fear that "rising internal tensions and continued deterioration ... might lead to a breakdown of government authority and open the way for at least a gradual assumption of control by Tudeh," just as a local communist party had led a coup in Czechoslovakia in 1948, replacing a democratic regime and constitution with a pro-Soviet, one-party Communist government.

Overthrow of Mosaddegh: The British government had grown increasingly distressed over Mosaddegh's policies and were especially bitter over the loss of their control of the Iranian oil industry.

[...] Engulfed in a variety of problems following World War II, Britain was unable to resolve the issue single-handedly and looked towards the United States to settle the matter. Initially, the US had opposed British policies. After mediation had failed several times to bring about a settlement, American Secretary of State Dean Acheson concluded that the British were "destructive, and determined on a rule-or-ruin policy in Iran."

The American position shifted in late 1952 when Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected President. In November and December, British intelligence officials suggested to American intelligence that the Iranian prime minister should be ousted. British prime minister Winston Churchill suggested to the incoming Eisenhower administration that Mosaddegh, despite the latter's open dislike of communism, would become reliant on the pro-Soviet Tudeh Party, resulting in Iran "increasingly turning towards communism" and towards the Soviet sphere at a time of high Cold War fears.