Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Barry Hufker]

No matter if that's all the Shah could do.  His people were sick of him and the American government which put him in power.

We are often the masters of our own destruction.  We've screwed around with nation-building to upset most of the world and we do it just to please ourselves.

I don't think any single founder of this country would approve of this strategy.

[bblackwood]

Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 10:56

I don't think any single founder of this country would approve of this strategy.

Just guessing, but I suspect they'd despise it...

[J-Texas]

Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 10:56

We've screwed around with nation-building to upset most of the world and we do it just to please ourselves.

Professor, please. I'm sure the Iraqi people feel they are better off now... don't you?  

[Jay Kadis]

JDNelson wrote on Wed, 09 July 2008 14:32

I remember reading an article in National Geographic magazine, about Iran. This would have been just before all hell broke loose there, right about '78 or '79.  The overall picture they painted was a country shaking off the past and quickly entering the 20th century, thanks to progressive leadership by the Pahlavi family.  Months later and all that was, as they say, history.

Ever heard of the Savak?  Those Iranian students I knew in the '70s were extremely worried about the Shah's secret police monitoring their political activities in the US.  The Pahlavi regime was anything but progressive.

[PRobb]

JDNelson wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 11:43

What I'm suggesting is that you guys are "making the perfect the enemy of the good".  When you consider the brutal, uncompromising nature of his Islamist enemies, what else could the Shah do to maintain order?  Sometimes it's a choice of lesser evils...

You need to learn some history. The brutality of the Shah is what lead to the Islamist takeover.

[mgod]

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 09:18

Professor, please. I'm sure the Iraqi people feel they are better off now... don't you?

No and no. WE are in a lot more danger then before we destabilized Iraq, and the Iraqi people, while being no freer, are faced everyday with a lot more death. So-called political freedom, while not being able to leave one's house and not even being safe in that house, is not freedom. They were considerably more secure under our chosen and armed dictator, Hussein. He was brutal with weapons "we" (Cheney/Rumsfeld) sold him. This war (Cheney/Rumsfeld) is more brutal.

DS

[Barry Hufker]

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 11:18

Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 10:56 We've screwed around with nation-building to upset most of the world and we do it just to please ourselves. Professor, please. I'm sure the Iraqi people feel they are better off now... don't you?

Absolutely not.  Not one lick better and hundreds of thousands dead, many of whom have helped us have been executed.  Even the government we put in place in Iraq is corrupt through and through with private allegiances of their own with militant groups

Over the years we've set up the following governments:
1. Noriega in Panama.  Worked as a paid CIA operative (a dictator whom we later removed).
2. Various U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials have asserted that Saddam was strongly linked with the CIA, and that U.S. intelligence, under President John F. Kennedy, helped Saddam's party seize power for the first time in 1963 (whom we removed and had executed).
3. "In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Massadegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."
4. The (disasterous) Bay of Pigs Invasion as an attempt to overthrow Castro in Cuba.
5. Pakistan: Western countries (including the United States and the United Kingdom) have switched from sanctions to active support through military and monetary aid.
6.Osama bin Laden: trained and armed by the U.S. in a successful effort to overthrow the Russians in Afghanistan.

I'm sure there are more.

[mgod]

Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 10:33

Over the years we've set up the following governments: 1. Noriega in Panama.  Worked as a paid CIA operative (a dictator whom we later removed). 2. Various U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials have asserted that Saddam was strongly linked with the CIA, and that U.S. intelligence, under President John F. Kennedy, helped Saddam's party seize power for the first time in 1963 (whom we removed and had executed). 3. "In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular Prime Minister, Mohammed Massadegh. The Eisenhower Administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons; but the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs." 4. The (disasterous) Bay of Pigs Invasion as an attempt to overthrow Castro in Cuba. 5. Pakistan: Western countries (including the United States and the United Kingdom) have switched from sanctions to active support through military and monetary aid. 6.Osama bin Laden: trained and armed by the U.S. in a successful effort to overthrow the Russians in Afghanistan. I'm sure there are more.

Man!!!

Do NOT mess with the Professor!

DS

[PRobb]

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 12:18

Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 10:56 We've screwed around with nation-building to upset most of the world and we do it just to please ourselves. Professor, please. I'm sure the Iraqi people feel they are better off now... don't you?

I'll let Doonesbury take that one.

[PRobb]

[J-Texas]

mgod wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 13:22

Man!!! Do NOT mess with the Professor! DS

What are you the peanut gallery?




While I understand your point, Professor... I can't fathom that we're talking about the same people here. I mentioned the Iraqis and Saddam. The guy who:

Put bodies in mass graves. Some still alive.
The Anfal Campaign. 100,000 Kurds killed by chemical weapons.
During the '91 uprising killed 50,000 fed up civilians.
Drained the marshlands and deprived people of a way to live.
His motorcade was shot at... he bulldozed the whole town of Dujail, killed 150 men and 1,500 women and children were taken to prison.
Dropped bombs of mustard gas and nerve agents on Halabja. 5,000 men, women, and children dead. 10,000 more disfigured, sick, cancer.

Now:

Businesses are re-opening.
City councils are meeting.
Iraqi government has passed a budget.
Is making laws.
The national government is sharing oil revenues w/towns.
Iraqi police and military are taking on more or the security responsibilities.
US is talking with Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, and Egypt to encourage them to reopen their embassies in Baghdad.


I'm sorry guys, I just don't agree.

[Jessica A. Engle]

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 15:15

mgod wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 13:22 Man!!! Do NOT mess with the Professor! DS What are you the peanut gallery? While I understand your point, Professor... I can't fathom that we're talking about the same people here. I mentioned the Iraqis and Saddam. The guy who: Put bodies in mass graves. Some still alive. The Anfal Campaign. 100,000 Kurds killed by chemical weapons. During the '91 uprising killed 50,000 fed up civilians. Drained the marshlands and deprived people of a way to live. His motorcade was shot at... he bulldozed the whole town of Dujail, killed 150 men and 1,500 women and children were taken to prison. Dropped bombs of mustard gas and nerve agents on Halabja. 5,000 men, women, and children dead. 10,000 more disfigured, sick, cancer. Now: Businesses are re-opening. City councils are meeting. Iraqi government has passed a budget. Is making laws. The national government is sharing oil revenues w/towns. Iraqi police and military are taking on more or the security responsibilities. US is talking with Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, and Egypt to encourage them to reopen their embassies in Baghdad. I'm sorry guys, I just don't agree.

Some good things may be happening.  I'm really not well kept up on this subject.  But the question was, are they better off?

And "better" is subjective.  

You can't argue with the tens of thousands of civilians who have been killed.  Can you imagine if 80,000 American civilians were killed in this war?  The outcry would be unbelievable.  But these are Iraqis.... so where is the outcry?  

"Better off" is extremely relative.  And it is not our country, nor our lives that are at the center of what is going on.  It is theirs.

[J-Texas]

Jessica,

It's not cool. I know. "Better off" that after this shit is over, one could live without the fear that he will be forced to lop off a friend's hand in public.

The casualties of war. Unfortunate. Necessary?

Whatever the conspiracy theory, conservative-bashing, anti-government, underlying arguments to this war...

We are helping a country form a safe, democratic government where people can live with hope instead of fear. Not today. Someday. That's why it's so important for us to stay there and make sure it happens.

[Jay Kadis]

J-Texas wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 13:55

Jessica, It's not cool. I know. "Better off" that after this shit is over, one could live without the fear that he will be forced to lop off a friend's hand in public. The casualties of war. Unfortunate. Necessary? Whatever the conspiracy theory, conservative-bashing, anti-government, underlying arguments to this war... We are helping a country form a safe, democratic government where people can live with hope instead of fear. Not today. Someday. That's why it's so important for us to stay there and make sure it happens.

And what gives the US the right to install governments in other sovereign countries?  Even if the motives are entirely benign (which they are not), we do not have the right.  How would you like Russia invading the US and installing a communist government?  I don't see  a fundamental difference between that and what we're doing in Iraq.  Helping Iraqis to overthrow their government might have been more defensible, but that's not what we did.  We just barged in and took over.  That is illegal under international law and is morally wrong, well-meaning or not.

[PRobb]

Jay Kadis wrote on Thu, 10 July 2008 17:06

And what gives the US the right to install governments in other sovereign countries?

What gives any nation the right is an immanent threat. Or as a response to an attack. That's why Afghanistan was justified. And why Iraq wasn't.