Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

When and why did Iran become our no.1 enemy?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Smith_3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:49 AM
Original message
When and why did Iran become our no.1 enemy?
What actually has Iran done, other than threaten Israel, that is of any relevance to us?

Moreover, even if some shit happens between Israel and Iran, one could argue that in the end it is not really our top priority to
be Israels bodyguard. So what is it aside from that?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. Their version or the truth?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
2. We need their oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_U_L8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
3. Because they're EVIL !!!
booooooooooo oooooo oooooooooooooooo
be verrrry afraid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
4. PNAC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
siligut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. I agree.
Remember when people were saying How can you believe we will go into Iran?

Iran has been in the plan since the 1997 PNAC plan. All the media build-up is par for the course. Iran is a threat to U.S. oil interests in the Gulf.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
5. They're training Al Qaeda, according to McCain
on several occasions.

Didn't you know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Juche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #5
24. I love it
Another GOP president who doesn't know the difference between sunni & Shi'ite. I am not extremely educated on the subject but to not understand basic cultural issues there is laughable if you are running for president.

FTR, the US is working with Saudi Arabia to help fund Sunnis linked to Al Qaeda while we talk about Iraning help for the shi'ites. You never hear that in the news.

http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/28/investigative_rep...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ilsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
39. The Sunni Al Kayda or the Shia Al Kayda? ;-) nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
6. They just switched their oil for Euros.. instead of US dollars..
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 09:59 AM by glowing
this is the real threat.

If they switch, then Venezuela, and then Opec..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MisterHowdy Donating Member (295 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
33. That is true.
Remember what happened to Iraq 6 mths after they changed from the $
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
7. Enough people figured out Iraq WASN'T and Iran stopped trading oil in dollars
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regularguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
8. Most Americans didn't even know Iran existed
until the revolution ('79?) and subsequent taking of American hostages. Hardly anyone knows about the CIA helping to overturn the election of Mosadeg (?) in the 50s and propping up the Shah. I was in high school durinmg the hostage situation and the general attitue was along the line of 'How dare those weird looking non-english-speaking people hate us. Lets Nuke 'em!'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. I agree
This war with Iran is yet another Baby boomer revenge thing. Most boomers still think of Iran only from the American hostage situation. I wonder at what point do I have to stop reliving the late 60s-70s?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. Don't blame the boomers for what the 'lost generation' instigated.
But for that matter, they can't be blamed either, except for their propensity for conformity.

The whole Iran thing was generated by the post-WW2 anti-commie hysteria, when the boomers were still kids.

There are 80+ million boomers, and the one thing we all have in common is that we have very little in common. We are no more homogenous a group than the GenXers or GenYers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. GenXers or GenYers
are not in the whitehouse right now in the US, the boomers are. And I do not believe that current US policy in Iran has anything to do with post WWII Iran. I generally agree with the first poster, most Americans feelings for Iran were generated by the hostage crisis. A crisis that took place and was central to forming the boomers generation impression of Iran. Most GenXers and GenYers have no idea what the crisis was or simply weren't alive to have this event have any lasting effect on their views of Iran. Bush administration has focused on countlessly trying to refight the culture wars of the late 60s and 70s. It would appear the Administration is trying to punish Iran for an event that took place before the vast majority of the Iranian population was even born. I think it's hard to argue that significant events in a persons life do not influence their opinion. The Iran hostage situation was the major news event about Iran of most Boomers lifetime and it left largely a negative opinion of the country in the minds of those alive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regularguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. I don't think of it as a generational thing....
just trying to answer the OP as to the point in time Iran became the "enemy". My peers who wanted to "Nuke" Iran at the time were more or less GenXers anyway, FWIW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raccoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
27. Baby boomer revenge thing? LOL.

Weird-oh opinion you've got there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OwnedByFerrets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
9. When
pigs flew and the monkeyboy decided it was so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Green Mountain Dem Donating Member (784 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
10. When they decided...
to open their own oil bourse and trade only in Euros..it was supposed to open last month but as far as I know it hasn't opened yet. It would further destabilize the dollar and threaten its global position, especially if other oil exporting countries also switched to the Euro as the standard for payment.

Saddam did this in 2000 and look what happened to him!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynzM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
12. But... but...
We've always been at war with Eastasia. Or something like that. /sigh

Another year, another boogey-man. Gotta keep the war and oil money flowing, don't you know? :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
14. when bush included it in his AXIS OF EVIL.
stupid a$$ man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bushmeister0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
15. Sharon to Bolton: Iran is more important than Iraq
Haaretz (3/18/2003)

"In a meeting with U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton yesterday, Sharon said that Israel was concerned about the security threat posed by Iran, and stressed that it was important to deal with Iran even while American attention was focused on Iraq.

Bolton said in meetings with Israeli officials that he had no doubt America would attack Iraq, and that it would be necessary thereafter to deal with threats from Syria, Iran and North Korea."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=2...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
19. When the politicians, prodded by the lobbyists, told us it was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Juche Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
20. When Cheney took over. Because they have oil.
That pretty much sums up the when and why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
21. When AIPAC asks our gov't to jump our gov't asks how high, that's why (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
22. We've always been at war with Iran
Now move along citizen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TCJ70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
23. Are they? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
25. 1953, to be precise. The year we toppled Iran's organic democratic government
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 01:02 PM by WilliamPitt
because they fucked with our oil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossadeq

Stupid believers in a democratic system...what were they thinking when they decided to take ownership of the oil under their land and use the revenues to build schools and roads and hospitals and Western stuff like that?

Sillies.

Couse, we'd love it if they went for democracy now...but we'd love it more if they don't, because that makes them available for demonization, which lubricates the war industry, which pays the bills...

Pays your bills? Mine?

Sillies.

They bounced him in 1953, by way of a combined operation between America and the UK that Eisenhower signed off on.

Better: they replaced democracy with the Shah.

The punch line: the Sha is who caused the Islamic revolution of 1979, when the current scary people took over.

More: Iran then started talking to the Soviets, so we made friends with...yup...Saddam Hussein.

We stayed friends until 1991, armed him, gave him coordinates for the best use of his chemical weapons, but we also were selling missiles to Iran to pay for a whole 'nother mess south of Texas...etc.

A great, great many rocks were pushed down the mountain in 1953, when Mossadeq lost his job for being waaaaay too into democracy and voting and that sort of stuff.

Why are they our enemies? Because they keep the money rolling in, because we caused them, because they humiliated us for 444 days, because they have oil, and because we really aren't positive we can take them in a stand-up fight without unspooling twelve other calamities in the process...which pisses off the kind of people who need to believe they can do what they want when they want to whomever they want.

Mostly it's out of habit. They've been bad guys for 30 years, so why fuck with a good storyline.

Shhh. Big secret.

P.S. They also killed 263 Marines in 1983, sponsored terrorism in a bunch of places, and really do suck big ass when it comes to things like human rights.

Last dagger: the groups responsible for those dead Marines in 1983 were Dawa and SCIRI.

Guess who controlls pretty much the entire Shia majority in Iraq's government?

Dawa and SCIRI. We helped them find legitimacy by getting them civil service gigs. Touching.

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #25
35. Winston Churchill's idea. He keeps popping up in Iran/Iraq history like a bad penny...
In 1911, it was Churchill who had the Brit's buy 50% of Anglo-Persian Oil to fuel the conversion to oil of the British Navy.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KNN/is_2000_Win...

After WWI, Churchill defined the borders and ethnic makeup of Iraq. (see Armed Madhouse).

And, in 1953, it was Churchill who went to Eisenhower and demanded we topple Mossadeq.

Good old "Empire Forever" Churchill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #35
52. It's a marvelous case study, if you think about it.
Here is Winston, brilliant and educated and flush with patriotism, eager to serve queen and country.

Can you imagine what it must have been like to have recieved the finest Enlightenment-bred education available on Earth, which involved a long process of indoctrinary info sessions about stuff like how the sun never set on the British Empire...

...yet nowhere in those foundational lessons on British excellence, nowhere was there a chapter or lecture or book daring to posit a question like, "Is there injustice, cruelty, quasi-slavery or profiteering going on anywhere that sun shines?" Flowery sentence there - remember, it was the Enlightenment, when assbags like me who wrote interminably got paid by the word, heh - but bleed it down to grunted monosyllables and even still nothing close to it was part of his schooling.

Sneaky stuff, and a hell of a thing to do to a kid. If nobody ever told him what was really happening in India, he wouldn't know. The internet back then was Morse Code, a two-engine prop airplane, or a ship bound for the Atlantic. If nobody told him about Ireland, it's the same result.

We can go back now and slap him around for another piece-mover playing that grand game of chess, and sure, it's a fact. But I try to understand these guys as best I can, and for me, Churchill is a sympathetic character. The British Empire had perfected the art of turning out educated, patriotic, shrewd, liberated robots before Elizabeth ever saw the throne. His teachers and lecturers and mentors were working off a 600 year old curriculum when Churchill came along, and they filled his sharp mind with ten generations worth of stories about honor, valor, fidelity, and the absolute fact that England was supreme, the apex, and it was his great fortune to offer his service to that grand heritage.

Jesus, right? Sounds familiar, but I guess the best tricks are the old tricks, so that one's been around a while. In the end, what you have is a product of his environment, bred to rule, personally invested in the fate and fortune of the kingdom, and that silly core of innocence sustaining his fervor remained unbruised because it was swaddled in ten thousand layers of armor that had been meticulously set with every lesson and story and heroic tale, armor that was made of the mythology he served alongside king and country.

Kind of like a toddler who doesn't know what a burn feels like because he's never touched a hot stove, but he's never seen a hot stove nor heard of "burns," but instead learns only of strength and nobility, and thus is spared suffering any pain but denied learning any lesson, none of which is his fault.

Yeah, sounds familiar. Right up until I was 14 or 15, my goal in life was to go to West Point, join the Army, and become a Green Beret. Myriad influences were behind this, among them my dad volunteering for Vietnam in '68, the books I read trying to understand his war, the unavoidable bleating nationalism of the Cold War and the Reagen era that got under your skin if you were young and dumb, but mostly I was fired up by movies and TV.

"Red Dawn" really scrambled my head, and I spent a good run of years waiting for hordes of Cubans in Russian camo to come boiling out of the sky. I watched that crap the other day for the first time in maybe 20 years, and I was gape-mouthed in awe. It's a masterpiece of fear-mongering masquerading as an AMERICA KICKS ASS flick, unless you know anything about history and tactics and topography, in which case the move is unbelievably goony from soup to nuts. It was kinda like watching Sixteen Candles again, and having a chuckle at your own expense for ever believing high school was really like that.

Remember First Blood III? Rambo goes to Afghanistan to fight the commies alongside the brave and freedom-loving mujeheddin warriors.

I saw that shit in the theater.

Ah. Irony.

My house growing up had a slice of a view of downtown Boston way off in the distance, and our sightline over the city went right over where Logan Airport sat. Three times, three different times, I was walking home at night, and looked towards the city, and saw a bright light descending towards the center of town, and panicked, because that was a nuclear missile and I had to get home to see my mom before it hit. Three times. And it didn't seem silly at the time. I don't know how old you are, but if you remember Carter, you remember the missiles.

That shit laid all the same kinds of armor over the part of me that knew right from wrong and wanted to serve and didn't know from bupkus about the kind of questions nobody ever asked Churchill, either. But then I really got into reading, and watched the Iran-Contra hearings, and had the strangest sense that our Panama incursion was freighted with bullshit...didn't know what or why exactly, but it just smelled like theater.

My first real break-through experience with all this shit happened in my living room, a few weeks before graduation, when me and mom and a visiting dad sat with an Army recruiter who wanted me to join up. For an hour, this sargent explained to me how Hussein had the fourth largest army in the world, how they were battle-tested after fighting Iran, that this was going to be heavy, but if I joined right now and went to college and did ROTC, I wouldn't be slated for active service for another four years.

Hm. Paradox. I was the kid who would paint his face black and sneak out at night to practice my stealth tactics for when I went in for the Green Berets (I was on every rooftop on that street before my 14th birthday, not peeping or vandalizing, just testing myself to see if I could really be invisible...and never once did I get caught...), and there I was listening to this crisp uniformed soldier trying to sell me on serving...but I wasn't buying, for reasons I wasn't totally able to communicate...while he was promising I'd never see combat...the kid who dreamed of soldiery balked at the opportunity, and the troop offering the chance went out of his way to keep me behind a desk.

I thanked him and signed nothing and told him I'd consider it, and later that night my mom asked me what I thought. I remember my answer vividly, because I got this unexpected adrenaline rush as I said it, and it was pretty much the first adult opinion I ever expressed. "I wanted to join the Army to serrve the counrty," I said, "and this sounds like I'd be helping to close a business deal." My mom smiled, I went to college, and the Gulf War started while I was getting up from my bed to take a piss, and it was over before I flushed...and it wasn't right, it was a business deal (more like a thousand deals, actually), and I regret not having served but know for sure I was right to refuse, because what I wanted to serve and what I would have actually served is the difference between the devil and the deep blue sea.

That was me getting my armor off, and it was only made of TV and movies and nationalism and fear. That adrenaline rush came because I was scared to say shit like that out loud. I didn't know anything, and here I was lining up against America and patriotic duty and flag upon glag upon flag, and repudiating what you were bred to believe and obey is scary stuff the first time you do it. Even in the kitchen.

I didn't go through the kind of indoctrination Churchill did.

I didn't go through the Blitz, either. Whatever else may be said, that guy was all spine for that whole disaster, he held the country and the charnel house that was London in flames together with both hands, and it was one of the most valiant and stoic and strong last-stand feats of pure "Go Fuck Yourself" perserverance in history. All of Britain did it, he was merely the face and voice of their unbelievable courage...but without him bracing the nation, I'm not sure much of London would have remained.

That experience, coupled with all he had to deal with over the rest of the war, probably made him bold enough to play checkers with Mossadeq. Was he arrogant, or terrified? He knew what happened when matters unspooled, and in desiring to personally make sure the cork didn't pop, he wound up buried in all the machinations that ripened and blossomed and are now rotting, and it's our problem at last.

I peg Mossadeq's fall as the beginning of a lot of really gruesome shit. That move was so bad that we're losing soldiers over it fifty-five years later. But Churchill was a creature of his environment, as I was in a much tamer fashion. I gave up trying to re-manage the Cold War a long time ago, but still dedicate a great deal of scholarship towards understanding it. We can't undo that shit, and swatting Churchill around for what went down is a little like kicking a duck because it quacked.

I'm not necessarily defending Churchill, mind you. Your post got me going on the study of him.

It comes down to this, I guess. We can do better. We have to remember why their decisions have become our calamity. That's the lesson. As for Churchill, well, you're totally right. It's still worthwhile to figure out what made him and his hubris, because that same kind of aristocratic, nationalistic, deliberately dull approach to leadership is still very much involved in present matters of life and death, it's still alive and kicking, and is still doing damage that will blow up on us twenty years down the road.

Long, sorry. I read your post earlier today and have been cooking on it for a while.

Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 06:47 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. As for Churchill, his devotion to Empire seems to come from two strong sources...
1.) He fought for Empire personally as a young man. And I mean fought. For example, he charged the Dervish line on horseback twice in the Sudan. And on each charge, more of his fellows were cut down than survived. That experience alone would seem to either sour a man on Empire as purpose, or cement it into his being.

2.) He worshiped his Tory father Randolph who was a big opponent of Gladstone. At that time, Gladstone questioned Empire, not for humanitarian reasons, but for financial reasons - did it make financial sense to keep expanding The Empire. Indeed, when Winston Churchill crossed the aisle and became a Liberal, he defended his support of Irish home rule on the basis that The Empire needed to put this question behind her in order to quiet the opposition to Empire by the Irish diaspora.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
26. NOT SO. Are we not at war elsewhere? What BS. It is all distraction and blame game.
Anything to divert attention from massive lies and consequent failure in Iraq.

Fricking how many times a fricking day do I need to type this fricking meme around here, for Christ's fricking sake!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
28. It is just Israel -- and it started in the early 90's
There was a posting here last fall that gave some of the important background: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

The OP quoted a Democracy Now interview with Trita Parsi, who said:
During the 1980s, in spite of the Iranian Revolution, in spite of Ayatollah Khomeinis many, many harsh remarks about Israel, far, far worse than what anything Ahmadinejad has said so far, Israel at the time was the country that was lobbying the United States to open up talks with Iran to try to rebuild the US-Iran relations, because of strategic imperatives that Israel had. Israel needed Iran, because it was fearing the Arab world and a potential war with the Arabs.

After 1991, 92, that's when you see the real shift in Israeli-Iranian relations, because that's when the entire geopolitical map of the Middle East is redrawn. The Soviet Union collapses. The last standing army of the Arabs, that of Saddam Hussein, is defeated in the Persian Gulf War. And you have an entirely new security environment in the Middle East, in which the two factors, the Soviets and the Arabs, that had pushed Iran and Israel closer together suddenly evaporate. But as their security environment improves, they also start to realize that they may be ending up in a situation in which they can become potential threats to each other. And that's when you see how the Israelis shift 180 degrees. Now the Israeli argument was that the United States should not talk to Iran, because there is no such thing as Iranian moderates.

And ever since, the Israelis and the pro-Israel interest in the United States have lobbied to make sure that there is no dialogue or theres no rapprochement between the United States and Iran. And the Iranians have done similar things. They have undermined every US foreign policy initiative in the Middle East that they feared would be beneficial to Israel. So the real shift in Israeli-Iranian relations come after the Cold War, not with the revolution in 1979.

Ever since then, Iran has been the major enemy for all true Neocons. There have been a few interruptions -- by the late 90's, Osama bin Laden had become too obnoxious to ignore, and then there was the Bush/Cheney obsession with Saddam Hussein. But the Neocons have known what their real target was all along, and they have never lost sight of it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. Thanks for posting this interview :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
29. "Cause blacks, gays, abortions, Al Qaida, Saddam Hussein and mexicans
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 07:05 PM by jazzjunkysue
aren't scarry enough, anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leftist Agitator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
30. Fuck Israel.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elspeth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
31. Try going back to the 1950s
then 1979.

Iran's been on the back burner for a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
34. We're at war with Iran ...

We have always been at war with Iran.

Don't you know that?

I'm afraid it's the Ministry of Love for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leftist Agitator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. I take umbrage at the "i" in your handle, RoyGBiv.
Damned Indigo was only included because Isaac Fucking Newton decided that he saw two shades of blue, when in fact there is only one in the spectrum. Just so you know...

Back to your regularly scheduled thread.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
36. 1964 is another pivotal date, but that seems to get lost in our
history with Iran.

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Iran 1964... Immunity agreement or Capitulations Agreement
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roamer65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
38. Because they had the guts to overthrow our dictator, the Shah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
40. The Folly of Attacking Iran: Lessons from History
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laverdadtelibrara Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #40
48. Good video
This really hits the nail on the head
Laverdadtelibrara
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #48
59. Thanks for the interest and welcome to DU :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #40
57. delete n/t
Edited on Thu May-01-08 11:13 AM by slipslidingaway
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
El Pinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
42. Once enough time had passed for people to forget that Reagan & Ollie North Sold them Weapons...
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 11:20 PM by El Pinko
As for a reason, it think the answer is "'Cuz I'm the decider and I say so."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laverdadtelibrara Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #42
50. Ironic isn't it
The same repugnicans who followed reagan and sold weapons to our then-enemy and committed high treason in doing so....They ought to be taken and shot......that's just me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSdemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
43. Dubya said so. Enough said . . . what, were you expecting facts and reason?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerfectSage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
44. More like # 1 scapegoat, for the inevetiable failure of the surge.
Besides attacking Iran makes Aipac, the Isreal lobby and Cheney get their senile old dicks semi stiff.


Wooooooooooooooo Hoooooooooooooooooooooooo what manly warriors. ROFLMAO

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laverdadtelibrara Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
45. Because..................... that's why.............
When someone snubs their nose at america and does it for almost thirty years someone starts to hold a grudge.....When someone starts to hold a grudge ANYTHING becomes justafiable, like war. Just like when Saddam Hussein tried to kill Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. came to power and killed him, there are people in high places now who still hold grudges from way back then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
New Dawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
46. Iran was the Neocon's main target after Iraq
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 11:51 PM by New Dawn
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laverdadtelibrara Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. no kidding...........
And if they have even a tenth of the defenses they say they have the battlefields of a future Iran war would supply the demand for new defense contracts/spending/abuses of by Neocons and warmongers for at least ten to fifteen years. But the Iranian capacity to assimilate invaders could be the worst news yet for america
I don't think anything could defeat that culture.
3000 years of written history and culture in Iran Vs. American anticulture (popculture)
I think I know who'll win this one.......in the end
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
New Dawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #47
49. Exactly
And Iran's population is three times as large as Iraq's, and they have a much larger and much more mountainous country than Iraq. Combined with the very patriotic people that live there, Iran has the perfect conditions to wage an infinitely long guerrilla war against any potential invaders. They also have a more modern military force than Iraq's, which was crippled by 12 years of sanctions and air-strikes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laverdadtelibrara Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. Every Iranian victory is always drenched in blood..........
but inevitable. Let me illustrate my point....the first invasion.......when good ole Isaiah in the bible is still prophsiing the "messiah" the Scythians sweep into the region effectively pushing Babylon and Assirya back into the stone and who eventually drives them out Iranian........The Greeks and Macedonians invade and crush all organized resistance, but then guerilla warfare continues until all the greeks and macedonians marry iranian women and are subsumed by the culture. The Romans had a bright gleaming army and were crushed at Carrhai, their later incursions resulted in the capture of Emperor Valerian himself who eventually died captive in the Sassanid Empire. Even Sunni Islam itself, the greatest political, economic and military power in the world(When it was expanding before the Caliphs screwed everything up.) Was eventually subsumed and converted into Shiism in Iran. The Mongols were next and they killed 1,000,000 Iranians(this comes to 90% of the urban population at the time.) And they were later subsumed and converted entirely to become Persian Speaking Iranians who, even though broken came back from the brink of near ethnic cleansin. Next were the Turks who had employed a real full court-press with their Turkic brethren to the east and they were beaten by Safavids who (with I admit a lot of British technological aid) turned the Tide and beat yet another world power. British, Russians, even the Iraquis and soon the americans (whether through arms or culture will inevitably be assimilated if they choose to invade, and so I make this plea to all my fellow americans. Stop our government from making the last mistake it will ever make in the middle east!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timtom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
53. I believe that it started in 1979 with the Iran Hostage Crisis.
Edited on Thu May-01-08 05:37 AM by nathan hale
Our sock-puppet, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, had fled Iran. (The Iranis couldn't take no damn more.) As he was ill, the U.S. granted him a brief sojourn here, for medical purposes).

This outraged the Iranis considerably. It has been downhill since then.

Essentially we can't stand there self-determination (regardless of leadership).*

*See Hugo Chavez

(Since I responded directly to the OP, my reply is way down here. I must look like a complete nitwit, since this has been copiously addressed elsewhere in this thread).

Oh, well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
55. Crude jolt for US as Iran scraps oil trade in dollar
Come to think of it... wasn't this exactly what happened to poor 'ole Saadam Hussein? When he threatened to trade oil in Euros instead of dollars...we whacked him? :shrug:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

With Iran, the worlds fourth-largest oil producer, shifting its crude trading to the euro and the yen, instead of the US dollar, treasury managers feel that this could well be the first challenge to the US dollars dominance as currency of global trade. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3000162...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
56. I presume somebody has mentioned the hostages they kidnapped?
I mean that was a long time ago and I"m not saying it justifies any military action against them now, but that certainly wasn't a friendly act.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
58. They are sitting on top of OUR Oil and dared to say anything bad about Israel
2 HUGE no-no's

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
60. It didn't. They're just a convenient rebranding of the same old colonialism. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paparush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-01-08 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
61. When Bush needed yet another distraction from the Colossal, Galactic ClusterFsck Known as Iraq
Edited on Thu May-01-08 11:25 AM by paparush


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 16th 2014, 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC