Thread: Iranian distrust of America is 50 years in the making

Lull, there is a heck of a lot left out of that article which transpired that brought about those changes. It doesn't even mention all of those American hostages taken captive for such a long time. I was a young girl when that happened, and clearly recall coming home from school everyday and turning on the television to see if they had been released yet. Personally, I haven't had much for Iran since that time.

I know you are aware of some important issues omitted in that article. If you don't I would be glad to enlighten you and discuss those as well. There is always two sides to a story, most of the time three.

Originally Posted by Julie

Lull, there is a heck of a lot left out of that article which transpired that brought about those changes. It doesn't even mention all of those American hostages taken captive for such a long time. I was a young girl when that happened, and clearly recall coming home from school everyday and turning on the television to see if they had been released yet. Personally, I haven't had much for Iran since that time.

I know you are aware of some important issues omitted in that article. If you don't I would be glad to enlighten you and discuss those as well. There is always two sides to a story, most of the time three.

Julie the Carter Administration is solely responsible for what transpired between the U.S. and Iran, all until the eventual takeover and hijacking of the revolution by the mullah's! There is absolutely no excuse for interfering in another countries affairs. The guy who wrote this article is specifically mentioning the Mossadegh episode when the CIA overthrew that democratically elected regime and instead put their lackey the Shah in power.

The Hostages were taken because that 2 cent bastard Carter refused to leave that country alone, until humiliated and insulted in front of the whole world!

Its really a disgrace how our country interferes and meddles in other countries internal affairs.

Shame on our successive administrations, and now on this fundo Bush for trumpeting war and threatening other countries.

I have been to the former U.S. embassy in Tehran ( And I can certainly tell you that it wasn't no innocent embassy ) The god-damn thing was a massive intelligence and espionage outpost with thousands of our sleuths and agents working to undermine the indigenous iranian political system, as well as spying on Russia and other countries in the region.

The U.S has earned the iranian ppls distrust and hatred. Its sad.

Oh Bhensssssssssssssss! The Iranian people detest everything aout America and want nothing to do with our culture and anyone from this country. They also love their Iranian Mullah masters.

If your going to discuss world affairs try making factual posts...that is trolling plain and simple.

Originally Posted by Lunatock

Oh Bhensssssssssssssss! The Iranian people detest everything aout America and want nothing to do with our culture and anyone from this country. They also love their Iranian Mullah masters.

Lull is staging his political platform in case of a US invasion in Iran. I fully intend to head this one off at the pass.

Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Shah of Iran, began his reign in 1941, succeeding his father, Reza Khan, to the throne. In a 1953 power struggle with his prime minister, the Shah gained American support to prevent nationalization of Iran's oil industry. In return for assuring the U.S. a steady supply of oil, the Shah received economic and military aid from eight American presidents.

Early in the 1960s, the Shah announced social and economic reforms but refused to grant broad political freedom. Iranian nationalists condemned his U.S. supported regime and his "westernizing" of Iran. During rioting in 1963, the Shah cracked down, suppressing his opposition. Among those arrested and exiled was a popular religious nationalist and bitter foe of the United States, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Between 1963 and 1979, the Shah spent billions of oil dollars on military weapons. The real price of military strength was the loss of popular support. Unable to sustain economic progress and unwilling to expand democratic freedoms, the Shah's regime collapsed in revolution. On January 16, 1979, the Shah fled Iran, never to return.

The exiled Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Tehran in February 1979 and whipped popular discontent into rabid anti-Americanism. When the Shah came to America for cancer treatment in October, the Ayatollah incited Iranian militants to attack the U.S. On November 4, the American Embassy in Tehran was overrun and its employees taken captive. The hostage crisis had begun.

On November 4, 1979, Iranian militants stormed the United States Embassy in Tehran and took approximately seventy Americans captive. This terrorist act triggered the most profound crisis of the Carter presidency and began a personal ordeal for Jimmy Carter and the American people that lasted 444 days.

President Carter committed himself to the safe return of the hostages while protecting America's interests and prestige. He pursued a policy of restraint that put a higher value on the lives of the hostages than on American retaliatory power or protecting his own political future.

The toll of patient diplomacy was great, but President Carter's actions brought freedom for the hostages with America's honor preserved.

http://jimmycarterlibrary.org/documents/hostages.phtml

Well what other reason is there for Carter to go head over heels and not leave Iran alone??? back in the day?

that SOB was totally infatuated with Iran! He could not leave that country alone! No matter what!

Okay, let's do some comparisons that you can relate to shall we?

Musharaff was President of Pakistan before 9/11, and since that time we have supported Musharaff in our interests in the war on terror, which is a valid claim of interest on the part of the US. Musharaff has done some "cracking down" on militants and let's say they don't want him in power any more and want to overthrow his government, which is likely since there already has been one attempt made on his life.

In doing this, let's say the militants create the same scenario in Pakistan as they did in Tehran. Storm an area in Pakistan and take 70 Americans hostage and hold them for 444 days.

Now, what you are saying is that if the rule of a Government wants to help the US, for any reason, it is okay for it's citizens to uprise and overthrow their Government at the expense of innocent American citizens that maybe have no idea what politics and/or pacts are involved between the two countries? And hold those innocent Americans for a year and 79 days against their will until the militants get what THEY want?

You know in all honesty Carter was obsessed with Iran! He would not leave that country Julie! Iran was very important because it had a ton of oil, and the Shah had given the Carter Admin. free access to almost anything in the country. the politics were different in those days with the cold war and all. But still, the Carter admin. didnot respect iran's sovreignty.

The Iranians had to take those hostages and humilate teh U.S. in frnot of the whoel world to drivea point across! Stay in your country and mind your own business.

P.S. Pakistan has always been a puppet of the U.S. julie. from the day it was created ( for that specific purpose)!

You remember when i mentioned in that article about who is our closest ally? and I insinuated about musharraf being a lackey...an bluesman got pissed??? He didn't want me to call him a lackey! BWWWAaaaaaaaaaahHAhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

If you will read that article, the Shah was in power for 12 years before he power-struggled with his PM. All the US did was support the Shah who was already in power, the US DID NOT INSTALL HIM THERE. The Shah provided oil supply to US in return for military aid. ALOT OF COUNTRIES DO THAT YA KNOW. That deal remained through 8 American Presidents, what was so special about the Carter Administration?

And, please, provide a LINK to support your contentions.

Originally Posted by lulldapull

P.S. Pakistan has always been a puppet of the U.S. julie. from the day it was created ( for that specific purpose)!

How is that when Pakistan was put under sanctions for developing nukes, and remained under sanctions until shortly after 9/11?

Originally Posted by Julie

If you will read that article, the Shah was in power for 12 years before he power-struggled with his PM. All the US did was support the Shah who was already in power, the US DID NOT INSTALL HIM THERE. The Shah provided oil supply to US in return for military aid. ALOT OF COUNTRIES DO THAT YA KNOW. That deal remained through 8 American Presidents, what was so special about the Carter Administration?

And, please, provide a LINK to support your contentions.

well here is a nice article from the 'middle east resources' to corroborate that 1953 Mossadegh ouster by the CIA! A shameful act indeed.

Mohammed Mossadegh
Mohammed Mossadegh (Persian: محمد مصدق), (May 19, 1882 - March 4, 1967) was prime minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953. Mossadegh's name is sometimes spelled Mosaddeq, which better reflects the Persian pronounciation. He was removed from power by the Shah of Iran and pro-monarchy forces in a complex plot orchestrated by British and US intelligence agencies.

Image:Mossadeq.jpg
Premier MossadeghAfter being educated in England, Mohammed Mossadegh got his start in Iranian politics in 1914, when he was appointed Governor General of the Iranian province of Fars by Shah Soltan Ahmad Qajar. He was later appointed finance minister and then foreign minister. In 1923 he was elected to the Iranian parliament (Majlis) but resigned shortly after, following the election of Reza Pahlavi as shah.

By 1944 Reza Pahlavi had abdicated, and Mossadegh was once again elected to parliament. This time he ran as a member of the National Front Party, a nationalist organization with socialist leanings that aimed to end the foreign presence that had established itself in Iran following the Second World War, especially regarding the exploitation of Iran's rich oil resources.

After negotiations for higher oil royalties failed, on March 15, 1951 the Iran parliament (the Majlis) voted to nationalize Iran's oil industry, and seize control of the British-owned and operated Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Prime minister General Ali Razmara, elected in June 1950, had opposed the nationalization bill on technical grounds. He was asssassinated on March 7, 1951 by Khalil Tahmasebi, a member of the militant fundamentalist group Fadayan-e Islam. After street protests and under pressure from the Majlis, the Shah appointed Mossadegh, a prominent supporter of oil nationalization, as new prime minister.

Responding to the seizure of the AIOC, the British government announced it would not allow Mossadegh's government to export any oil produced in the formerly British-controlled factories. A blockade of British ships was sent to the Persian Gulf to prevent any attempts by Iran to ship any oil out of the country. An economic stalemate thus ensued, with Mossadegh's government refusing to allow any British involvement in Iran's oil industry, and Britain refusing to allow any oil to leave Iran.

Since Britain had long been Iran's primary oil-consumer, the stalemate was paticularly hard on Iran. While the country had once boasted over a 100 million dollars a year in exports to Britain, after nationalization, the same oil industry began increasing Iran's debt by nearly 10 million dollars a month.

Despite the economic hardships of his nationalization plan, Mossadegh remained popular, and in 1952 was approved by parliament for a second term. Sensing the difficulties of a worsening political and economic climate, he announced that he would request the Shah grant him emergency powers. Thus, during the royal approval of his new cabinet, Mossadegh casually asked the Shah to grant him full control of the military, and Ministry of War. The Shah refused, and Mossadegh announced his resignation.

Ahmed Qavam was appointed as Iran's new prime minister. On the day of his appointment, he announced his intention to resume negotiations with the British to end the oil dispute. This blatant reversal of Mossadegh's plans sparked a massive public outrage. Protestors of all stripes filled the streets, including communists and radical Muslims led by Ayatollah Kashani. Frightened by the unrest, the Shah quickly dismissed Qavam, and re-appointed Mossadegh, granting him the full control of the military he had previously requested.

Taking advantage of his atmosphere of popularity, Mossadegh convinced the parliament to grant him increased powers and appointed Ayatollah Kashani as house speaker. Kashani's radical Muslims, as well as the Iranian Communist Party, proved to be two of Mossadegh's key political allies, although both relationships were often strained.

Mossadegh quickly implemented more socialist reforms. Iran's centuries old feudal agriculture sector was abolished, and replaced with a system of collective farming and government land ownership.


Plot against Mossadegh
The governments of Britain and the United States grew increasingly distressed over Mossadegh's reforms. Publicly, they denounced his policies as harmful to the country; privately, both governments sought to implement lucrative oil contracts, but Mossadegh refused. Mossadegh's socialist reforms and increasingly close partnership with the Iranian Communist Party also prompted fears that Iran may develop closer ties with the neighbouring Soviet Union.

In October of 1952, Mossadegh declared that Britain was "an enemy", and cut all diplomatic relations with the United Kingdom. In November and December 1952, British intelligence officials suggested to American intelligence that the prime minister should be ousted. The new US administration under Dwight Eisenhower and the British government under Winston Churchill agreed to work together toward Mossadegh's removal.

On April 4, 1953, US CIA director Allen W. Dulles approved $1 million to be used "in any way that would bring about the fall of Mossadegh". Soon the CIA's Tehran station started to launch a propaganda compaign against Mossadegh. Finally, according to the New York Times:


In early June, American and British intelligence officials met again, this time in Beirut, and put the finishing touches on the strategy. Soon afterward, the chief of the CIA's Near East and Africa division, Kermit Roosevelt, a grandson of Theodore Roosevelt, arrived in Tehran to direct it.

The plot, known as Operation Ajax, centered around convincing Iran's monarch to use his constitutional authority to dismiss Mossadegh from office, as he had attempted some months earlier. But the Shah was uncooperative, and it would take much persuasion and many meetings to successfully execute the plan. Meanwhile, the CIA stepped up its operations. According to Dr. Donald N. Wilber, who was involved in the plot to remove Mossadegh from power, in early August, Iranian CIA operatives pretending to be socialists threatened Muslim leaders with "savage punishment if they opposed Mossadegh," thereby giving the impression that Mossadegh was cracking down on dissent, and stirring anti-Mossadegh sentiments within the religious community.
Mossadegh became aware of the plots against him and grew increasingly wary of conspirators acting within his government. He set up a national referendum to dissolve parliament. The vote was clearly rigged, with Mossadegh claiming a 99.9 percent victory for the "yes" side. This was in turn cited by US- and British-funded opposition press as a reason to remove Mossadegh from power. Parliament was suspended indefinitely, and Mossadegh's "emergency powers" were extended.

To prevent the plot from succeeding Mossadegh knew he would have to continue consolidating his power. Since Iran's monarch was the only person who constitutionally outranked him, he perceived Iran's 33-year-old king to be his biggest threat. In August of 1952 Mossadegh attempted to convince the Shah to leave the country. The Shah refused, and fired the Prime Minister, in accordance with the foreign intelligence plan. Mossadegh responded by ordering troops to seize the Imperial palace and drive out the king. Eager to avoid conflict, the Shah once again quickly folded, and accompanied by his wife, quickly fled Iran.

Once again, massive protests broke out across the nation. Anti- and pro-monarchy protestors violently clashed in the streets, leaving almost 300 dead. Aided by the U.S. CIA and British MI5, the pro-monarchy forces quickly gained the upper hand, stormed government offices and ransacked the prime minister's official residence. Mossadegh surrendered, and was arrested on August 19, 1953.

General Fazlollah Zahedi, who had been the CIA's original choice to replace Mossadegh, proclaimed himself as the new prime minister. The Shah himself, who by now was living a comfortable exile in Italy, was rushed back to Iran and returned to the throne. His overthrow and subsequent restoration to power had all occurred within a week.

Mossadegh was tried for treason, and sentenced to three years in prison. Following his release he remained under house arrest until his death in 1967. The new government under the Shah in August 1954 reached an agreement with foreign oil companies to "restore the flow of Iranian oil to world markets in substantial quantities" [1].

The extent of the US role in Mossadegh's overthrow was not formally aknowledged for many years, although the Eisenhower administration was quite vocal in its opposition to the policies of the ousted Iranian Prime Minister. In his memoirs, Eisenhower writes angrily about Mossadegh, and describes him as impractical and naive, though stops short of admitting any overt involvement in the coup.

Eventually the CIA's role became well-known, and caused controversy within the organization itself, and within the CIA congressional hearings of the 1970s. Die-hard CIA supporters maintain that the plot against Mossadegh was stragetically necessary, and praise the efficiency of agents in carrying out the plan. Critics say the scheme was paranoid and colonial.

When the Iranian revolution occurred in 1979, the overthrow of Mossadegh was used as a rallying point in anti-US protests. To this day, Mossadegh's image in Iran is mixed. His secularism and western manners have made official government praise mild at best in the now fundamentalist theocratic state. Yet many others still view him as a victim of US aggression.

In March 2000, then secretary of state Madeleine Albright stated her regret that Mossadegh was ousted: "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."

Mossadegh had a flamboyant personality and was well-known for theatrics, including weeping, fainting, and napping in public. His numerous eccentricities, such as wearing his bathrobe in parliament made him a well-known figure. His controversial actions captured the attention of the world, and he was named as Time Magazine's 1951 Man of the Year.

In early 2004, they Egyptian government changed a street name in Cairo from Pahlavi to Mossadegh, to faciliate closer relations with Iran.


External link

James Risen: Secrets of History: The C.I.A. in Iran -- A special report.; How a Plot Convulsed Iran in '53 (and in '79). The New York Times, April 16, 2000.
In Memory of August 19, 1953 by Sasan Fayazmanesh, August 18, 2003.

Things seemed to being going fine until Mossadegh guy came in and radically changed things because he didn't like Britain. He attempted to fix something that was not broken. The US stated publically that his radical policies would be harmful to the country, which in fact have proven to be true.

I had trouble with my material orders from a supplier in Florida a few years back and I began doing business with another company for about a year. Afterward, a new manager had been hired with the company I had previously done business with, and he called me and said, if you will send your business back to us, I will make things right, and as a good faith gesture, he gave me price discounts on certain items. Sounded good to me, I gave my business back to him for 2 years, everything was fine until he left and a new manager came on the scene.

Without telephoning me and discussing matters with me, my discounted prices immediately went up and matched everyone elses, AND I was charged a freight charge of $50.00 on every order twice a week. I called him about it, and he told me the deal, and I said, well, I'll call your home office and discuss it with them. The home office called him and said, do not mess with long-time customers' prices, as we do not want to lose their business again, she is a $200,000 per year customer.

Now, if you want to blame the US for the shake-up in Iran's Government, you need to blame the new guy who busted in on the scene where everything was fine until he came along. Agreements between countries are passed down from ruler to ruler, and should be respected by each of them, and changes discussed on an as-need basis.

Radical changes of agreements between countries to the point of a new ruler declaring a consumer importer as an "enemy" is not healthy in any given situation and probably will not be tolerated as such. The Iranian people brought this upon themselves if they supported him in this approach. They will have to deal with it just as other countries are having to.

Damn! so we dictate business on our terms?...even if that means overthrowing other democratically elected governemnts?

BWAaaaaaaHHaaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaaaaaa

I know Julie the CIA got to Gen. Zia of Pakistan too when he refused to sign the Geneva accords on Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawl! the problem is that Unkal sam's beyond obsessive/ compulsive behaviour with other smaller countries has become a liability.

basically as my previous boss use to tell me......my way or the highway!

This is real bad! Its like an overly friendly and interferin neighbour that god-damn refuses to go away, and wants to focibly hang out with you!

Originally Posted by Julie

Musharaff has done some "cracking down" on militants and let's say they don't want him in power any more and want to overthrow his government, which is likely since there already has been one attempt made on his life.

More like half-a-dozen such atttempts, some probably staged by his own guards.

What SOME people seem to forget is that Musharreff is walking a razor, and so are we. He is hated by much of his own populace for helping the U.S. and so is at fantastic risk of assassination, and if (when) he does get whacked whoever replaces him will most probably be 10x worse for the strategic situation.

-dale