About Iran

[ErikinWest]

I'm sure most people read Drak's interesting comments....

This is not a direct reply to anything Drak said, but his statements have lead me to think about something.

Think about how Iranians would think about America when:

The American government supported Iraq invading Iran. The Americans put the Iraqi president in power (Mr. Hussein), the Americans supplied the Iraqi's with their small arms and military equipment, and the American government whole heartedly supported Iraq invading Iran!

The Iran-Iraq war lasted from 1980-1988! That's eight years of a war of attrition. The war cost over 1 MILLION lives and ravaged the Iranian economy.

I'd like to hear what Drak, or any other American supporter/Iranian hater has to say about this.

You don't mess with another country and be shocked when it hits back,
Erik

[therussian]

That policy has really come to bite America in the ass, all over the world (the main one being Israel, of course)

[Hub'ite]

I'm guessing this belongs in the Pit.
When did Iran hit back? What makes Iran so special? The whole ME hates America.

[ErikinWest]

I'm guessing this belongs in the Pit.
When did Iran hit back? What makes Iran so special? The whole ME hates America.

Yes I might have made it sound much more direct than it really was. I'm sure some of the 9/11 hijackers had Iranian decent. I'm also sure all Iranians hate America, and this hatred spreads throughout the Muslim world, which eventually turns into the form of terrorism.

Erik

Yeah and? Iran was viewed as a bigger 'threat' then so it was US policy to support countries to counter countries it feared falling under Soviet influence. The US didnt 'make' Iran and Iraq go to war, they did that themselves but it supported Iraq in the conflict. You are aware most western nations, Russia included supply millions and millions of dollars of military equipment to other countries regardless of the conquences. BTW if Iran wants to hit back at a country that messes with it, it should try the Brits since the meddled with Iran just as much and for longer

I don't think that Iran had any chance of becoming communist. I realize that multiple western countries supplied Iraq with weapons during the war, but the US supported Iraq going to war before it had begun.

Erik

[Mangalore]

Yes I might have made it sound much more direct than it really was. I'm sure some of the 9/11 hijackers had Iranian decent. I'm also sure all Iranians hate America, and this hatred spreads throughout the Muslim world, which eventually turns into the form of terrorism.
Erik

Sorry, not a single hijacker from 9/11 had Iranian descent. Also, not a single hijacker was from Iraqi descent for that matter. It's ignorance of such simple facts that easily distorts the view on other countries.
I guess the short story is that it is mainly because Al Qaeda is barely tolerated and barely tolerates the Shiite theocracy and the anti-religious Baath movements. Because of that Al Qaeda was not really active in those two countries to find someone to do the dirty work for them.

For instance, the Europeans absolutely refused to get involved in Bosnia and Kosovo unless we provided the majority of the troops. 10 years later we are still the only thing keeping Serbs and Muslims from slaughtering each other. If we pulled out, that would resume immediately, and good luck trying to get the Europeans to fill our shoes. And if they were there, good luck trying to get them to get involved any where else around the world.

I'm not sure about that one but I thought that the missions in bosnia and macedonia are by now under EU/NATO command. And actually I as a European would really ask you Americans to stop helping us so we finally get our backsides back up to take responsibility. Bosnia and similar regions being the precise reason why I expect Europe to finally get on its feet again and solve this trouble in our backyard ourselves, but sadly your point is partly valid though I'd argue in the case of such operations within Europe, Europe would be military capable to do it itself, European nations just don't want to (which I kind of find embarassing), for international crisis the US is indeed the only country maintaining a doctrine of global strike capability (which I find somewhat troublesome but a different topic entirely) and thus the only country to send troops into other people's country.
With such power however one should think more often wether one does more harm than good.

btw: the only two other countries with doctrines of limited global strike capability are France and Britain. For me that makes it always hard to reason that other countries are the aggressor when they don't even have the military doctrine (intention) and material to wage war away from home.

[danzig]

I'm sure most people read Drak's interesting comments....

This is not a direct reply to anything Drak said, but his statements have lead me to think about something.

Think about how Iranians would think about America when:

The American government supported Iraq invading Iran. The Americans put the Iraqi president in power (Mr. Hussein), the Americans supplied the Iraqi's with their small arms and military equipment, and the American government whole heartedly supported Iraq invading Iran!

The Iran-Iraq war lasted from 1980-1988! That's eight years of a war of attrition. The war cost over 1 MILLION lives and ravaged the Iranian economy.

I'd like to hear what Drak, or any other American supporter/Iranian hater has to say about this.

You don't mess with another country and be shocked when it hits back,
Erik

Yeah and? Iran was viewed as a bigger 'threat' then so it was US policy to support countries to counter countries it feared falling under Soviet influence. The US didnt 'make' Iran and Iraq go to war, they did that themselves but it supported Iraq in the conflict. You are aware most western nations, Russia included supply millions and millions of dollars of military equipment to other countries regardless of the conquences. BTW if Iran wants to hit back at a country that messes with it, it should try the Brits since the meddled with Iran just as much and for longer

[rez]

"BTW if Iran wants to hit back at a country that messes with it, it should try the Brits since the meddled with Iran just as much and for longer "

You do realise how much Persians hate the British now don't you? I've been accused of being am Islamic Spy because of my British heritage by Persians. I assure you the Persian People have no love for the meddling British either.

I on the other hand love the guys, being raised there and all

[Saint-Germain]

Moved to the Mudpit.

[Richard the Lionheart]

This belongs in the mudpit I think.

EDIT: Looks like Menander got it.

[MasterAdnin]

Damn man. Didn't realise this. This is just another reason why America wants to deny Iran nuclear testing and programs. I don't doubt that Iran is continuing the nuclear programs just to **** the United States off and in the end, get some revenge too.

Peace,
Adnan

[LSJ]

The world is a difficult place to deal with.
The only way to make sure you aren't bitten in the arse by your own actions is to not get involved. Although that way people think of you as a lazy person and you lose friends...
Whenever you help someone, you are hurting another.
You aid one country with a war, so the enemy nation bombs you 20 years down the road.
You bring aid to one country and not another. 30 years later the country you didn't help is taken over by a new regime, so you go and bomb them and tell them you are helping them. What else will they do but shoot you in the face? Apart from being a donkey-mud slinger.
Every action can have an equal, but usually opposite, reaction.

[IamthePope]

The world is a difficult place to deal with.
The only way to make sure you aren't bitten in the arse by your own actions is to not get involved. Although that way people think of you as a lazy person and you lose friends...
Whenever you help someone, you are hurting another.
You aid one country with a war, so the enemy nation bombs you 20 years down the road.
You bring aid to one country and not another. 30 years later the country you didn't help is taken over by a new regime, so you go and bomb them and tell them you are helping them. What else will they do but shoot you in the face? Apart from being a donkey-mud slinger.
Every action can have an equal, but usually opposite, reaction.

Too bad America has no way of withdrawing our influence from the global scene without leaving a power vacuum in its wake that would create further instability. We live in what the French mockingly call the "Pax Americana". Without American indirect imperialism, local powers would compete and war with each other for political dominance.

While the intervention of American influence necessitates danger, it also provides our nation with great oppurtunity and ability to inact world wide change. In my mind it would be cowardly and foolish to do otherwise

[Kanaric]

Too bad America has no way of withdrawing our influence from the global scene without leaving a power vacuum in its wake that would create further instability. We live in what the French mockingly call the "Pax Americana". Without American indirect imperialism, local powers would compete and war with each other for political dominance.

While the intervention of American influence necessitates danger, it also provides our nation with great oppurtunity and ability to inact world wide change. In my mind it would be cowardly and foolish to do otherwise

And you know this from what? What american generals will tell you? Pfft. You dont know this until it actually happens, otherwise your just spurting baseless political lies and nationalistic propoganda.

The vacumn would be instantly filled by UK and related allies that do this kind of thing allready. The US isn't the only country to do this type of work, regardless of what propogandists have brainwashed you into believing.

[crazyj]

And you know this from what? What american generals will tell you? Pfft. You dont know this until it actually happens, otherwise your just spurting baseless political lies and nationalistic propoganda.

The vacumn would be instantly filled by UK and related allies that do this kind of thing allready. The US isn't the only country to do this type of work, regardless of what propogandists have brainwashed you into believing.

The U.S. is the only country CAPABLE of doing that kind of work. And funny that you would have no problem with the U.K. or others stepping in to do the same things that we are doing now (which they couldn't.)

You guys want mayhem around the world? Ok, watch what would happen if we were to retreate into pure isolationism, pulling all foreign aid, pulling our Navy from the sealanes, not mediating disputes, etc.

For instance, the Europeans absolutely refused to get involved in Bosnia and Kosovo unless we provided the majority of the troops. 10 years later we are still the only thing keeping Serbs and Muslims from slaughtering each other. If we pulled out, that would resume immediately, and good luck trying to get the Europeans to fill our shoes. And if they were there, good luck trying to get them to get involved any where else around the world.

Dunno, but maybe you aren't aware of our economic and military clout. You think you can just pull the largest, best equipped, and best trained military out of world affairs and have it picked up by countries whose military size and force-projection capabilities aren't even a fraction of ours? What world do you live in. Thats like saying that after Western Rome fell the Goths were just as capable of maintaining the empire's borders worldwide.

We are present in 100's of countries, doing jobs on such a scale precisely because we are the only ones who can. I love how you think this assessment is "spurting baseless political lies and nationalist propaganda." Check our GDP, the structure of our Army and USMC, and the size of our Navy then compare them to the rest of the world before you conclude that relying on such facts is "baseless."

[internationalist]

I'm sure most people read Drak's interesting comments....

This is not a direct reply to anything Drak said, but his statements have lead me to think about something.

Think about how Iranians would think about America when:

The American government supported Iraq invading Iran. The Americans put the Iraqi president in power (Mr. Hussein), the Americans supplied the Iraqi's with their small arms and military equipment, and the American government whole heartedly supported Iraq invading Iran!

The Iran-Iraq war lasted from 1980-1988! That's eight years of a war of attrition. The war cost over 1 MILLION lives and ravaged the Iranian economy.

I'd like to hear what Drak, or any other American supporter/Iranian hater has to say about this.

You don't mess with another country and be shocked when it hits back,
Erik

Ironically, the U.S. supplied Iran with arms during the same conflict!!!! Wow hows that for good foreign policy?!

[GeneralLee]

Ironically, the U.S. supplied Iran with arms during the same conflict!!!! Wow hows that for good foreign policy?!

And despite all the outrage we kept our priorities in order.

[internationalist]

Just slightly biased dont you think? You left out the hostage taking, the support for hezbollah, hamas, and any shady islamic organization that promises to hurt the west or Isreal.

AND the U.S. sponsored overthrow of the Iranian PM Mossadegh! (the democratically elected PM of Iran.

[rez]

I think he meant the Average Iranian person General Lee.

The vile offenses you mentioned were comitted by the government. Although the hostage taking was done through a real hatred of America and was a sore day for humanity.

[GeneralLee]

I think he meant the Average Iranian person General Lee.

The vile offenses you mentioned were comitted by the government. Although the hostage taking was done through a real hatred of America and was a sore day for humanity.

My apologies, editing now.

[crazyj]

The American government supported Iraq invading Iran. The Americans put the Iraqi president in power (Mr. Hussein), the Americans supplied the Iraqi's with their small arms and military equipment, and the American government whole heartedly supported Iraq invading Iran!

Erik

We didn't put Saddam Hussein "in power." He did that himself. We didn't supply them with their "small arms and military equipment." We gave them very limited military help (less than 3% of his arsenal). Why do you think Iraq's main weapons were Ak's, Soviet tanks, Soviet choppers, Soviet jets, etc. You guys have actually forgotten who Saddams biggest friend and supplier were eh? Hussein saw himself as another little Stalin, not as FDR.

Yes, we supported them invading Iran because we didn't think Iraq would win, but would simply diminish the power of the Iranians (who by taking hostages only a year before demonstrated their blatant hostility to the U.S.). When Saddam DID seem as if he would win, we freaked out and gave some help to Iran because we didn't want either power in control of the entire Iran/Iraq area and becoming a Middle East superpower with the potential to annex the entire oil nexus, with further attacks on Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, etc.

We didn't know who Saddam was then, or what he would do to his own people (using Shia children to clear out minefields in the later stages of the war, gassing Kurds, etc.) He was a relative unknown, and one who certainly achieved power on his own.

And please no more lies about us giving him chemical weapons. Iraq bought some generic chemical ingredients from American firms, ingredients which could have been used in fertilizers, plastics, and a hundred other things. Europeans sold him key ingredients and helped build his factories. Get with it guys.

@IamthePope: right on

Damn man. Didn't realise this. This is just another reason why America wants to deny Iran nuclear testing and programs. I don't doubt that Iran is continuing the nuclear programs just to **** the United States off and in the end, get some revenge too.

Peace,
Adnan

If some radicals hadn't seized American hostages we wouldn't have had reason to fear Iran and subtlely support Hussein in the early years of the war. Also, if we hadn't stepped in with Iranian aid then he WOULD have won, and Iranians would have experienced the same fate as so many Kurds and Shia in a new, "greater Iraq."

Iran isn't going after nukes to just peeve people off, they are going after them to slaughter the Jews in "one perfect storm" and create a nuclear umbrella under which they can continue their terrorist operations worldwide.