DogOnPorch Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 But did'nt President Goober look into Putin's eyes and see his soul?? El Presidente' for life. Got to admire the man...lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 I am not implying there is a threat, all im saying is the main advantage the British had, is now gone. If the Argentinians were to get a hold of those Islands, there is very little the British could do without say EU or US support. And how would Argentina retake the Falklands? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 And you cant wait for him to commit genocide before you decide to stop him. im afraid harpers gonna commit genocide in the future the world should remove him!! .. see how ridic your thinking is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Really? When? Is it? How is it being bullied? Describe. You mean when the Iranian military threw that communist out in 1953 for being too friendly with the Soviets? The same one who stole the British owned oil wells? Ah yeah...he got his. With CIA help, thank goodness. It was the era he lived in...you chose your sides carefully...unlike today where we have Canadians openly siding with Canada's enemies. I remember the 1970s. Pity you do not. Erm...You had me until you called Mossadiq a Pinko...He did nationalize the Iranian oil industry,which pissed off the likes of BP and Shell...The oil BS was the driving force behind that CIA led coup,which gave us the Shah,and,lead to the Islamic Revolution in '79 which leads us to the dilly bars running the show there now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 im afraid harpers gonna commit genocide in the future the world should remove him!! .. see how ridic your thinking is What evidence is there that Harper plans genocide? Has he called for the death of any certain countries? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Irans terrified that the west is going to attack THEM. There were three countries named in the "axis of evil". They want to get left alone like NOrth Korea, instead of sacked like Iraq. And they SHOULD be scared. The US has a history of provoking Iran, interfering in its domestic affairs, and directly supporting invasions of Iran by Iraq. A military "victory" for Iran would simply be to not get sacked like Iraq did. The reason Iraq got sacked and North Korea didnt was because North Korea has put themselves in a position where they could do a whole lot of damage if there was a war, even though they would be guaranteed to lose. This makes it unlikely that there WILL be a war. This is what happens when some Twit goes around describing a group of entire nations as "Evil" and then destroys one of them. The other ones get real nervous. North Korea was not attacked because they have 13,000 artillery pieces aimed at South Korea, and it is estimated that within the first hours of war, there would be millions of casualties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 El Presidente' for life. Got to admire the man...lol. More like looking into the black eyes/soul of a KGB killer... I'm not certain Vlad is all that "admirable"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Erm...You had me until you called Mossadiq a Pinko...He did nationalize the Iranian oil industry,which pissed off the likes of BP and Shell...The oil BS was the driving force behind that CIA led coup,which gave us the Shah,and,lead to the Islamic Revolution in '79 which leads us to the dilly bars running the show there now... the west is only good it seems at creating future enemies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Erm...You had me until you called Mossadiq a Pinko...He did nationalize the Iranian oil industry,which pissed off the likes of BP and Shell...The oil BS was the driving force behind that CIA led coup,which gave us the Shah,and,lead to the Islamic Revolution in '79 which leads us to the dilly bars running the show there now... The Shah came much earlier, actually. 1941...thanks to Churchill and Stalin not liking the Shah's Nazi dad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 1, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 What evidence is there that Harper plans genocide? Has he called for the death of any certain countries? there doesnt need to be any proof, all you have to do is THINK it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) North Korea was not attacked because they have 13,000 artillery pieces aimed at South Korea, and it is estimated that within the first hours of war, there would be millions of casualties. Ummmm... i think theres been a misunderstanding. You just replied to my post and made the exact same point I had already made, almost verbatum. The reason Iraq got sacked and North Korea didnt was because North Korea has put themselves in a position where they could do a whole lot of damage if there was a war, even though they would be guaranteed to lose. Edited December 1, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 The Shah came much earlier, actually. 1941...thanks to Churchill and Stalin not liking the Shah's Nazi dad. Not shocking the US propped up the progeny of a Fascist during the Cold War,however,the blowback is definately palpable... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 What evidence is there that Harper plans genocide? Has he called for the death of any certain countries? Its not what YOU think its what HE saysand DOES. If he says I want to destroy so and so, and is attempting to get the means to accomplish that, by all means the world should be worried. But just because some nutcase does not like the leader does not make it a requirment for military intervention. The Argument is that Iranian President and Irans policy is that they will destroy Israel, and are simultainiously trying to aquire nuclear weapons. Its not Israel accusing Iran of wanting to destroy Israel, its Iran saying it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 there doesnt need to be any proof, all you have to do is THINK it Perhaps you should think happy thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Jack: Erm...You had me until you called Mossadiq a Pinko. In 1953, he indeed qualified as a pinko. Why do you think he wanted to nationalize the oil? To sell it back to the British? lol....Noooooooooo. He wanted to sell it to the guys just across the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 In 1953, he indeed qualified as a pinko. Why do you think he wanted to nationalize the oil? To sell it back to the British? lol....Noooooooooo. He wanted to sell it to the guys just across the border. Possibly...Or simply control the oil industry within the borders of Iran... Chronologically,I take your point,however.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Ummmm... i think theres been a misunderstanding. You just replied to my post and made the exact same point I had already made, almost verbatum. The reason Iraq got sacked and North Korea didnt was because North Korea has put themselves in a position where they could do a whole lot of damage if there was a war, even though they would be guaranteed to lose. I agree, but what I understood from that was that you were implying it was due to their nuclear weapons and Iran is just trying to get some security. If I misunderstood this I would like to apologize to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) I agree, but what I understood from that was that you were implying it was due to their nuclear weapons and Iran is just trying to get some security. If I misunderstood this I would like to apologize to you. No problem at all. And no I just meant that North Korea was in a position to cause a lot of problems. I personally still dont even believe North Korea does have any usable nuclear ordinance, although it problably helps to keep people guessing. You are exactly right... That big artillary battery is the deterent. Anyhow... as far as the countries in question it would be flat out batshit insane for them to NOT try and aquire some kind of deterent to western aggression. How many times has Iran been screwed with by the west, and invaded by western backed Iraq? It would be irresponsible for them to not try and create some kind of firewall against this aggression, and the only reason Iran wasnt sacked a long time ago was because they have SOME ability to respond. Most of the worlds oil exports have to drive right along Irans shore for a couple of hundred miles, it has proxies in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon that can cause problems, and it has a "fair" ammount of ordinance that can reach various western allies. The question is, will it be enough? Edited December 1, 2011 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Possibly...Or simply control the oil industry within the borders of Iran... Chronologically,I take your point,however.... People also like to put the accent on the CIA in this affair. They had little hands on involvement other than providing money and aircraft to run the Shah in and out of Iran as his lovableness factor changed. This was mostly an Iranian officers affair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 People also like to put the accent on the CIA in this affair. They had little hands on involvement other than providing money and aircraft to run the Shah in and out of Iran as his lovableness factor changed. This was mostly an Iranian officers affair. Not shocking...The CIA basically assisted in the same fashion in Salvador Allende's demise (see suicide )and installed that great humanitarian,General Augusto Pinochet!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 Not shocking...The CIA basically assisted in the same fashion in Salvador Allende's demise (see suicide )and installed that great humanitarian,General Augusto Pinochet!!!! The Shah may have been a tyrant...but he at least was torturing the bastards in power today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 The Shah may have been a tyrant...but he at least was torturing the bastards in power today. Sadly,he tortured anyone else who questioned him,as well...And because of that,those bastards are the ones calling the shots now,sadly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 (edited) Sadly,he tortured anyone else who questioned him,as well...And because of that,those bastards are the ones calling the shots now,sadly... To be fair, he was pretty benevolent for most of his run. It was towards the end when his secret police went nutzo. But he was going pretty nutzo himself by then. Edit: His wife was also a big factor in Iran being a very progressive Muslim nation back then. Miniskirts and the Beatles + women's rights. Burqas were not in use, etc. Edited December 1, 2011 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted December 1, 2011 Report Share Posted December 1, 2011 To be fair, he was pretty benevolent for most of his run. It was towards the end when his secret police went nutzo. But he was going pretty nutzo himself by then. To be fair,he was benevolent to those who towed the party line... Anyone else...Not so much... It tends to go that way with Fascists... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted December 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2011 People also like to put the accent on the CIA in this affair. They had little hands on involvement other than providing money and aircraft to run the Shah in and out of Iran as his lovableness factor changed. This was mostly an Iranian officers affair. little hands on involvement? they got him into the country and in position to take over thats little hands on involvement? without the cia there would have been no shah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.