Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Discussion of current events
User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Re:Iran: the enemy that America made.

Post by cassowary » Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:16 am

Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:06 am
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:09 am
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:01 am
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:27 am

More military spending = stronger NATO. The Europeans, being fair minded people, will ackowledge that they are not spending enough. So I don't think the resentment will last. They are supposed to spend 2% of GDP but most are not spending that, especially Germany.
Together, European countries spend more in defense than Russia, but while Russia has a credible defense, Europe has nothing. Europe doesn't need NATO or the US. It needs to pool its resources and get the assets and the organization needed for the whole thing to function in an effective manner. Military units may be uninational, but the officers and staff must have a common language (English).
That is unfortunately why Europe needs the US - to provide the leadership. I say "unfortunately" because I much rather the US withdraws from Europe and build up its forces in Asia to deter China. If only the bum Europeans can get their act together.
We don't need the US. We have just been too lazy to pool our resources, but we can very well do it on our own.
Stop being lazy and defend yourselves from the pesky Russians. So that the US can redeploy its limited resources to Asia.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Re:Iran: the enemy that America made.

Post by Sertorio » Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:18 am

cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:16 am
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:06 am
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:09 am
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:01 am
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:27 am

More military spending = stronger NATO. The Europeans, being fair minded people, will ackowledge that they are not spending enough. So I don't think the resentment will last. They are supposed to spend 2% of GDP but most are not spending that, especially Germany.
Together, European countries spend more in defense than Russia, but while Russia has a credible defense, Europe has nothing. Europe doesn't need NATO or the US. It needs to pool its resources and get the assets and the organization needed for the whole thing to function in an effective manner. Military units may be uninational, but the officers and staff must have a common language (English).
That is unfortunately why Europe needs the US - to provide the leadership. I say "unfortunately" because I much rather the US withdraws from Europe and build up its forces in Asia to deter China. If only the bum Europeans can get their act together.
We don't need the US. We have just been too lazy to pool our resources, but we can very well do it on our own.
Stop being lazy and defend yourselves from the pesky Russians. So that the US can redeploy its limited resources to Asia.
It's not from the Russians we must defend ourselves, it is from the world oligarchy led by the US...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Iran: the enemy the West made for itself.

Post by cassowary » Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:04 am

neverfail wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:14 am
neverfail wrote:
Mon Jul 16, 2018 7:21 pm
As for your speculation that Mossadegh might have led Iran into the Soviet camp; I don't believe that this was ever on the cards.
cassowary wrote:
Mon Jul 16, 2018 7:40 am
He was a lefty, was he not? So it is possible and even probable. But, I have to admit, that we will never know for sure.
A lefty? I do not know whether you are being deliberately ingenuous for the sake of point scoring or whether you are just exposing your block-headed prejudice again. Either way you anger me Cassowary.

Read up about it and dispel your ignorance - if that is possible:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iran ... 7%C3%A9tat
From your link:
The Tudeh, on the other hand, quietly approved the short-circuiting of Iran’s nascent democratic institutions in the hope the newly created dictatorial powers would soon fall into their hands.
Partly through the efforts of Iranians sympathizing with the British, and partly in fear of the growing dictatorial powers of the Prime Minister, several former members of Mosaddegh's coalition turned against him, fearing arrest.
The Tudeh was Iran's communist party. They were Mossadegh's allies. Mossadegh had assumed emergency powers and sliding into a dictatorship. That was unavoidable given Iran's then-primitive state. So much for the myth that he was a Democrat.

Had Mossadegh remained in power, the Tudeh might have been proven right and might have taken over the country. That was the fear of Ayatollah Kashani, Mossadegh's erstwhile ally, who turned against him.

Excerpt from link:
Kashani’s eventual split from Mossadegh is widely known. Religious leaders in the country feared the growing power of the communist Tudeh Party, and believed that Mossadegh was too weak to save the country from the socialist threat.
So Ayatollah Kashani shared the Communists' assessment that Mossadegh was too weak to stop the Communists from taking power. Of course, that means Iran would have been ruled by a Communist dictatorship as in all Communist countries.

As I said, it is impossible for anyone to know what would have happened if the CIA had not launched a coup. But I am pretty sure that a democracy can be ruled out. A Socialist/Communist dictatorship in Iran allied to the Soviet Union was certainly possible and perhaps even probable.

Had that happaped, the Soviet Union would have gained a warm water port in the Persian Gulf to spread the Socialist/Communist ideology and subversion. Would Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and others have fallen too? Would the west had lost the Cold War if 70% of the then world's oil reserves fallen into unfriendly hands? There is too much at stake to take such a risk. At least, the west had an ally in Iran till 1976 and allies in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf petro states till today.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Iran: the enemy the West made for itself.

Post by cassowary » Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:21 am

Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:30 am
neverfail wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:14 am

Some of the ignorant bullshit you [Cass] publish on this website frankly causes my blood temperature to rise to boiling point.
Being a wine drinker, rather than a scotch one ( :D ), my blood doesn't boil that easily... I just find it amazing that a seemingly intelligent person can be so incredibly dumb when dealing with these type of issues. Maybe I will send him a case of good Alentejo red wine, and some cheese to go with it... :D
I like wine and cheese too.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Re:Iran: the enemy that America made.

Post by cassowary » Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:22 am

Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:18 am
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:16 am
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:06 am
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:09 am
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:01 am
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:27 am

More military spending = stronger NATO. The Europeans, being fair minded people, will ackowledge that they are not spending enough. So I don't think the resentment will last. They are supposed to spend 2% of GDP but most are not spending that, especially Germany.
Together, European countries spend more in defense than Russia, but while Russia has a credible defense, Europe has nothing. Europe doesn't need NATO or the US. It needs to pool its resources and get the assets and the organization needed for the whole thing to function in an effective manner. Military units may be uninational, but the officers and staff must have a common language (English).
That is unfortunately why Europe needs the US - to provide the leadership. I say "unfortunately" because I much rather the US withdraws from Europe and build up its forces in Asia to deter China. If only the bum Europeans can get their act together.
We don't need the US. We have just been too lazy to pool our resources, but we can very well do it on our own.
Stop being lazy and defend yourselves from the pesky Russians. So that the US can redeploy its limited resources to Asia.
It's not from the Russians we must defend ourselves, it is from the world oligarchy led by the US...
Ah. Like most leftists, you think the US is the source of the world's problems. It is the left that is the source of most of the world's problems.

neverfail
Posts: 2520
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Iran: the enemy the West made for itself.

Post by neverfail » Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:30 pm

cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:04 am


So Ayatollah Kashani shared the Communists' assessment that Mossadegh was too weak to stop the Communists from taking power. Of course, that means Iran would have been ruled by a Communist dictatorship as in all Communist countries.

As I said, it is impossible for anyone to know what would have happened if the CIA had not launched a coup. But I am pretty sure that a democracy can be ruled out. A Socialist/Communist dictatorship in Iran allied to the Soviet Union was certainly possible and perhaps even probable.

Had that happaped, the Soviet Union would have gained a warm water port in the Persian Gulf to spread the Socialist/Communist ideology and subversion. Would Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and others have fallen too? Would the west had lost the Cold War if 70% of the then world's oil reserves fallen into unfriendly hands? There is too much at stake to take such a risk. At least, the west had an ally in Iran till 1976 and allies in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf petro states till today.
I did not know that Mossadegh had such a shaky power base.

Given the absolute horror Muslims normally regard godless, atheist Communism I would still, with hindsight, rule out the likelihood of a Communist takeover having happened in Iran. They tried in Indonesia in 1965 and the result was a large scale massacre of Communists at the hands of irate muslims (along with thousands of hapless Chinese :( ).

Please pardon my earlier attack of pique. :)

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Iran: the enemy the West made for itself.

Post by cassowary » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:51 am

neverfail wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:30 pm
cassowary wrote:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:04 am


So Ayatollah Kashani shared the Communists' assessment that Mossadegh was too weak to stop the Communists from taking power. Of course, that means Iran would have been ruled by a Communist dictatorship as in all Communist countries.

As I said, it is impossible for anyone to know what would have happened if the CIA had not launched a coup. But I am pretty sure that a democracy can be ruled out. A Socialist/Communist dictatorship in Iran allied to the Soviet Union was certainly possible and perhaps even probable.

Had that happaped, the Soviet Union would have gained a warm water port in the Persian Gulf to spread the Socialist/Communist ideology and subversion. Would Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and others have fallen too? Would the west had lost the Cold War if 70% of the then world's oil reserves fallen into unfriendly hands? There is too much at stake to take such a risk. At least, the west had an ally in Iran till 1976 and allies in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf petro states till today.
I did not know that Mossadegh had such a shaky power base.

Given the absolute horror Muslims normally regard godless, atheist Communism I would still, with hindsight, rule out the likelihood of a Communist takeover having happened in Iran. They tried in Indonesia in 1965 and the result was a large scale massacre of Communists at the hands of irate muslims (along with thousands of hapless Chinese :( ).

Please pardon my earlier attack of pique. :)
Don't worry about it, Neverfail. I consider you a friend even though I have never met you. We all blow our top once in a while. :lol:

Back to the discussion. Yes, what you say is possible - another Indonesia scenario with a bloodbath of suspected communists by the religious faction. Or it could be another Afghanistan scenario. The Soviets might have backed someone ruthless to take over Iran. This might have sparked off a revolution against a godless communist leading to a Russian invasion.

The US and British cannot allow the Persian Gulf to be dominated by the Russians. WWIII? Who knows?

neverfail
Posts: 2520
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Iran: the enemy the West made for itself.

Post by neverfail » Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:13 am

cassowary wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:51 am

Back to the discussion. Yes, what you say is possible - another Indonesia scenario with a bloodbath of suspected communists by the religious faction. Or it could be another Afghanistan scenario. The Soviets might have backed someone ruthless to take over Iran. This might have sparked off a revolution against a godless communist leading to a Russian invasion.

The US and British cannot allow the Persian Gulf to be dominated by the Russians. WWIII? Who knows?
In 1953 Stalin was on his death bed. Given how much the USSR decision making power was centralised in his hands I do not believe he would have been capable at this stage in his life of ordering a Russian invasion of Iran - especially in view of a probable clash with Western military forces in the offing.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Iran: the enemy the West made for itself.

Post by cassowary » Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:31 am

neverfail wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:13 am
cassowary wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:51 am

Back to the discussion. Yes, what you say is possible - another Indonesia scenario with a bloodbath of suspected communists by the religious faction. Or it could be another Afghanistan scenario. The Soviets might have backed someone ruthless to take over Iran. This might have sparked off a revolution against a godless communist leading to a Russian invasion.

The US and British cannot allow the Persian Gulf to be dominated by the Russians. WWIII? Who knows?
In 1953 Stalin was on his death bed. Given how much the USSR decision making power was centralised in his hands I do not believe he would have been capable at this stage in his life of ordering a Russian invasion of Iran - especially in view of a probable clash with Western military forces in the offing.
Maybe the communist coup that toppled Mossadegh might take a few years to materialize. It might take place in 1954 when a young vigorous Kruschev was in charge. Would he watch and do nothing in an Iranian civil war between a communist regime and the Mullahs? Won't this inspire Russia's own Muslims to rebel against the USSR if the Muslims win? It would certainly show that history need not "progress' towards communism. Not wanting to lose a communist state to a "reactionary" force under his watch, Kruschev might have invaded. The incentives to invade - control of Persian Gulf oil - was greater than Afghanistan.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Iran: the enemy the West made for itself.

Post by Sertorio » Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:54 am

cassowary wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:31 am
neverfail wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:13 am
cassowary wrote:
Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:51 am

Back to the discussion. Yes, what you say is possible - another Indonesia scenario with a bloodbath of suspected communists by the religious faction. Or it could be another Afghanistan scenario. The Soviets might have backed someone ruthless to take over Iran. This might have sparked off a revolution against a godless communist leading to a Russian invasion.

The US and British cannot allow the Persian Gulf to be dominated by the Russians. WWIII? Who knows?
In 1953 Stalin was on his death bed. Given how much the USSR decision making power was centralised in his hands I do not believe he would have been capable at this stage in his life of ordering a Russian invasion of Iran - especially in view of a probable clash with Western military forces in the offing.
Maybe the communist coup that toppled Mossadegh might take a few years to materialize. It might take place in 1954 when a young vigorous Kruschev was in charge. Would he watch and do nothing in an Iranian civil war between a communist regime and the Mullahs? Won't this inspire Russia's own Muslims to rebel against the USSR if the Muslims win? It would certainly show that history need not "progress' towards communism. Not wanting to lose a communist state to a "reactionary" force under his watch, Kruschev might have invaded. The incentives to invade - control of Persian Gulf oil - was greater than Afghanistan.
The Soviets were a lot more pragmatic than you seem to think. They would never go to war for ideological reasons alone. That's why they signed a treaty with Nazi Germany...

Post Reply