-- thank you John Kerry.., US Secretary of State...

[vertical_doug]

The Shah of Iran ruled from 1941-1979, he inherited his position from his father part of a dynasty of sorts.

So, the U.S. was responsible for the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran?? That's.....uh.......interesting.

During the early part of the Shah's reign, Iran also had a democratically elected Parliament and PM. The PM Mohammed Mossaddegh wanted to revisited the royalties charged to Anglo-American (present day BP). Anglo said no, Iranians nationalized Anglo-American. Later in 1953, British and American covert ops launched project ajax to overthrow the PM and make the Shah absolute ruler. You can read about the 1953 Coup. It is well documented. The heavy handed rule of the Shah post coup led to the eventual revolution.

To be fair, I think internally in the U.S. it was portrayed as: nationalizing Anglo = socialism = communism (the ultimate 1950's evil)

[Loki]

Go above and read. You guys make my head hurt. Good day, sir.

I guess I should ask what about what in your initial statement is actually true, nothing that I see.

[monadnocky]

The Shah of Iran ruled from 1941-1979, he inherited his position from his father part of a dynasty of sorts.

So, the U.S. was responsible for the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran?? That's.....uh.......interesting.

The United States was definitely one of the major factors for the '79 Islamic Revolution. The CIA overthrew Iran's democratically elected leader, the beloved Mohammad Mosaddegh, in what was known as the 28 Mordad coup, in 1953, after Mosaddegh got uppity about wanting BP oil to basically stop raping the Iranian people for their oil. This was definitely one of the CIA's most evil moments, and a key mistake in world history, setting the stage for vehement hatred towards the US that has existed ever since.

Although some accounts have it that the Shah was "cheered" in Tehran after he took the reigns of power, it's understood now that many of those crowds were paid for via TPAJAX (the CIA's codeword for the operation). At the time, most Iranians probably disliked, or even tolerated the Shah; he didn't start to get completely evil until he learned his lesson from the CIA and formed the SAVAK (Iranian secret police- many if not most trained in the United States!). Within a few years, the average Iranian hated, feared, and loathed the Shah. He was an evil, despicable despot, but he was our evil, despicable despot.

If we hadn't gotten rid of Mosaddegh, if we had just left things alone... although it's impossible to predict events in the past that didn't happen, there's little chance that the Iranian people would have looked towards Khomeini as their savior. But they were so tired of the persecution under the Shah, so fed up with the torture and the people going missing and the human rights violations that basically Khomeini looked like Ghandi at that point. Anything but the (completely US backed) Shah.

And, the Shah didn't rule for much of your timeline. Yes, he "ruled," but in name only, like Queen Elizabeth "rules" England.

[Mabouya]

The Shah of Iran ruled from 1941-1979, he inherited his position from his father part of a dynasty of sorts.

So, the U.S. was responsible for the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran?? That's.....uh.......interesting.

If this is your view of modern Iranian history I would think that here in America you should be a Royalist, actively working to restore GIII and the British crown's rightful rule over the 13 colonies.

[Dallas Tex]

If this is your view of modern Iranian history I would think that here in America you should be a Royalist, actively working to restore GIII and the British crown's rightful rule over the 13 colonies.

If you thing the relationship between the King of Iran and the Prime Minister is the same relationship as the President of US and the King of England you couldn't be more wrong.

The Shah or King of Iran was not a symbolic position.

[Mabouya]

But Mosaddegh was, so it was OK for the CIA and the Brits to get rid of him?

[Rich Beaudoin]

I avoid these threads in general, but in this case I think I am one of the few here who has actually lived in Muslim cultures and one of those was Iran. In the late 70s my dad was an engineer at the richest copper mine in the world which was in central Iran near Kerman.
Iranians are just as rational and motivated by the same goals as all of us - safety, prosperity, opportunity for those we care about. When arguments about executing gays are brought up, that is akin to talking about the execution of innocent people by the state of Texas and implying all Texans support capital punishment, which is clearly not true.
The government of Iran is not chosen by the people, and ironically Iran is one of the most pro-US middle eastern nations according to public opinion. Those in power clearly try to manipulate the public, to distract attention, but they are a very well-educated society in general. As seen with the last couple of elections in Iran, the people voted for pro-western moderate candidates, but the elections were rigged (most agree).
It is easy to hate and de-humanize strangers, but when you know someone it becomes much harder to hate them. Lifting sanctions will cause more contact & and trade which means more relationships, even some friendships will develop and that would make us all safer. I don't mind my neighbors owning guns as long as they don't wave them around to solve disputes.
Sorry I'm rambling, my point is that you should not let anyone tell you that other people are not just like you in all the important ways.
Rich

[living_minimal]

Iran is a recognized supporter of world wide terrorism.

So is the United States of America.
Bin Laden comes home to roost | NBC News

It's really painful that, in 2015 with the proliferation of the internet now 20 years in the rear view, people still believe that the US is a bastion of exceptionalism.

[Loki]

So is the United States of America.
Bin Laden comes home to roost | NBC News

It's really painful that, in 2015 with the proliferation of the internet now 20 years in the rear view, people still believe that the US is a bastion of exceptionalism.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[jclay]

So is the United States of America.
Bin Laden comes home to roost | NBC News

It's really painful that, in 2015 with the proliferation of the internet now 20 years in the rear view, people still believe that the US is a bastion of exceptionalism.

With one major difference being that our recent actions have resulted in orders of magnitude more deaths of innocents than OBL.

One must look in the mirror if one is to change and improve. This country and much of its electorate needs to do that. The list of awful despots that we've trained and supported, who have brutalized their populations beyond belief is horrifying, if one cares to look.

I choose to believe that nobody on this list is evil; that if they knew the extent of the atrocities to which the USA has been a part, they'd they'd vomit. Start reading stuff you don't want to hear; Noam Chomsky is a good place to start. Nick Turse, US-Russia.org and Tomdispatch are illuminating as well.

[Dallas Tex]

^ shiny side out, brotha. Shiny side out.

[Badonkadonk]

Tough issues here- but man it would be nice to picture a well educated secular Iranian society working towards peace, stability, and progress in the Middle East. I sure don't have a view on the probability of that any more than the passionate knuckleheads who have already chimed in. Hopefully we are getting good service in good faith from the folks working directly on all of this.

[Dallas Tex]

Tough issues here- but man it would be nice to picture a well educated secular Iranian society working towards peace, stability, and progress in the Middle East. .

Absolutely.

Something that I find fascinating is to Google for pictures of Iran prior to the '79 Islamic Revolution.

It looks like the place you are describing. You'd swear you are looking at old pictures of Florida!!

Ladies at the beach in swimsuits. College girls in engineering classes. Education, industry, etc.

Google pictures for 'pre' and 'post' 1979. It's reall interesting.

[Cookietruck]

here is a good interview. perhaps you can read this and have little more confidence in the Obama's intelligence and the position of his foreign policy?
so much good stuff in there that i won't go through and quote some of it. just read it all.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/op...view.html?_r=1

[XR2]

The ignorance of truth by many is astounding. Current media (where many get their viewpoints/knowledge) would have you believe that the middle east has been nothing but war and destruction forever and everyone there wishes to kill the rest of us. Little could be further from the truth. Look at the art that is currently being destroyed by ISIS. It's hundreds,even thousands of years old. Art is rarely created in an environment of war nor survives it.

Have any of you had a recent conversation with an Iranian citizen? I have had many with many due to work circumstances. They are not very different than the rest of us. The common thread when talking politics is to get the religion out of government. They all want a secular government. Look at Turkey's struggles to get and maintain a secular government. Successful but tenuous at best. I have several associates who regularly visit Iran freely. I ask them what it's like. Their answers are surprising. They show me photos of beautiful countryside and mountains. Other than a few cultural differences it's a lot like everywhere else. Iran has well educated populace. According to those I've asked the religious extremist is a minority and in most of the country is not as we're told it is. If that's not true why would someone who disagrees with it go home regularly? I did get many comments from them on where I was educated because many Americans distrust and shun them. They are subject to discrimination almost daily. Land of the free huh?

In the end we're all humans. The difference is in what the governments get away with,the US included. How many of you actually supported the insanity that was our destruction of Iraq? Unfortunately due to things few understand there are those whom ruling with an iron fist is preferable to civil war. Which is what's going on if no one wants to say so or not. And we (the USA) are responsible. it will take decades to clean this mess up should we decide as a nation being at war constantly is a despicable waste of our good fortune as a nation.

Turn off your television and have a conversation with another human.

[bigbill]

I've avoided this because I don't really like political discussions on this forum.

In my job, I work with Russians pretty frequently, in May I will work with a group for two weeks. They are great guys, they care about the same things I do, many are cyclists. I really enjoy my time spent with them. Their government is evil, corrupt, and is basically a third world military with nuclear weapons. Doesn't change my opinion of the Russian people, but it's the reality of the situation.

Iran is supporting terrorism throughout the Middle East. They are using proxy armies to carry out their desire to put Shia in control of the Middle East. These talks and frameworks address the nuclear issue, they don't change behaviors. Lifting of sanctions will bring a flow of cash and open doors for technology that has been previously prevented from reaching Iranian hands. Iran is developing ICBM's, why? They have missiles now that will reach all of the Middle East and even into Europe, what is the purpose of missiles designed to reach another continent? What kind of warhead?

I spent 27 years in the military, started on missile submarines late in the Cold War, did some Special Project Missions on another submarine, became an officer and did six deployments on three different carriers. I've talked to Iran military on bridge to bridge radios while navigating the Strait of Hormuz and while driving a carrier in the Persian Gulf. Each encounter was genial and professional, we even talked about the weather. But, the Iranians do exercises all the time to show how they'd take out an American aircraft carrier and that would be in my thoughts when we'd squeeze through the narrow straits.

I have no doubts that the Iranian people are progressive and want additional freedoms but their government supports "Death to America" and the destruction of Israel. I have a hard time getting past that.

[9tubes]

I think they were already using as much money as they wanted for their nuclear programs. It isn't as if they're a democracy and have to go to congress every year to justify the budget. If it's purely a budget thing, I doubt the deal will have a significant effect one way or the other on changing the rate at which they approach getting a bomb. The military probably gets whatever it want for that.

What is gained is that the Iranians are agreeing to limits on the number, quality and output of their centrifuges. Without any deal they keep operating as they have in the past.

Actually, Iran is a democracy and its President does have to go to the legislature every year to set a budget.

It's also a country with 75 million people and a fully-diversified economy. Iran builds more cars than the UK. It has the funds to afford a nuclear weapons program. However, every US intelligence group that has examined the situation says that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program. Mossad says that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program. The IAEA says that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program.

[9tubes]

If you suppose Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons, ask yourself why an oil-rich country would need a "peaceful " nuclear power generation program.

Iran started its nuclear energy program in the 1970s. It stated then that they knew oil would run out someday (at that point they thought 25 years or so) and they wanted to save oil for transportation uses and use nuclear for everything else. Iran got its nuclear energy technology mostly from the US and France. Back then Cheney and Rumsfeld advocated on behalf of the Reagan administration for the need for Iran to develop nuclear energy. Surprised? Consider that perhaps the sanctions aren't about nuclear energy or nuclear weapons at all.

[joosttx]

Iran started its nuclear energy program in the 1970s. It stated then that they knew oil would run out someday (at that point they thought 25 years or so) and they wanted to save oil for transportation uses and use nuclear for everything else. Iran got its nuclear energy technology mostly from the US and France. Back then Cheney and Rumsfeld advocated on behalf of the Reagan administration for the need for Iran to develop nuclear energy. Surprised? Consider that perhaps the sanctions aren't about nuclear energy or nuclear weapons at all.

What then are they about?

[bigbill]

Since I've cracked the seal on this one I'll share one more thought about this situation.

We can discuss how the Iranian people feel about the US and for the most part, it's very positive. Something important to remember, in WW2 we didn't fight the Germans, we fought the Nazis. The German people were much like us but their government was evil and bent on the destruction of an entire group of people and establishing a unified Europe under Nazi rule. It's not the people, it's government that they allow.