One Day After Warning Russia of Civilian Casualties,

Germany had the industrial might and military clout to cause some very serious harm to international commerce and trade. Iraq did not.

 

Then you obviously don't understand the geography of the Gulf and the fact that the world economy depends on the oil flow out of it. Many nations imported 100% of their oil from that gulf. You propose leaving it to the whims of a madman? Glad you weren't in charge.

 

You believe wrong then. Iran was a democratic and Western-oriented nation. America destroyed her democracy, installed a vicious dictator, the Shah, and his equally barbaric CIA-trained secret police (SAVAK). The Iranian Revolution followed in direct retaliation against this US-inspired oppression and we find ourselves in the situation which both the US and Great Britain conspired together to create.
Joining the dots is easy as long as you can understand just a little history. Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

 

Whoops...

[video=youtube;5rXPrfnU3G0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0[/video]

And re your post No. 28, which stated about Saddam (previously America's dear friend):

'So he never invaded Kuwait? Or we should just stay out of other's invasions? What is your position? Dozens of UN resolutions against Saddam didn't happen?'

It seems that US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, communicated to Saddam tacit US approval for his plans to invade Kuwait 8 days before it happened. See HERE and HERE

 

Why is it left to us foreigners to educate Americans about their own country?

 

So nationalizing industries is not to be associated with communism? The Ayatollah didn't have to kill/exile a bunch of communists that helped him take over in 1979? The Soviets were not successfully encouraging provinces to secede from Iran in the 1950's?

Perhaps it is you that could use some context.

 

The only ones pretending Saddam had WMD was the UK and US. Or haven't you come across the so called "dodgy dossier" story that has persistently beleaguered Tony Blair? Much like the fabricated Yellowcake story, I guess (see HERE).

Yep, when it comes to fabricating facts to create excuses to go to war the Brits and Yanks are outright masters at conning their public into acquiescence.

 

Britain had nationalised rail, steel and coal and utilities industries for decades under governments both left and right. I don't believe we ever had a Communist in power. You're free to correct me, of course.

 

There is the one vid you got after 14 years of war in an age when everyone has the ability to shoot video AND a wiki leak of thousands of communications. We got more than that on German atrocities in a war that lasted a third of these, and in an age when almost no one had video. Conclusion: "US regularly kills civilians " is nothing but a regular use of propaganda.

 

So many of them are intellectually blind and don't want to be educated anyway. I blame their education system, Hollywood, Disney and the diet induced systemic stupidity that their elites have artfully foisted on them to keep them working with eyes wide shut.

But that's just me....

 

No, it isn't just you. America needs to be watched-closely.

 

I never said it was exclusively a move that precipitates communism, but when combined with the context of 1950's Iran, it certainly was a possibility.

 

It was their country to do as they pleased with. The West's involvement was unwarranted and illegal by any standards of international law; and you don't invade sovereign nations and overthrow governments on the basis of 'possibility'. Unless you're America...

 

Oh what a lovely conspiracy theory.

Anyway, there's plenty more if you'd care to root them out. Try THIS and THIS.

Anyway, that makes four now if you care to count the previous one - which you haven't. Any excuse for wilful blindness eh.

 

No it wasn't. Just 8 years before the installation of the shah, the USSR shaved off huge chunks of northern Iran and formed Azerbaijan, which joined the communist empire. Without US intervention since 1945, ALL of Iran would have been part of the USSR.

 

The Allies, including Soviet Russia, had invaded and occupied Iran since 1941. It was only after diplomatic pressure that the USSR eventually withdrew. They had no real need of Iran anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_crisis_of_1946

 

The installation of the Shah by the US. At least be accurate. And when they'd finished with him, the US removed the Shah from power. AS they did to Saddam, their prior close friend. And oh so many other tyrants, warlords and dictators around the world. The US woes them, get's it's nasty way with them and then discards them for a new love. It brings a new meaning to keeping their hand in.

 

Did the US take Iran's territory? Who took the northern part of Iran and formed a separate communist state in Azerbaijan, just 8 years prior to the shah incident? Iran never got that back. The Soviets took it. They would have carved out more of Iran if it weren't for the US. Don't think they weren't trying right up until the 79 revolution, which is why afterwards, the Ayatollah had to expel/kill a bunch of communists who had infiltrated his country.

 

Hah! The ideological aim of communism is to export revolution to the world. Communism won't work unless the whole world goes communist as Marx's theory dictates. The Soviets definitely tried to make Iran communist (and succeeded in the north) which is why all those communists were there during the 79 revolution, and had been there since WWII.

 

Those vids are not vids of war crimes; they are vids of people talking about war crimes. So again, in the age of cell phones and everyone having the capability to video, you have 1 wikileaks heli vid as opposed to hours of footage of German atrocities in WWII in an age when almost no one could video. Something stinks about your claims. You should have much, much more video of US troops committing war crimes if that is what were doing.

 

.... and Kuwait was part of Iraq until Britain lopped it off in the 1920's to deny Iraq access to the Persian Gulf.

Kuwait then took advantage of the Iran/Iraq war and encroached further into Iraq, stealing its oil.

The US basically gave Saddam a green light to go into Kuwait ..... until he did, then the world was 'outraged'.

Your point?

http://www.csun.edu/~vcmth00m/iraqkuwait.html

 

A madman put into to power by America.

 

The point is that the US was acting to prevent communist takeovers of several states around the world, and although some decision makers obviously made mistakes in these responses (because they are human), their objectives were defense against communism, an absolutely abhorrent and dangerous form of government, which in the 1940's-1970'e was a real threat. Cuba, China, Korea, Vietnam, are cases where communism succeeded; there are several more countries from Latin America to Europe to Asia where communists would have taken over if not for US efforts.

You people that come here and bash the US without this context are being misleading.

 

yes, the US dealt with bad men. Unfortunately there are a lot of bad men running countries since 1945. How do you propose the US conduct foreign policy and business in this world without dealing with these men?

Is there some intl rule that says no foreign policy or business is to be conducted with dictators? Or is there some rule that says once the US conducts business with a dictator, it is obligated to support that dictator for life?

 

They are going to spin it. Today the Pentagon says that yes, our guys did it, but it was the Afghans fault for calling in the strike. The doctors said they notified NATO of their GPS coordinates, but it did no good.