War Against Iran Is Necessary - Soon!

[TyroneSlothrop]

Lets go fight wars yippeee lets put up a picture of Rambo yahooo...what an effing freak

<----- A Cartoonish Movie character

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Quick question: Doesn't war with Iran pretty much guarantee an attempted attack on U.S. interests with whatever they are cooking up in the mountains?

Was just tryin to enjoy these rice krispy treats and came in here. Shit is serious. War NOW!

War usually means attacks in various places. Just like in World War II. Europe, Asia, North Africa. So ?

are we in WW 2 old timer? ...how about a picture of Chuck Norris AND Rambo ...that way we will all be impressed by how "HARD NOSED" you are...you are a total moron

 

[CremeBrulee]

Don't forget Senator Graham is running for president. How much of that display in Congress or the Atlantic editorial for that matter is for voter consumption?

 

[gipper]

Have we learned nothing from decades of military intervention?

War is ALWAYS the health of the STATE...

What the hell does this mean ? Another goofball leftist talking point ?

Leftist??? Really??? I sure get a kick out of posters confusing me with a leftist.

Look up the meaning, since apparently you can't figure it. It might enlighten you. Its meaning should be required learning for all Americans.

Google - War is the health of the state...and get back to me.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

Sounds like you've been watching Faux MSNBC. I those loons are saying that he IAEA, CIA, and Mossad deny that Iran is building nukes, they're even farther out in the lunatic frnge than I thought

EARTH TO JS: The Iranians building nuclear weapons is on TV every day. And almost everybody is aware of the Iranian threat. Even Obama and Kerry agree to that. They just have an idiotic way of trying to defend against it.

Sorry tea cultist, there really isn't going to be a liberation of the Iranian oil fields and nobody cares what your messiah says anymore

 

[frigidweirdo]

As I've said numerous times.

In 2001 there were four enemies of the US that were OPEC members.

In 2002 there was a coup against Chavez, leader of Venezuela.
In 2003 the invasion of Iraq.
In 2011 the bombing and helping to oust Gaddafi.
Iran has suffered sanctions, as has Venezuela recently.

So, is there any surprise that the right feel Iran needs to be invaded? Is there any surprise that they hate this deal with Iran that takes away their excuse for invading?

It's ridiculous, thinly veiled attempt at invasion, we know why, it's not because of nukes, it's not because of their religion, it's because they're OPEC and hate the US.

The funny thing is though that the Saudis are the main player in OPEC going against the wishes of the US. But as they're "allies" the US won't do anything.

Just because one advocates the invasion of Iran, to defend the US from nuclear attack, doesn't mean that they are supportive of the Saudis and OPEC.

As I've said numerous times.

In 2001 there were four enemies of the US that were OPEC members.

In 2002 there was a coup against Chavez, leader of Venezuela.
In 2003 the invasion of Iraq.
In 2011 the bombing and helping to oust Gaddafi.
Iran has suffered sanctions, as has Venezuela recently.

So, is there any surprise that the right feel Iran needs to be invaded? Is there any surprise that they hate this deal with Iran that takes away their excuse for invading?

It's ridiculous, thinly veiled attempt at invasion, we know why, it's not because of nukes, it's not because of their religion, it's because they're OPEC and hate the US.

The funny thing is though that the Saudis are the main player in OPEC going against the wishes of the US. But as they're "allies" the US won't do anything.

Just because one advocates the invasion of Iran, to defend the US from nuclear attack, doesn't mean that they are supportive of the Saudis and OPEC.

Oh, now it's defending the US from nuclear attack. I'm sorry, but Iran isn't going to nuke the US.

You should be more worried about Pakistan.

You know that the supposed threat from Iran is the same as the supposed threat from Iraq in 2003. Non-existent.

Sure, Iran isn't the best of countries, it treats its people not so great, however better than the Saudis, for example. But that's an issue for the Iranian people, not the US.

Why do you think the Iranians want to nuke the USA and not other countries? Think about it, it might tell you a lot about US foreign policy over the last 70 years or so.

But you're right, just because someone supports the invasion of Iran doesn't mean they support the Saudis. However the US govt DOES, which is what is important here.

 

[frigidweirdo]

[ Let the next president worry about the ramifications, just like did Clinton.

Clinton left weakling 43 a nightmare of Peace and prosperity and projected Government budget surplus..........

You did say neither Iran no the US should fund terrorism correct..? that means a tacit agreement that the US does fund terrorism ...it does and then some

since the end of World War II, the United States has:

* Attempted to overthrow more than 50 foreign governments, most of which were democratically-elected.

* Dropped bombs on the people of more than 30 countries.

* Attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders.

* Attempted to suppress a populist or nationalist movement in 20 countries.

* Grossly interfered in democratic elections in at least 30 countries, according to Chapter 18 of his book Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower.

All of these are wars of sorts done to defend the American people. There haven't been enough of them. Morsi should have been taken out, instead of leaving it to the Egyptians. Thank God they got the job done.

Do you not understand the consequences of US action around the world?

Due to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 the US has made the world a much less stable place and far more dangerous for Americans to be in.

 

[eagle1462010]

Who the fuck cares................he'd double down on sanctions which have helped force them to the table now...................It didn't matter then that we got a deal and it doesn't matter now.................we could impose them until hell freezes over and it wouldn't make a damned difference................................

There was never a reason to force the issue now on their terms................which is what happened...................and we will give them more money to play with. It is money that will not go to the people there................It will go into the hands of the leadership there.............and will continue to be used for increased military procurement..........................including cruise missiles from Russia with Love, and ICBM tech which only use is to deploy Nuclear warheads................

Only a fool would think they need them............and only a fool would recognize that it is for the purpose other than their lies on it's for nuclear power................

A fool runs this country supported by foolish posters like tyrone.

100% true. And this is why there is no alternative but to go into Iran, fight the Iranians, defeat them, take over the whole country, scour it inside out for nuke anything, destroy everything nuke, and keep massive numbers of troops there, to insure they don't try again. Anything less than this is GAMBLING with USA survival.

My point was not a ground invasion and occupation. My point was to target the sites and take them out from either air or sea assets and set them back a decade or so. And only after increased sanctions didn't put up a better deal to try one last time to prevent them from getting the bomb.

I don't think, given their ideology, that they will go along with any deal. They have proven that over 35 years. In the end, we will more than likely have to take these sites out. I would also remind you that the last thing our forces want is another long drawn out conflict. They are still fighting over there now, as our current gov't CUT'S THEIR NUMBERS AGAIN. 40,000 army cuts are starting now.

A couple of aircraft carrier groups can put Iran into submission is necessary.

So we disagree in occupation of Iran, but not in the essence of having to eventually deal with them militarily. And this deal ensures their capabilities come up instead of down, as Russia and China are chomping at the bit to sell them advanced weapons systems including ICBM TECH that has ONLY ONE PURPOSE...........delivering a danged Nuclear bomb.

 

[Bfgrn]

Who the fuck cares................he'd double down on sanctions which have helped force them to the table now...................It didn't matter then that we got a deal and it doesn't matter now.................we could impose them until hell freezes over and it wouldn't make a damned difference................................

There was never a reason to force the issue now on their terms................which is what happened...................and we will give them more money to play with. It is money that will not go to the people there................It will go into the hands of the leadership there.............and will continue to be used for increased military procurement..........................including cruise missiles from Russia with Love, and ICBM tech which only use is to deploy Nuclear warheads................

Only a fool would think they need them............and only a fool would recognize that it is for the purpose other than their lies on it's for nuclear power................

A fool runs this country supported by foolish posters like tyrone.

100% true. And this is why there is no alternative but to go into Iran, fight the Iranians, defeat them, take over the whole country, scour it inside out for nuke anything, destroy everything nuke, and keep massive numbers of troops there, to insure they don't try again. Anything less than this is GAMBLING with USA survival.

My point was not a ground invasion and occupation. My point was to target the sites and take them out from either air or sea assets and set them back a decade or so. And only after increased sanctions didn't put up a better deal to try one last time to prevent them from getting the bomb.

I don't think, given their ideology, that they will go along with any deal. They have proven that over 35 years. In the end, we will more than likely have to take these sites out. I would also remind you that the last thing our forces want is another long drawn out conflict. They are still fighting over there now, as our current gov't CUT'S THEIR NUMBERS AGAIN. 40,000 army cuts are starting now.

A couple of aircraft carrier groups can put Iran into submission is necessary.

So we disagree in occupation of Iran, but not in the essence of having to eventually deal with them militarily. And this deal ensures their capabilities come up instead of down, as Russia and China are chomping at the bit to sell them advanced weapons systems including ICBM TECH that has ONLY ONE PURPOSE...........delivering a danged Nuclear bomb.

How many American hostages did Iran kill in 1979?

Why did Iran round up hundreds of Arabs to help the United States counter al Qaeda after the Sept. 11 attack after they crossed the border from Afghanistan?

James F. Dobbins, the Bush administration's chief negotiator on Afghanistan in late 2001, said Iran was "comprehensively helpful" in the aftermath of the 9-11 attack in 2001 in working to overthrow the Taliban militias' rule and collaborating with the United States to install the Karzai government in Kabul.

Iranian diplomats made clear at the time they were looking for broader cooperation with the United States, but the Bush administration was not interested...

Instead the retard Bush the "decider" decided instead to denounce Iran as part of an "axis of evil" and declined to consider resumption of diplomatic relations.

Iran Gave U.S. Help On Al Qaeda After 9 11 - CBS News

 

[eagle1462010]

Who the fuck cares................he'd double down on sanctions which have helped force them to the table now...................It didn't matter then that we got a deal and it doesn't matter now.................we could impose them until hell freezes over and it wouldn't make a damned difference................................

There was never a reason to force the issue now on their terms................which is what happened...................and we will give them more money to play with. It is money that will not go to the people there................It will go into the hands of the leadership there.............and will continue to be used for increased military procurement..........................including cruise missiles from Russia with Love, and ICBM tech which only use is to deploy Nuclear warheads................

Only a fool would think they need them............and only a fool would recognize that it is for the purpose other than their lies on it's for nuclear power................

A fool runs this country supported by foolish posters like tyrone.

100% true. And this is why there is no alternative but to go into Iran, fight the Iranians, defeat them, take over the whole country, scour it inside out for nuke anything, destroy everything nuke, and keep massive numbers of troops there, to insure they don't try again. Anything less than this is GAMBLING with USA survival.

My point was not a ground invasion and occupation. My point was to target the sites and take them out from either air or sea assets and set them back a decade or so. And only after increased sanctions didn't put up a better deal to try one last time to prevent them from getting the bomb.

I don't think, given their ideology, that they will go along with any deal. They have proven that over 35 years. In the end, we will more than likely have to take these sites out. I would also remind you that the last thing our forces want is another long drawn out conflict. They are still fighting over there now, as our current gov't CUT'S THEIR NUMBERS AGAIN. 40,000 army cuts are starting now.

A couple of aircraft carrier groups can put Iran into submission is necessary.

So we disagree in occupation of Iran, but not in the essence of having to eventually deal with them militarily. And this deal ensures their capabilities come up instead of down, as Russia and China are chomping at the bit to sell them advanced weapons systems including ICBM TECH that has ONLY ONE PURPOSE...........delivering a danged Nuclear bomb.

How many American hostages did Iran kill in 1979?

Why did Iran round up hundreds of Arabs to help the United States counter al Qaeda after the Sept. 11 attack after they crossed the border from Afghanistan?

James F. Dobbins, the Bush administration's chief negotiator on Afghanistan in late 2001, said Iran was "comprehensively helpful" in the aftermath of the 9-11 attack in 2001 in working to overthrow the Taliban militias' rule and collaborating with the United States to install the Karzai government in Kabul.

Iranian diplomats made clear at the time they were looking for broader cooperation with the United States, but the Bush administration was not interested...

Instead the retard Bush the "decider" decided instead to denounce Iran as part of an "axis of evil" and declined to consider resumption of diplomatic relations.

Iran Gave U.S. Help On Al Qaeda After 9 11 - CBS News

Your Liberal Skirt is showing. They held our hostages for 444 days. They used psych. torture on them all the time. They used to take a gun to their heads with no bullets saying this is the end...............and pulled empty chambers on their heads.

To attack an Embassy and hold our people hostage is an ACT OF WAR. And they didn't kill them because they KNEW WE WOULD GO TO WAR OVER IT....................The THREAT OF WAR KEPT THEM ALIVE............PERIOD.

And you ignore that the Iranians pander to all sides of the equation............and ignore that the IED tech killed many of our people.

 

[Bfgrn]

BULLSHIT...

First of all, you didn't answer my questions...

1) WHO will fight it?
2) HOW will you pay for it??

Second...Iraq was not "under US control". The Bush Administration had agreed in 2004 to restore Iraqi sovereignty, and in 2005 put the country’s elected government in charge of shaping its destiny.

Iraq demanded US troops leave Iraq by the end of 2008 forcing Bush to sign a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012.

I don't recall you asking these questions, but here's the answers.>>

1) American troops + a coalition of allies.

2) We won't. Iran will.

Yeah, yeah, I know all about SOFA. It doesn't mean squat. When the defense of the American people from nuclear attack is at stake, nothing is off the table (including keeping troops in Iraq) And ISIS could gain enough wealth to acquire nukes, and they are seeking them.

OHHHH, the war will pay for itself...where have I heard that retarded idea before?

The projections: Ahead of and shortly after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, a number of officials, including former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz suggested the war could be done on the cheap and that it would largely pay for itself. In October 2003, Rumsfeld told a press conference about President Bush's request for $21 billion for Iraq and Afghan reconstruction that "the $20 billion the president requested is not intended to cover all of Iraq's needs. The bulk of the funds for Iraq's reconstruction will come from Iraqis -- from oil revenues, recovered assets, international trade, direct foreign investment, as well as some contributions we've already received and hope to receive from the international community." In March 2003, Mr. Wolfowitz told Congress that "we're really dealing with a country that could finance its own reconstruction." In April 2003, the Pentagon said the war would cost about $2 billion a month, and in July of that year Rumsfeld increased that estimate to $4 billion.

What happened? The Iraq war cost about $800 billion, or about $7.6 billion a month. When long term benefits are paid out connected with the death and injury of US troops there, the number is expected to rise to about $1 trillion, or about $9.5 billion a month. About $60 billion was spent directly on Iraq reconstruction efforts.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You clearly don't "know all about SOFA"...you said "Iraq was under US control". It wasn't...the Bush Administration had agreed in 2004 to restore Iraqi sovereignty, and in 2005 put the country’s elected government in charge of shaping its destiny.

And you didn't know that the SOFA Bush signed had harmful provisions requiring U.S. troops to leave Iraqi cities by the summer of 2009, rendering them powerless in containing future violence. In addition to withdrawal from cities by mid-2009 and total withdrawal by the end of 2011 were requirements that U.S. combat troops coordinate missions with the Iraqi government; hand over prisoners to Iraqi authorities; relinquish control of the Green Zone; and give Iraqi authorities the lead in monitoring Iraqi airspace. The agreement also allows for nonmilitary contractors to be subject to Iraqi law, a change contracting advocates fear will open civilians up to unfair prosecution.

http://www.cfr.org/iraq/us-security-agreements-iraq/p16448#p5

 

[Bfgrn]

Your Liberal Skirt is showing. They held our hostages for 444 days. They used psych. torture on them all the time. They used to take a gun to their heads with no bullets saying this is the end...............and pulled empty chambers on their heads.

To attack an Embassy and hold our people hostage is an ACT OF WAR. And they didn't kill them because they KNEW WE WOULD GO TO WAR OVER IT....................The THREAT OF WAR KEPT THEM ALIVE............PERIOD.

And you ignore that the Iranians pander to all sides of the equation............and ignore that the IED tech killed many of our people.

LOL...on "this" thread my "Liberal Skirt is showing"...does that mean you will save "totalitarian killer" for another thread?

SOOOO...Iran used "torture" on Americans, but America using the same methods DIDN'T use "torture" at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo... your retarded brain is showing...

Why did Iran take American hostages? Is there anything America did that caused it?

 

[MisterBeale]

Exactly. People can't support going to war against Iran till we curtail all clandestine operations in the ME. As long as we are mucking about in Syria, funding Al-Qaeda, funding this rebel group or that rebel group to achieve our goals, etc. We have no right to be launching an invasion of Iran or criticizing them for "supporting" terrorists. We do that same damn thing.

Our elites have policy goals in the ME, their elites have policy goals in the ME. Our press is going to spin it one way, their press is going to spin it the other way. If you believe everything our corporate and state press push on us with out thinking about it in an unbiased critical fashion, you have become a jingoistic partisan tool of the establishment. Nothing more than cannon fodder.

We have a right to do anything that is necessary to secure our survival.

 

[eagle1462010]

Your Liberal Skirt is showing. They held our hostages for 444 days. They used psych. torture on them all the time. They used to take a gun to their heads with no bullets saying this is the end...............and pulled empty chambers on their heads.

To attack an Embassy and hold our people hostage is an ACT OF WAR. And they didn't kill them because they KNEW WE WOULD GO TO WAR OVER IT....................The THREAT OF WAR KEPT THEM ALIVE............PERIOD.

And you ignore that the Iranians pander to all sides of the equation............and ignore that the IED tech killed many of our people.

LOL...on "this" thread my "Liberal Skirt is showing"...does that mean you will save "totalitarian killer" for another thread?

SOOOO...Iran used "torture" on Americans, but America using the same methods DIDN'T use "torture" at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo... your retarded brain is showing...

Why did Iran take American hostages? Is there anything America did that caused it?

We supported a leader who didn't rule my Religion an the Islamic doctrine and rules. Imagine a time that women their went to the beach with BIKINI'S..........................OH MY FUCKING GOD...............Now they get the Burkas..........Religion rules................the 12th Imam prophecies.......................and Islam will dominate the world...........................

Yeah............we made a mistake back in 1979...........We should have done what we did in 1953 and make end it right there................instead of allowing it to grow.

 

[irosie91]

***))))))))))))) C A R T E

Your Liberal Skirt is showing. They held our hostages for 444 days. They used psych. torture on them all the time. They used to take a gun to their heads with no bullets saying this is the end...............and pulled empty chambers on their heads.

To attack an Embassy and hold our people hostage is an ACT OF WAR. And they didn't kill them because they KNEW WE WOULD GO TO WAR OVER IT....................The THREAT OF WAR KEPT THEM ALIVE............PERIOD.

And you ignore that the Iranians pander to all sides of the equation............and ignore that the IED tech killed many of our people.

LOL...on "this" thread my "Liberal Skirt is showing"...does that mean you will save "totalitarian killer" for another thread?

SOOOO...Iran used "torture" on Americans, but America using the same methods DIDN'T use "torture" at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo... your retarded brain is showing...

Why did Iran take American hostages? Is there anything America did that caused it?

We supported a leader who didn't rule my Religion an the Islamic doctrine and rules. Imagine a time that women their went to the beach with BIKINI'S..........................OH MY FUCKING GOD...............Now they get the Burkas..........Religion rules................the 12th Imam prophecies.......................and Islam will dominate the world...........................

Yeah............we made a mistake back in 1979...........We should have done what we did in 1953 and make end it right there................instead of allowing it to grow.

*)))))) C A R T E R (((((((*

screwed the world

 

[Penelope]

Your Liberal Skirt is showing. They held our hostages for 444 days. They used psych. torture on them all the time. They used to take a gun to their heads with no bullets saying this is the end...............and pulled empty chambers on their heads.

To attack an Embassy and hold our people hostage is an ACT OF WAR. And they didn't kill them because they KNEW WE WOULD GO TO WAR OVER IT....................The THREAT OF WAR KEPT THEM ALIVE............PERIOD.

And you ignore that the Iranians pander to all sides of the equation............and ignore that the IED tech killed many of our people.

LOL...on "this" thread my "Liberal Skirt is showing"...does that mean you will save "totalitarian killer" for another thread?

SOOOO...Iran used "torture" on Americans, but America using the same methods DIDN'T use "torture" at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo... your retarded brain is showing...

Why did Iran take American hostages? Is there anything America did that caused it?

We supported a leader who didn't rule my Religion an the Islamic doctrine and rules. Imagine a time that women their went to the beach with BIKINI'S..........................OH MY FUCKING GOD...............Now they get the Burkas..........Religion rules................the 12th Imam prophecies.......................and Islam will dominate the world...........................

Yeah............we made a mistake back in 1979...........We should have done what we did in 1953 and make end it right there................instead of allowing it to grow.

***))))))))))))) C A R T E

Your Liberal Skirt is showing. They held our hostages for 444 days. They used psych. torture on them all the time. They used to take a gun to their heads with no bullets saying this is the end...............and pulled empty chambers on their heads.

To attack an Embassy and hold our people hostage is an ACT OF WAR. And they didn't kill them because they KNEW WE WOULD GO TO WAR OVER IT....................The THREAT OF WAR KEPT THEM ALIVE............PERIOD.

And you ignore that the Iranians pander to all sides of the equation............and ignore that the IED tech killed many of our people.

LOL...on "this" thread my "Liberal Skirt is showing"...does that mean you will save "totalitarian killer" for another thread?

SOOOO...Iran used "torture" on Americans, but America using the same methods DIDN'T use "torture" at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo... your retarded brain is showing...

Why did Iran take American hostages? Is there anything America did that caused it?

We supported a leader who didn't rule my Religion an the Islamic doctrine and rules. Imagine a time that women their went to the beach with BIKINI'S..........................OH MY FUCKING GOD...............Now they get the Burkas..........Religion rules................the 12th Imam prophecies.......................and Islam will dominate the world...........................

Yeah............we made a mistake back in 1979...........We should have done what we did in 1953 and make end it right there................instead of allowing it to grow.

*)))))) C A R T E R (((((((*

screwed the world

Carter screwed the world, how profound. Tell us how he did that?

 

[irosie91]

easy-----he facilitated the Ayatoilets and they created HEZBOLLAH------for more information
find a friendly Yemeni -----look around for Yemeni small store keepers in the USA---little
newspaper, mini grocery type things. Yemen is under siege by Iranian sponsored persons----of the Shiite variety,
already attacking Saudi Arabia. I do not believe
that you do not know this stuff, Penelope----in fact I believe that you are an ardent supporter of the SHIITE agenda. It is clear that English is not your mother tongue---

getting back to the issue------Iran wants Saudi Arabia--------and the black turd in the sand----
but there are lots more "anti Shiites" in the world than pro-Shiites. This situation is going to lead to major conflict which will quickly jump into Iran----it's birthplace-----Iran post carter----the birth place of Shiite aggression. Of course the best bet for the USA is to stay out of it as long as possible-------but lots of innocents will (in fact, already have) die. Somewhere along the line lots of countries including the USA will get dragged in.. Saudi Arabia is already playing with anti assad (aka pro-iran) elements in Syria.
But you already know that

 

[Art__Allm]

My point was to target the sites and take them out from either air or sea assets and set them back a decade or so.

That would be an unprovoked aggression against a peaceful and decent nation, that signed the Non-Proliferation-Treaty. What about attacking states, that did not sign the Non-Proliferation-Treaty, that illegally acquired nuclear weapons, that do not stick to the international law, and that were created by means of terror?

 

[Syriusly]

Well another example of old white guys willing and ready to use the lives of young Americans to make themselves feel more secure.

Of course they won't want to have to fund the war.

 

[Bfgrn]

Your Liberal Skirt is showing. They held our hostages for 444 days. They used psych. torture on them all the time. They used to take a gun to their heads with no bullets saying this is the end...............and pulled empty chambers on their heads.

To attack an Embassy and hold our people hostage is an ACT OF WAR. And they didn't kill them because they KNEW WE WOULD GO TO WAR OVER IT....................The THREAT OF WAR KEPT THEM ALIVE............PERIOD.

And you ignore that the Iranians pander to all sides of the equation............and ignore that the IED tech killed many of our people.

LOL...on "this" thread my "Liberal Skirt is showing"...does that mean you will save "totalitarian killer" for another thread?

SOOOO...Iran used "torture" on Americans, but America using the same methods DIDN'T use "torture" at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo... your retarded brain is showing...

Why did Iran take American hostages? Is there anything America did that caused it?

We supported a leader who didn't rule my Religion an the Islamic doctrine and rules. Imagine a time that women their went to the beach with BIKINI'S..........................OH MY FUCKING GOD...............Now they get the Burkas..........Religion rules................the 12th Imam prophecies.......................and Islam will dominate the world...........................

Yeah............we made a mistake back in 1979...........We should have done what we did in 1953 and make end it right there................instead of allowing it to grow.

History 101: How the CIA Overthrew Iran’s First Democratically Elected Government
March 24, 2015

Presently, there’s a lot of talk in Washington DC about how the nation of Iran is a threat to US national security, and that its being run by “extremist Islamic Mullahs”, and how the country is “not democratic”.

Not surprisingly, very few Americans are actually aware that once upon a time, their own government had killed-off Iran’s first ever democratically elected government, headed by Mohammad Mosaddegh (or Mosaddeq). He was the elected as Prime Minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953, until his government was overthrown in a coup d’état orchestrated by the CIA. After the coup, US and British interests quickly installed their own unelected monarch, The Shah, who ruled the country until he was eventually replaced, again by the US and British intelligence agencies, with the theocrat, the Ayatollah Khomeini, in what became known as the ‘Islamic Revolution’ in 1979. Iran has maintained a theocratic council at the head of its government ever since.

Why the coup in the first place? There are many geostrategic reasons why the American and the British did not want any secular, independent democratic nation states in the region, and neither did Saudi Arabia. Those same reason extend until today, but one of the central motivations for enacting an overthrow of Iran at that time was that Iran’s Mosaddegh had designs on nationalizing Iran’s oil industry. Over sixty years ago, and with the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) risking losing its grip on Iran’s burgeoning energy sector, the coup happened, and then in the following year in 1954, the company was re-incorporated and thus became the global powerhouse we know today, the British Petroleum Company (BP). It’s one of many examples of how the CIA and MI6 ‘intelligence’ agencies acted not on behalf of “freedom and democracy”, but on behalf of transnational corporations in order to preserve Anglo-American ‘interests’.