It's rather unnerving when interventionalists discuss democracy in Iran like it never existed.

It did.

Iran had a Constitutional Monarchy from 1906 to 1953. In 1953 Iran's democratically elected prime minister was removed from office in a coup sponsored by Britain and the US, which had been mislead by Britain.

Operation Ajax in Wikipedia: <link>

Britain wanted to protect its British Petroleum (BP) oil interests in Iran, and the democratically elected Iranian prime minister presented possible a threat to those oil interests.

Britain used lies about "communism" in Iran to manipulate the CIA into assisting Britain in destroying Iranian democracy and putting Iran under the total control of the British and US friendly Shah.

If not for the myopic greed of the British Iran still be a "beacon of democracy" in the Middle East. If not for the British intervention Iran would have, as of now, been a democracy for the last 103 years.

Also, the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which deposed the British and American puppet Shah in favor of the Ayatollah would have never happened, and the US would have never had to build Saddam Hussein's arms and army for the Iran-Iraq war.

Bottom line: Almost full responsibility for the mess in the Middle East, from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to Iran, lies at the feet of the British.

If militant Muslim immigrants destroy Britain it will be just revenge for the destruction of the Arab and Persian world by militant Brits.

Sorry Hitchens, but one cannot trust a Brit, even one that had the decency to renounce his British citizenship in favor of US citizenship, on Middle Eastern policy.

The one thing that ordinary people can do is boycott BP. BP is directly responsible Iran being a Islamic Theocracy instead of Iran being a modern democratic country, like it was back in 1953.

wow! you are so smart! no one knew that!

dipshit.

By the end of 1952, it had become clear that the Mossadeq government in Iran was incapable of reaching an oil settlement with interested Western countries; was reaching a dangerous and advanced stage of illegal, deficit financing; was disregarding the Iranian constitution in prolonging Premier Mohammed Mossadeq's tenure of office; was motivated mainly by Mossadeq's desire for personal power; was governed by irresponsible policies based on emotion; had weakened the Shah and the Iranian Army to a dangerous degree; and had cooperated closely with the Tudeh (Communist) Party of Iran....

It was the aim of the TPAJAX project to cause the fall of the Mossadeq government to reestablish the prestige and power of the Shah; and to replace the Mossadeq government with one which would govern Iran according to constructive policies. Specifically, the aim was to bring to power a government which would reach an equitable oil settlement, enabling Iran to become economically sound and financially solvent, and which would vigorously prosecute the dangerously strong Communist Party.

Iran was incapable of reaching an oil settlement with interested Western countries

On the contrary, Mossadegh was more than capable of reaching a settlement. It just happened to be a settlement the West didn't agree with.

It's a common right wing ploy to accuse any leader who tries dares to put the interestst of his country before those of the West, as being a wannbe tyrant motivated by personal power. We've seen it with the demonixatoio of Chavez and Putin, and Chavez of course, was on the receiving end fo a failed coup backed by teh State Department.

It was the aim of the TPAJAX project to cause the fall of the Mossadeq government to reestablish the prestige and power of the Shah; and to replace the Mossadeq government with one which would govern Iran according to constructive policies.

Nothign could be further from the truth.

Firstly, it is illegal to meddle in the politics of another country and furthermore, it is highly criminal to set off bombs in Tehran and blame the attacks on the government.

If there was any legitimacy to unsat the existing government, it would and shoudl have been dome through the appropriate legal and trasnparent means.

The Shah was a marcissistic and brutal dictator who had no reagrd for human righs, much less any concern or respect for Iranin laws.

TPAJAX was an imperilistic prohject to install a puppet dictator that would take his orders from London and Washington and rape the wealth fo his country.

That was a full quote pulled off the internet. Not really in a position to defend any of it.

Did you know that Chavez early in his career went for his own military coup in Venezuela and it failed. People died. I wonder why the power structure back then never shot him?

Oh, by the way I don't believe your bullshit. There is truth in it but it is not unvarnished.

That was a full quote pulled off the internet.

Without providing the source, it's about as credible as graffiti on the wall of a public toilet.

Did you know that Chavez early in his career went for his own military coup in Venezuela and it failed.

Really? Do you have a source?

Oh, by the way I don't believe your bullshit. There is truth in it but it is not unvarnished.

So you agree there is truth, but you still don't believe it?

That the US and Britain intervened in Iran in 1953 to overthrow its government is something that probably 5% of Americans are aware of, despite it, and the US support of Saddam Hussein during the war that Iraq declared on Iran, coloring the entire relationship between the US and Iran.

It is why idiots with nothing to add, like you, think that the US needs to strongly condemn the Iranian elections when in reality the best way to undermine the strong but silent resistance movements in Iran is to show US support for them.

To be clear, the above was in response to irvingchang's completely worthless comment.

It is why idiots with nothing to add, like you, think that the US needs to strongly condemn the Iranian elections when in reality the best way to undermine the strong but silent resistance movements in Iran is to show US support for them.

you need to go to earl sheib's and have your belly re-yellowed.

It's actually not a belly, but abs. I work out so that I don't have to pretend to be tough by sitting in my recliner and saying we (well, not you, but people that actually serve in the military) need to be "tougher" with Iran.

Apparently Pat Buchanan is yellow bellied also since he agrees with me on how to deal with the Iranian election protests without undermining them. At least he does have a belly to be yellow.

Earl Sheib does terrible paint work, I just keep going there because your wife works there as the receptionist and puts out (they paint my abs yellow and then I paint her face white). If you don't like it then come down to Earl Sheib and we'll discuss it in person.

If you don't like it then come down to Earl Sheib and we'll discuss it in person.

bring it on shirley.

No, I'm just going to be at Earl Sheib with your wife; I, along with everyone else at Earl Sheib, am glad that you are so willing to share. However, if you don't like you bring it on and I'll drop you.

tough guy, eh?