Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Iran To Sue The U.S.?


Baz Dane

Recommended Posts

This could get interesting...

- "The Iranian parliament has given preliminary approval to a bill requiring the government to sue the U.S. for the damage the country suffered as a result of the U.S.’ hostile moves over the past 63 years."

- "The bill calls on the government to take legal action against the U.S. government in an international court."

- "The cases include the U.S. involvement in the 1953 coup against the government of then democratically-elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq."

- "The bill also requires the government to seek compensation from the U.S. for the moral and material damage the country suffered as the United States supported Iraq’s Saddam Hussain during his invasion of Iran in the 1980s...

http://english.aawsa...anctions-losses

This comes off the heels of the U.S. courts' rulings in different cases in March and April of this year, that Iran be liable for over $12 Billion dollars USD combined... and I believe the U.S. has frozen assets of $2 Billion already.

That $2 Billion is in relation to the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut.

Another $10.5 Billion is in relation to 9/11 in which U.S. District Judge George Daniels ruled that Iran plotted and executed the 9/11 attacks using the 15 Saudi nationals(+4 others).

Maybe some truth will come out from all of this at some point down the road?

The 1953 coup happened. That much is true.

The U.S. covertly supported Saddam as well. That should not really be surprising when you look at the timeline of events back then...

- November 4, 1979 following the Iranian Revolution(which happened because of the 1953 C.I.A. backed coup), the "Iran-Hostage Crisis" took place where mobs of Iranians stormed the U.S. Embassy and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

- Then on September 22, 1980, Iraq launched a full scale invasion of Iran, which turned into an 8 year long war with no "winner" at the end.

Considering Iran still had the hostages when Iraq attacked, it's not surprising the U.S. would help Iraq. But had there been no 1953 coup, there likely would have been no hostage situation.

THEN... we can't forget Iran/Contra either. That started in the very early 1980's, but AFTER the hostages were released, though the deals may have been in place beforehand.

We never did get the truth out of that scandal... or shall I say THREE scandals.

One being the weaponry to Iran... Younger people may not realize it, but because of 26 years of rule under the Shah(after the 1953 coup) most of Iran's weaponry, tanks, planes, etc, were American made, so when Iraq attacked in 1980, and Iran needed parts for repairs/replenishments and such, they needed American parts to do so.

Two being the "aid" to the Contras, and WHO authorized it... that was hidden, obstructed and eventually pardoned away.

The third separate scandal that came under the moniker of "Iran/Contra" and got even less scrutiny, was the 1000's of tons of cocaine being brought into the U.S. throughout the 1980's(and probably right up to today still). Barry Seal was killed and that was that. Case closed on that story.

What a tangled web indeed. :blink:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could get interesting...

- "The Iranian parliament has given preliminary approval to a bill requiring the government to sue the U.S. for the damage the country suffered as a result of the U.S.’ hostile moves over the past 63 years."

- "The bill calls on the government to take legal action against the U.S. government in an international court."

- "The cases include the U.S. involvement in the 1953 coup against the government of then democratically-elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq."

- "The bill also requires the government to seek compensation from the U.S. for the moral and material damage the country suffered as the United States supported Iraq’s Saddam Hussain during his invasion of Iran in the 1980s...

http://english.aawsa...anctions-losses

This comes off the heels of the U.S. courts' rulings in different cases in March and April of this year, that Iran be liable for over $12 Billion dollars USD combined... and I believe the U.S. has frozen assets of $2 Billion already.

That $2 Billion is in relation to the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut.

Another $10.5 Billion is in relation to 9/11 in which U.S. District Judge George Daniels ruled that Iran plotted and executed the 9/11 attacks using the 15 Saudi nationals(+4 others).

Maybe some truth will come out from all of this at some point down the road?

The 1953 coup happened. That much is true.

The U.S. covertly supported Saddam as well. That should not really be surprising when you look at the timeline of events back then...

- November 4, 1979 following the Iranian Revolution(which happened because of the 1953 C.I.A. backed coup), the "Iran-Hostage Crisis" took place where mobs of Iranians stormed the U.S. Embassy and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

- Then on September 22, 1980, Iraq launched a full scale invasion of Iran, which turned into an 8 year long war with no "winner" at the end.

Considering Iran still had the hostages when Iraq attacked, it's not surprising the U.S. would help Iraq. But had there been no 1953 coup, there likely would have been no hostage situation.

THEN... we can't forget Iran/Contra either. That started in the very early 1980's, but AFTER the hostages were released, though the deals may have been in place beforehand.

We never did get the truth out of that scandal... or shall I say THREE scandals.

One being the weaponry to Iran... Younger people may not realize it, but because of 26 years of rule under the Shah(after the 1953 coup) most of Iran's weaponry, tanks, planes, etc, were American made, so when Iraq attacked in 1980, and Iran needed parts for repairs/replenishments and such, they needed American parts to do so.

Two being the "aid" to the Contras, and WHO authorized it... that was hidden, obstructed and eventually pardoned away.

The third separate scandal that came under the moniker of "Iran/Contra" and got even less scrutiny, was the 1000's of tons of cocaine being brought into the U.S. throughout the 1980's(and probably right up to today still). Barry Seal was killed and that was that. Case closed on that story.

What a tangled web indeed. :blink:

Paying reparations to those hostages for their suffering and some cash to the families of the others that have been killed by Iranian proxies seems immanently fair. Those were specific instances, provable, that caused death or other hardship. If they want to cry over a monetary fine for crimes they KNOW they committed then go for it ;) Hopefully the families will be well into spending it before the ICC gets around to setting a docket. As to the rest, if nations can begin to sue each other successfully for actions they take against each other then war should be unnecessary from this point on. Just allow corrupt judiciaries to handle all the world's issues. I suspect that if Trump is elected the mullocracy is going to have a LOT more to worry about than a couple of billion dollars.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iran can stick it. They already got out of us all they are going to get. At least that will be true if Trump is president. Obama who knows what he would do. He lied to push that Iran deal through.

Obama's Foreign Policy Guru Boasts of How the Administration Lied to Sell the Iran Deal

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Iran is behaving in this manner because the US has been acting like a push-over for far too long. They ran rough shot over that horrible nuclear deal, they snatched US sailors, they constantly invoke the "death to America" slogan.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that open the door for litigation by third world countries against their former colonial masters in Europe?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that open the door for litigation by third world countries against their former colonial masters in Europe?

Be careful setting precedence, is what you're getting at?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that open the door for litigation by third world countries against their former colonial masters in Europe?

Hell, there'd be proxies standing in court for the oppression of the Neanderthals before that train came to it's destination. In a situation where the military of this nation kills or destroys in error I am onboard with reasonable reparations. The Iranian civilian airliner shoot down for example. Even though the pilots refused to communicate after 10 attempts, it was not the fault of the innocent dead and their families. We paid just over 200K$ per passenger - 290 of them - AND apologized for the error. What Iran is moaning about here is nothing more than wanting to squeeze the last little bit of dignity our PotUS has managed to retain as he prostrated himself before the world.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that open the door for litigation by third world countries against their former colonial masters in Europe?

That's what Obama wants. He thinks that socialism will bring equality to Mankind. All this does is throw millions of years of struggle and striving down the tubes so that we can relive those painful times of history.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what Obama wants. He thinks that socialism will bring equality to Mankind. All this does is throw millions of years of struggle and striving down the tubes so that we can relive those painful times of history.

His time is almost over, and another President will soon be in office, to do the will of another temporary majority. Our government is cleverly designed so that no tyranny of a majority ever lasts long or infringes on the rights of minorities. He and his supporters have had their day in the sun, and soon it will be the time of another's. Factions are the strength of our form of government, not a weakness.

Isn't it amazing how much for granted we take the socialism we already have? Social Security, Medicare, SSI, college loans, and the myriad other things added over the years to the foundation created by Roosevelt's New Deal. Would we really want to roll the clock back and give them all up?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

His time is almost over, and another President will soon be in office, to do the will of another temporary majority. Our government is cleverly designed so that no tyranny of a majority ever lasts long or infringes on the rights of minorities. He and his supporters have had their day in the sun, and soon it will be the time of another's. Factions are the strength of our form of government, not a weakness.

Isn't it amazing how much for granted we take the socialism we already have? Social Security, Medicare, SSI, college loans, and the myriad other things added over the years to the foundation created by Roosevelt's New Deal. Would we really want to roll the clock back and give them all up?

His time is almost up but the precedent setting of his administration is likely to haunt this nation well into the future. What executive would ever voluntarily give up the power Obama simply TOOK unto himself? He made a mockery of the whole concept of divided powers and a weak, feckless legislature abetted him in the act.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it amazing how much for granted we take the socialism we already have? Social Security, Medicare, SSI, college loans, and the myriad other things added over the years to the foundation created by Roosevelt's New Deal. Would we really want to roll the clock back and give them all up?

Actually, it started in 1913 under Wilson. It took some 40 years to reach these shores. Oh what a dream that would be if we could. Yes, unfortunately we take these things for granted, but like a bad habit; it takes will power to do the right thing. But I wouldn't want to go back to the past. We need to pull out the poison in the system now and move forward. And live the way our Founding Fathers wished we would.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it started in 1913 under Wilson. It took some 40 years to reach these shores. Oh what a dream that would be if we could. Yes, unfortunately we take these things for granted, but like a bad habit; it takes will power to do the right thing. But I wouldn't want to go back to the past. We need to pull out the poison in the system now and move forward. And live the way our Founding Fathers wished we would.

This country has grown into a bloated, sick man since the 60's. So has Europe. The only path to a strong, free America again leads through huge turmoil and a resetting of national priorities. One Party needs to stop telling people they cannot make it on their own and the other Party needs to do more than just tell people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. If people have opportunities to advance and do dignified work to raise families then almost all WILL do so.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what Obama wants. He thinks that socialism will bring equality to Mankind. All this does is throw millions of years of struggle and striving down the tubes so that we can relive those painful times of history.

You're thinking of communism.

Regarding this law suit. Well, it's most likely posturing, but the Iranians do have a point. Even forgetting the times the US (and Britain) tried to incite revolution or the whole Sha debacle, the US military shot down an Iranian passenger jet, which is a clear act of terrorism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're thinking of communism.

Regarding this law suit. Well, it's most likely posturing, but the Iranians do have a point. Even forgetting the times the US (and Britain) tried to incite revolution or the whole Sha debacle, the US military shot down an Iranian passenger jet, which is a clear act of terrorism.

Not so clear, actually. The pilots of the airbus refused to respond to hails ten times. The Iranians were making aggressive moves in the Gulf against oil tankers and when the tragedy occurred the US did the right thing by apologizing and paying reparations to the families - all 290 of them. I don't seem to recall any similar actions by Iran after the Beirut barracks bombing, or the Khobar towers, or... well, you'd get the message if you cared to be the slightest bit objective.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This country has grown into a bloated, sick man since the 60's. So has Europe. The only path to a strong, free America again leads through huge turmoil and a resetting of national priorities. One Party needs to stop telling people they cannot make it on their own and the other Party needs to do more than just tell people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. If people have opportunities to advance and do dignified work to raise families then almost all WILL do so.

Our bloat can trace its beginnings back to 1880s Germany with Bismarck’s social programs. It began here in 1913 under Wilson with the passing of the 16th Amendment and the Federal Reserve Act (you can probably include the League of Nations a bit later). Then we move forward 20 years to Roosevelt’s New Deal and his alphabet soup programs. Then another 20 years to Johnson’s War on Poverty. Then another 50 to Obamacare. Mind you, these programs had good elements but the implementation produced unintended consequences (or one would think). Today, I only see it as what was originally intended. It’s not too late to purge these things from our system if we only let the Constitution work. For instance, instead of giving handouts to the poor, if we insure that they become self-reliant is a far better tool to fighting the war on poverty. This makes for more loyal citizens. Broadening the tax base and creating an environment for job creation (not directly creating jobs) is the function of government. The loyalties must be to the nation and not the government.

None of these programs succeeded and have become a waste of a nation’s wealth. This is what the world sees – this flaunting of waste. They should see our power. Now don’t get me wrong, if these programs were properly managed and tweaked appropriately, they could actually be beneficial to this nation. Otherwise, if they cannot, need to be cut out entirely. The first thing that needs to be done, is a program that makes people responsible for their own actions. They reap the fruits of their labors and bear the burdens of their consequences.

Trying to wrangle this post back to the op (and I don’t think I’m going to succeed). Obama’s greatest achievements are Obamacare and the Iranian deal. We now know that both were bald-face lies foisted upon the American people. It’s too late to impeach him but after he leaves office, charges should be leveled at him for malfeasance and treason. Because he was the one that allowed legal action to even be considered against this nation, and questionable legal actions at that. It is the duty of the President to protect this nation, not bring it low and apologize for history. All he’s done is open up the victor to the vanquished world wide via frivolous law suits. He’s applied social Neo-Lysenkoism to the world order (not to be confused with “New World Order”). Does anybody understand the unintended consequences this will bring for generations to come? He has almost surely laid the ground work for WWIII. He has enabled the dark forces to coalesce once again. Hilary is totally clueless to this going on and Trump may not have the will power to fight this? We are going to war people – a major war. Hilary will attack the wrong side and Trump will be highly reluctant. Both will cause delay and waste valuable time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're thinking of communism.

I don’t think so. I should remind people that there is no real difference between Communism, Socialism, Marxism, etc., even Democracy. If you contrast the differences, it is trivial and academic. The shocking comparison is that they are more alike than not. The longer these forms stay in power, the more control they take from the people. Ultimately, that’s all that matters.

Regarding this law suit. Well, it's most likely posturing, but the Iranians do have a point. Even forgetting the times the US (and Britain) tried to incite revolution or the whole Sha debacle, the US military shot down an Iranian passenger jet, which is a clear act of terrorism.

No, they do not have a point. Do you ever ask yourself why the US and Britain tried to incite revolution (if you could call it that)? The US and Britain are responding to unfavorable conditions. When the Vincennes shot down Flight 655 was not an act of terrorism. It was a stupid accident brought on by the arrogance of the Iranians.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 1953 coup happened. That much is true.

Well, yes and no. A coup was attempted. When you think of a coup, it is some force trying to usurp the king. In this case Mossadeq was usurping the Shah’s power. Admittedly, the Shah was a weak leader and because of that, the British and Americans initiated Operation Ajax to thwart the attempted coup. Mossadeq was Prime Minister. That meant that he served at the pleasure of the King. In other words, the King has every right to remove the PM from office. Mossadeq was not democratically elected. He got this position by the backroom deal in Parliament and as the last man standing, and was presented to the King. That’s how these things work. You can’t show me the polling results of the nation-wide election that put Mossadeq into power because there aren’t any.

The U.S. covertly supported Saddam as well. That should not really be surprising when you look at the timeline of events back then...

It wasn’t so much being covert. But when the US found out what he was doing to his own people, the Kurds and Shiites, we pulled our support in 83 or 86.

- November 4, 1979 following the Iranian Revolution(which happened because of the 1953 C.I.A. backed coup), the "Iran-Hostage Crisis" took place where mobs of Iranians stormed the U.S. Embassy and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

the Revolution did not occur because of the attempted coup. Even Khomeini didn’t think much of Mossadeq. If the coup had succeeded, Mossadeq would have followed a secular/socialist government style. He would have still been at odds with the Islamists. The revolution would have still occurred. If not under Mossadeq then someone that followed. What caused the Revolution was the fact that Carter did not support the Shah. That act also enabled the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

One being the weaponry to Iran... Younger people may not realize it, but because of 26 years of rule under the Shah(after the 1953 coup) most of Iran's weaponry, tanks, planes, etc, were American made, so when Iraq attacked in 1980, and Iran needed parts for repairs/replenishments and such, they needed American parts to do so.

Well duh! Reagan was still a politician but I think he negotiated this deal before he became President. So his promise that we don’t negotiate with terrorists remains unblemished. But also under the Shah, Reza had modernized and brought his nation into the twentieth Century. Iran had been only the third Muslim nation to grant women the right to vote. The Shah’s enemies were the enemies of that progress of whom he was very ruthless to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what court they are going through, but It won't be legally binding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And live the way our Founding Fathers wished we would.

You mean with slavery?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2016 at 3:23 PM, RavenHawk said:

It wasn’t so much being covert. But when the US found out what he was doing to his own people, the Kurds and Shiites, we pulled our support in 83 or 86.

Bush signed an agreement to protect Iraq in 1989 and was selling arms to them in 1990 . 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many of the people posting in this thread, protesting that the US shouldn't pay reparations for aggressive activities it has engaged in over decades but agreeing that nations such as Iran should pay reparations for their aggressions, and making statements along the lines of "it is an affront to our pride", call themselves Christians?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Leonardo said:

How many of the people posting in this thread, protesting that the US shouldn't pay reparations for aggressive activities it has engaged in over decades but agreeing that nations such as Iran should pay reparations for their aggressions, and making statements along the lines of "it is an affront to our pride", call themselves Christians?

Care to be more specific?  I guess I missed that statement.  Once again we have an indictment of the morals or the validity of Christians because they might want justice like any other human being.  The point isn't so much that the US shouldn't have to pay but that IF nations are to begin being forced to pay such reparations, where is the line drawn?  The US typically is the ONLY nation that does admit wrong and pay such reparations.  When was the last time any other Colonial European government did such a thing?  In the modern world, what nation that bombards say, a hospital, and kills dozens of innocents, actually apologizes and pays up?  Your bias is showing again Leo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iran sue the US...right, they're damned lucky we haven't reaped bitter comeuppance against them so far (we've had reasons to since 1979).  Best they keep their mouths shut and wait for the thunder to come, instead of poking the dragon.

That is....once we get strong leadership in the US again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.