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 -
and then

The Screws are tightening on Iran

66 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

and then

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-administration-set-to-end-sanction-exemptions-for-nations-importing-iranian-oil-report 

Good news!  The economic pressure on the mullahs is overdue.  It's the only thing that might cause a change in their behavior at this point.  The 150 billion that Obama injected into their coffers has to be running low by now and this should cause some real pain to their plans.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

Yup, you, and the Emperor Donald,w ill get your long awaited war very very soon!
 

How many do you think will die as a result this time?   I bet you can't wait! ^_^ 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

if  you do get a major regional conflict with all its consequences for the global economy (since the number of ordinary people who might be killed is obviously of no concern), I think the world will come to see that it's at the behest of "the only democracy in the Middle East", and however much they may bleat over and over again that everyone hates them and wants to destroy them, and however many times Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu might bring out his risible cartoon bomb illustrating how near Iran is to getting a Nuke, I rather fear than an overwhelming surge of sympathy and support for the Beloved Land would not be the result, and may in fact have just the reverse effect. Just something to perhaps bear in mind. :hmm: 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80

Youre a sad, disgusting affront to everything Christ stood for. :tu:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
marsman

warmongering Americans yet again.....one day you might get lucky....and elect a president hell bent on PEACE in the world

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
marsman
2 hours ago, and then said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-administration-set-to-end-sanction-exemptions-for-nations-importing-iranian-oil-report 

Good news!  The economic pressure on the mullahs is overdue.  It's the only thing that might cause a change in their behavior at this point.  The 150 billion that Obama injected into their coffers has to be running low by now and this should cause some real pain to their plans.  

 

as per your signature quote

We've cast the world, we've set the stage,

for what could be, the darkest age...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam

The Iranian people got a taste of true freedom under the Shah Of Iran before he was overthrown by the Islamic revolution. I truly do feel sorry for the people. They have hopes, dreams and aspirations just as the rest of the world, but they are held down by a backwards government that wants complete control.

When governments realize you can give people freedom and still rule, then it will make the world a better place.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, South Alabam said:

The Iranian people got a taste of true freedom under the Shah Of Iran before he was overthrown by the Islamic revolution. I truly do feel sorry for the people. They have hopes, dreams and aspirations just as the rest of the world, but they are held down by a backwards government that wants complete control.

When governments realize you can give people freedom and still rule, then it will make the world a better place.


Yeah, and I hope you are aware that even in that, the US had a large hand.. Which makes the present lamenting of the Iranian theocratic rule a wee bit hypocritical.

First Mossadeq was democratically elected, he then moved to nationalise the Iranian oil production.. (hmmm, where did I hear that before..) Which ofcourse didnt fall well with the US and her oil multinationals..  To which the US effectuated a plan to foment a coup d'etat, facilitating the placement of the Shah. The Shah acted against the wishes of the masses, culminating in tyrannical acts against his opposition, and in time the population rose up against him, the Iranian Revolution. Enter Ayatollah Khomeini, and Khamenei now, as the legacy of this attempt at statecraft.

Quote

Faced with an army mutiny and violent demonstrations against his rule, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, the leader of Iran since 1941, is forced to flee the country. Fourteen days later, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the spiritual leader of the Islamic revolution, returned after 15 years of exile and took control of Iran.

In 1941, British and Soviet troops occupied Iran, and the first Pahlavi shah, who they regarded with suspicion, was forced to abdicate in favor of his son, Mohammad Reza. The new shah promised to act as a constitutional monarch but often meddled in the elected government’s affairs. After a Communist plot against him was thwarted in 1949, he took on even more powers. However, in the early 1950s, the shah was eclipsed by Mohammad Mosaddeq, a zealous Iranian nationalist who convinced the Parliament to nationalize Britain’s extensive oil interests in Iran. Mohammad Reza, who maintained close relations with Britain and the United States, opposed the decision. Nevertheless, he was forced in 1951 to appoint Mosaddeq premier, and two years of tension followed.

In August 1953, Mohammad Reza attempted to dismiss Mosaddeq, but the premier’s popular support was so great that the shah himself was forced out of Iran. A few days later, British and U.S. intelligence agents orchestrated a stunning coup d’etat against Mosaddeq, and the shah returned to take power as the sole leader of Iran. He repealed Mosaddeq’s legislation and became a close Cold War ally of the United States in the Middle East.

In 1963, the shah launched his “White Revolution,” a broad government program that included land reform, infrastructure development, voting rights for women, and the reduction of illiteracy. Although these programs were applauded by many in Iran, Islamic leaders were critical of what they saw as the westernization of Iran. Ruhollah Khomeini, a Shiite cleric, was particularly vocal in his criticism and called for the overthrow of the shah and the establishment of an Islamic state. In 1964, Khomeini was exiled and settled across the border in Iraq, where he sent radio messages to incite his supporters.

The shah saw himself foremost as a Persian king and in 1971 held an extravagant celebration of the 2,500th anniversary of the pre-Islamic Persian monarchy. In 1976, he formally replaced the Islamic calendar with a Persian calendar. Religious discontent grew, and the shah became more repressive, using his brutal secret police force to suppress opposition. This alienated students and intellectuals in Iran, and support for Khomeini grew. Discontent was also rampant in the poor and middle classes, who felt that the economic developments of the White Revolution had only benefited the ruling elite. In 1978, anti-shah demonstrations broke out in Iran’s major cities.

On September 8, 1978, the shah’s security force fired on a large group of demonstrators, killing hundreds and wounding thousands. Two months later, thousands took to the streets of Tehran, rioting and destroying symbols of westernization, such as banks and liquor stores. Khomeini called for the shah’s immediate overthrow, and on December 11 a group of soldiers mutinied and attacked the shah’s security officers. With that, his regime collapsed and the shah fled.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/shah-flees-iran


Venezuela('s first and second coup attempt) isnt the first in line, not by a long shot.

Edited by Phaeton80
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
3 hours ago, South Alabam said:

The Iranian people got a taste of true freedom under the Shah Of Iran before he was overthrown by the Islamic revolution. I truly do feel sorry for the people. They have hopes, dreams and aspirations just as the rest of the world, but they are held down by a backwards government that wants complete control.

When governments realize you can give people freedom and still rule, then it will make the world a better place.

Um, the "freedom" they got under the Shah was what caused the people to have a revolution in the first place......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
40 minutes ago, Phaeton80 said:


Yeah, and I hope you are aware that even in that, the US had a large hand.. Which makes the present lamenting of the Iranian theocratic rule a wee bit hypocritical.

First Mossadeq was democratically elected, he then moved to nationalise the Iranian oil production.. (hmmm, where did I hear that before..) Which ofcourse didnt fall well with the US and her oil multinationals..  To which the US effectuated a plan to foment a coup d'etat, facilitating the placement of the Shah. The Shah acted against the wishes of the masses, culminating in tyrannical acts against his opposition, and in time the population rose up against him, the Iranian Revolution. Enter Ayatollah Khomeini, and Khamenei now, as the legacy of this attempt at statecraft.


Venezuela('s first and second coup attempt) isnt the first in line, not by a long shot.

The problem is the US was largely fine with Iran nationalizing its oil industry, it was the UK who got mad and blockaded Iranian ports.  The US tried to act as an intermediary between the UK and Iran to come to a peaceful agreement, if I remember correctly the US even backed the Iranian proposal of splitting the oil revenue 50/50 between Iran and the UK.  The US government only moved to overthrow Mossadeq when he started to lose popular support due to the worsening economic situation Iran was in, largely due to the UK blockade of its ports, and began courting the USSR and moving towards communism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DarkHunter said:

The problem is the US was largely fine with Iran nationalizing its oil industry, it was the UK who got mad and blockaded Iranian ports.  The US tried to act as an intermediary between the UK and Iran to come to a peaceful agreement, if I remember correctly the US even backed the Iranian proposal of splitting the oil revenue 50/50 between Iran and the UK.  The US government only moved to overthrow Mossadeq when he started to lose popular support due to the worsening economic situation Iran was in, largely due to the UK blockade of its ports, and began courting the USSR and moving towards communism.


Thats interesting, got links?

The following might be interesting as well..

Quote

Operation Ajax (1953)

Operation Ajax (1953) (officially TP-AJAX) was an covert operation by the United States CIA in collaborating with the Pahlavi dynasty, to overthrow the elected government of Iran and Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and consolidate the power of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi.

Rationale for the intervention included Mossadegh's socialist rhetoric and his nationalization, without compensation, of the oil industry which was previously operated by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (which later changed its name to The British Petroleum Company) under contracts disputed by the nationalists as unfair. A particular point of contention was the refusal of the Anglo-Iranian Oil company to allow an audit of the accounts to determine whether the Iranian government received the royalties it was due. Intransigence on the part of the Anglo-Iranian Oil company led the nationalist government to escalate its demands, requiring an equal share in the oil revenues. The final crisis was precipitated when the Anglo-Iranian oil company ceased operations rather than accepting the nationalists' demands.

The newly state-owned oil companies saw a dramatic drop in productivity and, consequently, exports; this resulted in the Abadan Crisis, a situation that was further aggravated by its export markets being closed. Even so royalties to the Iranian government were significantly higher than before nationalization. Without its own distribution network it was denied access to markets by an international blockade intended to coerce Mossadegh into reprivatization. In addition, the appropriation of the companies resulted in Western allegations that Mossadegh was a Communist and suspicions that Iran was in danger of falling under the influences of the neighboring Soviet Union. But Mossadegh refused to back down under international pressure.

For the U.S., an important factor to consider was Iran's border with the Soviet Union. A pro-American Iran under the Shah would give the U.S. a double strategic advantage in the ensuing Cold War, as a NATO alliance was already in effect with the government of Turkey, also bordering the USSR.

In planning the operation, the CIA organized a guerrilla force in case the communist Tudeh Party seized power as a result of the chaos created by Operation Ajax. According to formerly "Top Secret" documents released by the National Security Archive, Undersecretary of State Walter Bedell Smith reported that the CIA had reached an agreement with Qashqai tribal leaders in southern Iran to establish a clandestine safe haven from which U.S.-funded guerrillas and intelligence agents could operate.

Operation Ajax was the first time the Central Intelligence Agency orchestrated a plot to overthrow a democratically elected government. The success of this operation, and its relatively low cost, encouraged the CIA to successfully carry out a similar operation in Guatemala a year later.

Widespread dissatisfaction with the oppressive regime of the reinstalled Shah led to the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran and the occupation of the U.S. embassy. The role that the U.S. embassy had played in the 1953 coup led the revolutionary guards to suspect that it might be used to play a similar role in suppressing the revolution.

The leader of Operation Ajax was Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., a senior CIA agent, and grandson of the former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt. While formal leadership was vested in Kim Roosevelt the project was designed and executed by Donald Wilber, a career contract CIA agent and acclaimed author of books on Iran, Afghanistan and Ceylon.

As a condition of restoring the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company the U.S. was able to dictate that the AIOC's oil monopoly should lapse. Five major U.S. oil companies, plus Royal Dutch Shell and French Compagnie Française des Pétroles were given licences to operate in the country alongside AIOC.

https://www.thelatinlibrary.com/imperialism/notes/operationajax.html

 

Edited by Phaeton80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Socks Junior

A great look at the oil biz throughout history is The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power by Daniel Yergin.  Meticulously researched, sourced, and written.  Definitely outlines the geopolitical and economic implications of oil throughout history.

I'll have to dig into his account of the Iran Revolution from the lens of oil.  My recollection is that it's not quite as simple as 'evil US machinations for oil'.  But mileage, of course, varies.

I'm reminded of getting taught about petroleum geology by an old oil man.  His (simplistic and a slightly derogatory) take on the Middle East was "If I'm living in a tent with a camel, of course I'm going to be p***ed off at multinationals pulling the oil out of 'my' ground.  I'm going to do some freedom fighting!"  Not a bad take, of course, it relies on a weird forgetfulness about who actually found the oil in economic quantities in the first place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam
1 hour ago, Phaeton80 said:


Yeah, and I hope you are aware that even in that, the US had a large hand.. Which makes the present lamenting of the Iranian theocratic rule a wee bit hypocritical.

First Mossadeq was democratically elected, he then moved to nationalise the Iranian oil production.. (hmmm, where did I hear that before..) Which ofcourse didnt fall well with the US and her oil multinationals..  To which the US effectuated a plan to foment a coup d'etat, facilitating the placement of the Shah. The Shah acted against the wishes of the masses, culminating in tyrannical acts against his opposition, and in time the population rose up against him, the Iranian Revolution. Enter Ayatollah Khomeini, and Khamenei now, as the legacy of this attempt at statecraft.

I'm aware. This country meddles way too much in other nations (mainly middle east) affairs.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
1 hour ago, Phaeton80 said:


Thats interesting, got links?

The following might be interesting as well..

 

I'm lazy so this is all from wikipedia but they site everything of importance, also only going to copy the more relevant stuff.

"Britain now faced the newly elected nationalist government in Iran where Mosaddegh, with strong backing of the Iranian parliament and people, demanded more favorable concessionary arrangements, which Britain vigorously opposed.

The U.S. State Department not only rejected Britain's demand that it continue to be the primary beneficiary of Iranian oil reserves but "U.S. international oil interests were among the beneficiaries of the concessionary arrangements that followed nationalization."

Mohammad Mosaddegh attempted to negotiate with the AIOC, but the company rejected his proposed compromise. Mosaddegh's plan, based on the 1948 compromise between the VenezuelanGovernment of Romulo Gallegos and Creole Petroleum, would divide the profits from oil 50/50 between Iran and Britain. Against the recommendation of the United States, Britain refused this proposal and began planning to undermine and overthrow the Iranian government.

...

The National Iranian Oil Company suffered decreased production, because of Iranian inexperience and the AIOC's orders that British technicians not work with them, thus provoking the Abadan Crisis that was aggravated by the Royal Navy's blockading its export markets to pressure Iran to not nationalise its petroleum. The Iranian revenues were greater, because the profits went to Iran's national treasury rather than to private, foreign oil companies. By September 1951, the British had virtually ceased Abadan oil field production, forbidden British export to Iran of key British commodities (including sugar and steel),:110 and had frozen Iran's hard currency accounts in British banks. British Prime Minister Clement Attlee considered seizing the Abadan Oil Refinery by force, but instead settled on an embargo by the Royal Navy, stopping any ship transporting Iranian oil for carrying so-called "stolen property". On his re-election as prime minister, Winston Churchilltook an even harder stance against Iran.

...

In mid-1952, Britain's embargo of Iranian oil was devastatingly effective. British agents in Tehran "worked to subvert" the government of Mosaddegh, who sought help from President Truman and then the World Bank but to no avail. "Iranians were becoming poorer and unhappier by the day" and Mosaddegh's political coalition was fraying.""

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

It will be interesting to see if India, China, and Turkey ignores the US and continues importing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam
4 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Um, the "freedom" they got under the Shah was what caused the people to have a revolution in the first place......

The way I should have worded that was "Western style freedom", they did get a taste of it, but still lived harshly in many instances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
3 minutes ago, South Alabam said:

The way I should have worded that was "Western style freedom", they did get a taste of it, but still lived harshly in many instances.

There are 100 Iranians that attend school here in the town I am in: http://www.iowastatedaily.com/news/iranian-students-make-a-stand-on-campus/article_bd4c6f66-e8c2-11e6-a4f4-8f3af4dfa6d6.html

They aren't the backwards goat herders you might have been led to believe.

(Found that out when Trump tried his Muslim ban 1.0, which would have booted them all out.  Version 3.0 has them all staying)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Alabam
4 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

There are 100 Iranians that attend school here in the town I am in: http://www.iowastatedaily.com/news/iranian-students-make-a-stand-on-campus/article_bd4c6f66-e8c2-11e6-a4f4-8f3af4dfa6d6.html

They aren't the backwards goat herders you might have been led to believe.

(Found that out when Trump tried his Muslim ban 1.0, which would have booted them all out.  Version 3.0 has them all staying)

I don't think they are backwards goat herders. The Shah actually bought Iran into the 20th century with modern western style culture and the Revolution stalled that. I see they are a people that want greater freedoms, it's just they cannot get it with a religious government. And Trump should actually place himself in others shoes before making decisions. It might make the world a better place.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
Posted (edited)

The US and England REALLY screwed things up in Iran, a once friendly, peaceful, Democratic nation. It seems when you pull off a coup and remove the democratically elected leader and replace him with a string of Shah's that are nothing more than puppet heads of state, then yeah - the people get a little tic'd off and I don't blame him. Yes, the US and England did cause that revolution.

Anyway, besides me thinking that the US is wrong in all of this, I think Pompeo is an ass. The problem is, he fits right in with Trump and the Great Foreign Policy designers of DC

PS:  Just for the record... Y'all know I back Trump on his domestic agenda but think his foreign policy generally sucks, as I do with all admins in my lifetime.

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa

China's latest position is "Nuts 2 U."  They buy about 50% of Iran's output. Maybe they will soften that somewhat if the US gives them some favorable trade deals.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Raptor Witness

Higher oil prices help Russia, and hurts average Americans. It’s foolish politically to do this, by a mile wide margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
31 minutes ago, Raptor Witness said:

Higher oil prices help Russia, and hurts average Americans. It’s foolish politically to do this, by a mile wide margin.

Not domestically. As long as Trump "hurts" the right people he keeps his base fired up and incapable of envisioning the wider ramifications 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

"Higher oil prices  help Russia"....    

Why, oh why, is it that if America embarks on a planned policy that is good for America, we have to recapitulate simply because it also helps Russia?   Who gives a bleep????   The Russian people are not America's enemy, they are good people. This "get the Ruskies"  attitude should have dissolved long ago in America when the USSR dissolved.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
marsman
8 hours ago, Raptor Witness said:

Higher oil prices help Russia, and hurts average Americans. It’s foolish politically to do this, by a mile wide margin.

 

Where does the US rank in oil production?
The United States is now the largest global crude oil producer. Note: Production for the United States and Russia includes crude oil and condensate. The total for Saudi Arabia includes only crude oil; EIA estimates that crude oil and condensate production in Saudi Arabia averaged 10.5 million b/d in August 2018.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37053

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OverSword
On ‎4‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 3:24 AM, Vlad the Mighty said:

Yup, you, and the Emperor Donald,w ill get your long awaited war very very soon!
 

How many do you think will die as a result this time?   I bet you can't wait! ^_^ 

 

You're high.  Hillary Clinton was the one who said we will attack Iran once she's president.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.