Boosters

Members who have given this post a Boost with their Coins
Writers, creators, commenters and curators get paid when people like you Boost their content. Learn More...

11 comments

Best   /  Newest   /  Oldest
Cyrus___ Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) Pinned comment
"MM: I was not only against a democratic republic but any type of those kinds of regimes since a change in regime does not necessary bring progress to a nation. Until a nation is knowledgeable and informed and there are not competent administrators in a country, the country’s fate will remain the same.

There are many countries whose regimes are a republic but do not enjoy freedom and there are those countries whose regimes are constitutional monarchy and they enjoy freedom and independence."

He was definitely right there. Look what happened when Iran became a republic.
Shhhh... Mossadegh was against a democratic republic. We'd better keep that one quiet.
See More
1 +
 
Ash_ Ash (@Ash_) Pinned comment
I must say it was quite rich of Mohamamd Reza Pahlavi to accuse Dr. Mossadegh of corruption, given that he was the corrupt son of corrupt tyrant from a corrupt upstart family. Equally as rich was the accusation of promoting imperialism. What a full-blown stooge.

This is what you get when you have a dynasty of base lineage founded by a former stable boy who slept on the floor in his palace. A family of thieves and buffoons calling themselves a "royal house" without even a drop of blue blood in their veins or a shred of nobleness in their character. What a disgraceful end to a 2500 years old monarchy.
See More
0 +
 
Cyrus___ Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) Pinned comment
Mossadegh learnt what happens when you threaten the bottom line of powerful interests tied to a stronger empire than your own. I cannot say he is totally blameless for pushing as hard as he did, despite his ideas being "right", because it doesn't matter how right you are if your enemy is much stronger than you - you're probably going to lose.

Notwithstanding their differences, Mossadegh, MRP and the mullahs have one thing in common - they were/are not afraid to push the boundaries of Anglo-American imperial tolerance, and get smacked down. Sixty five years later, Iran has still not found its place in the modern world.
See More
0 +
 
ashianeh ashianeh (@ashianeh) replied to Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) Pinned comment
Sharks along with internal parasites won't let it happen.
See More
4 +
 
Cyrus___ Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) replied to ashianeh (@ashianeh) Pinned comment
Sharks and parasites. It's time the host ridded itself of parasites and staved off the sharks, but as Mossadegh said, "until a nation is knowledgeable and informed and there are not competent administrators in a country, the country’s fate will remain the same."

See More
0 +
 
Ash_ Ash (@Ash_) replied to Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) Pinned comment
There's a very thin line between refraining from recklessly provoking an empire and kowtowing to it. This line separates reasonable cautiousness from spineless cowardice.

One of the things that separates Dr. Mossadegh from MRP and the Mullahs is the fact that his cause was just and his fight with the imperial powers well-chosen. Unlike the aforementioned idiots, Mossadegh did not recklessly provoke the foreign enemy because of an irrational reason or self-serving purpose. He fought not for religion, ideology, or power, but for sovereignty, freedom, and justice. He fought for his nation, and he knew what he was doing. Even though Iran and Mossadegh ultimately lost in the end, it was a good fight, since it was a heroic and defiant mockery of foreign enemies that had a chance to yield fruits and was driven by noble principles and ideals that continue to inspire millions of Iranian patriots.

Iran may have been driven out of the international community had Mossadegh succeeded, but is being part of that club more important than national honor, dignity, and independence? Absolutely not. Fighting against the odds is the right thing to do a lot of the times.
See More
1 +
 
Cyrus___ Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) replied to Ash (@Ash_) Pinned comment
Being part of a club versus ational honour and dignity? Ideologically, no. it's not more important. Pragmatically, yes, I think it is given the huge impact it has on outcomes for the people.
See More
0 +
 
Ash_ Ash (@Ash_) replied to Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) Pinned comment
Pahlavi Iran was a full member of the international community. What benefits did it get from that? Not much, and certainly not any that justified that membership. It was basically an exploited American colony ruled and mismanaged and abused by a corrupt, treacherous, treasonous, degenerate, and incompetent illegitimate regime. That miserable condition was required for Iran to be admitted into the club to begin with. Pragmatically as well as ideologically, it was a bad deal.
See More
0 +
 
Cyrus___ Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) replied to Ash (@Ash_) Pinned comment
But given that the alternative to that "membership" (your words) is a risk of total annihilation, I maintain that on balance it is better to avoid conflict with the Anglo-Zionists, which means submission to some of their demands. Don't try to outsmart them on oil, don't take them hostage, don't shout marg bar anything and don't try to set up a quasi neo Persian empire.
See More
0 +
 
Ash_ Ash (@Ash_) replied to Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) Pinned comment
I don't think total annihilation was a risk back then. Only sanctions were. Invasion was not a going to happen, certainly not at the height of the Cold War. Only now it has become a real threat thanks to the mullahs and their aggressive foreign policy.
See More
0 +
 
Cyrus___ Cyrus___ (@Cyrus___) replied to Ash (@Ash_) Pinned comment
Millions of Koreans, Vietnamese and Afghans would disagree with you. Wars most certainly did happen during the Cold War. Moreover, the British did in fact consider seizing the Persian oilfields, but the MI6/CIA option was much cheaper, and in the end it was successful. Had the coup against Mossadegh failed, only then would we have found out how far they were willing to push.
See More
0 +
 
More