Iran’s Supreme Leader: Jihad Will Continue Until America is No More

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: OneManArmy

Just a minor detail to correct there..but the CIA put the Shah into power in Iran ...Saddam was a murderous little psycho from his formative years onward and weaseled his way to the top. It's kinda funny, really, and especially since Saddam commissioned a movie made about himself and how that all happened. (Or..how we saw it..lol)

Iraq was an open ally in the 80's though, to check and push back against Iran. Bad judgement in hindsight, in my opinion...but I think it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Saddam was a CIA operative, who helped him into power through assassination of elected leaders in high office (i.e. compare Iran Pres. Mohammad Mossadegh). He was used to punish Iran (see 7 year war Iraq/Iran) for their revolution against the CIA's Shaw, who as mentioned was a brutal right wing dictator for Washington and the western petroleum consortium. In both cases (Iran/Iraq) oil security was the main object, with tertiary agendas based on other regional economic and military interests through political incorporation.

History clearly illustrates Washington's record as a democracy destroyer in the Middle East, Southeast Asia and Latin America. I will qualify myself as a 7th generation American whose patriotism is not rooted in the stripes of a flag or war or a constitutional supposition. For me its really about "practice".

a reply to: Gianfar

We can respectfully agree to disagree and we shall likely do just that here. The history I've read and taken as required courses told it a bit differently on the rise of little Saddam from street thug to National thug. No disagreement about the U.S. meddling in the Middle East, and its where I refer to Operation Ajax, in the specific name for it, with the placement of the Shah.

I just disagree on the history of how Saddam came to power. Once he was IN power, Iraq was an ally as a matter of public record. At least until we tricked them into crossing the border in 1990, then stomped their military into junk. To think about it, America hasn't been in any true sense of peacetime since. 24 years of some form of war or combat operations in the Middle East. Enough, to be sure.

(Self Snip to adjust for edits on original)

originally posted by: Gianfar

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: OneManArmy

Just a minor detail to correct there..but the CIA put the Shah into power in Iran ...Saddam was a murderous little psycho from his formative years onward and weaseled his way to the top. It's kinda funny, really, and especially since Saddam commissioned a movie made about himself and how that all happened. (Or..how we saw it..lol)

Iraq was an open ally in the 80's though, to check and push back against Iran. Bad judgement in hindsight, in my opinion...but I think it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Saddam was a CIA operative, who helped him into power through assassination of elected leaders in high office (i.e. compare Iran Pres. Mohammad Mossadegh). He was used to punish Iran (see 7 year war Iraq/Iran) for their revolution against the CIA's Shaw, who as mentioned was a brutal right wing dictator for Washington and the western petroleum consortium. In both cases (Iran/Iraq) oil security was the main object, with tertiary agendas based on other regional economic and military interests through political incorporation.

History clearly illustrates Washington's record as a democracy destroyer in the Middle East, Southeast Asia and Latin America. I will qualify myself as a 7th generation American whose patriotism is not rooted in the stripes of a flag or war or a constitutional supposition. For me its really about "practice".

Well it was Iran that actually started the conflict they were doing cross border raids into Iraq before Sadaam started his offensive. They were also trying to get a rebellion going in Iraq much the same way there revolution started. And at first there was no US involvement quite frankly they thought Iraq would easily win his army was huge. And Irans was in total disarray.What no one counted onwas the willingness of the people to sacrifice themselves in battle. Iran used people as fodder sending men women and children to the front just to waste Iraqi ammunition. Several of Irans victories were literally causing the Iraqis to run out of ammo than Iran would bring their forces into the battle.

This is why later Iraq started using CS at first to stop the civilians from charging his troops.Still turned out to be ineffective until later when he started using mustard gas.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Required courses may not deal with cold facts. There are good journalists and PhDs who research paper trails and interview officials. Seymour Hersh wrote about US support for terrorist groups from Latin America, Iran and Lebanon. Universities tend to follow the party line.

a reply to: dragonridr

The matter of who started it may be irrelevant, since Iraq was already a client state of Washington. War was going to happen and the US took advantage of it, if the CIA hadn't helped create the conditions.

One US paid puppet or another is calling for an attack on Iran every single day of the week but you have to wait for the weekend to hear for a call to attack China or Russia.

In the mean time the military is spending billions each day of your taxes.

Yes Americia is so great that its people bend over and take anything thats thrown at them and today the states is nothing short of a police state but lets talk about Iran who jail ten timess less of its people than happens in the USA with its prisons for profit.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Who is the latest country to call for an attack on Iran?
When was the last time a country called for an attack on Iran?

originally posted by: VirusGuard
One US paid puppet or another is calling for an attack on Iran every single day of the week but you have to wait for the weekend to hear for a call to attack China or Russia.

In the mean time the military is spending billions each day of your taxes.

Yes Americia is so great that its people bend over and take anything thats thrown at them and today the states is nothing short of a police state but lets talk about Iran who jail ten timess less of its people than happens in the USA with its prisons for profit.

Agreed. That sort of hype compares to how Middle Eastern governments harp on Israeli human rights violations to distract their own citizens from internalized political and economic failure. The enemy doctrine is one principle of supporting the status-quo. If people are frustrated about internal issues, let's give them some external inequity to release their tensions. And of course, the sheep always follow their Shepard.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: Gianfar

Once he was IN power, Iraq was an ally as a matter of public record. At least until we tricked them into crossing the border in 1990, then stomped their military into junk. To think about it, America hasn't been in any true sense of peacetime since. 24 years of some form of war or combat operations in the Middle East. Enough, to be sure.

I saw a State Dept video in which an official told three representatives of the Hussein government that Iraq's dispute over oil with Kuwait was none of our business and that we wouldn't interfere.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: VirusGuard

Who is the latest country to call for an attack on Iran?
When was the last time a country called for an attack on Iran?

The last time America and Israel attacked Iran through their proxy (Iraq) with help from NATO and even Russia...But Iran despite just getting out of a revolution at the time and with no military and political stability could manage to stand the heat for more than 8 years without getting any help from anybody....Zionists and their lobby in the US constantly and overtly call for an attack on Iran,it's just that there are people who oppose them passionately, and thankfully there are still some sanity remained in the government of both countries that prevents them from acting so foolish...The west is not able to charge a full out war against Iran even with all the supposed help coming from the NATO,otherwise they would have done it 15 years ago when America was more accepted and justified around the world and much mightier than now and Iran was a lot weaker.

a reply to: Gianfar

Yup.. That's what I recall from the time, too. Odd thing on that, eh? We didn't precisely say "Go for it!", we simply said we take no official position on border disputes. Something just must have been lost in translation since technically, our side has maintained it was about border disputes over slant oil drilling from Kuwait into the Southern Iraqi oil fields.

I think we ...forgot... to quite clarify that on purpose though, and Saddam did what tyrants do. He gobbled up a lesser nation. Like a big rat to a fat chunk of cheese. The breaker bar came down too...right across his military. It broke the back of what I believe was the 3rd largest in the world, at the time.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: Gianfar

Yup.. That's what I recall from the time, too. Odd thing on that, eh? We didn't precisely say "Go for it!", we simply said we take no official position on border disputes. Something just must have been lost in translation since technically, our side has maintained it was about border disputes over slant oil drilling from Kuwait into the Southern Iraqi oil fields.

I think we ...forgot... to quite clarify that on purpose though, and Saddam did what tyrants do. He gobbled up a lesser nation. Like a big rat to a fat chunk of cheese. The breaker bar came down too...right across his military. It broke the back of what I believe was the 3rd largest in the world, at the time.

Kuwait had a deal with the US to keep oil at about $7.00 a barrel (around the time of the Iran war). According to FBI documents regarding Hussein's capture and subsequent interrogations, after the war he needed internal funding from oil profits to rebuild and was unable to compete with Kuwaiti marketing, so this led to the dispute over slant drilling near the Kuwaiti border. Hussein stated that he was also concerned about Iran controlling the region or invading Kuwait. Though Washington convinced Iraq to go to war with Iran and supplied back door funding they had a falling out with Hussein during the 'tanker' conflict at the end of the Iranian war. That's a chapter of US Iraqi relations that is little too complex to talk about here. But if you're familiar with the Contra case and how it effected our Iraqi ally, you'll understand how Hussein became an enemy of the Bush family, who had considerable petroleum holdings and close relations with Kuwaiti elites.

In other news....

Due to the deterioration of the situation in Iraq, the USA and UK are seeking a joint venture with (drumroll please).... IRAN.

I would so like to swear right now to portray my disgust at the hypocrisy and two faced politics of our leaders, but foul language is not acceptable on this site.

But for #s sake what the # have we done to the middle east, we have decimated it, created a power vacuum that the extremists are happy to fill. Well done allied leaders you bunch of useless corporate serving #tards.
Pikes 3rd world war is just another step closer it would seem.

Iraq is without a doubt one of the biggest mistakes in War history.
I was totally against Afghanistan,Iraq, Syria and Libya, but I think we have a duty to the world to go back into Iraq and fix what we set in motion.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: VirusGuard

Who is the latest country to call for an attack on Iran?
When was the last time a country called for an attack on Iran?

oh xcathdra, how is the business going on?

originally posted by: OneManArmy
In other news....

Due to the deterioration of the situation in Iraq, the USA and UK are seeking a joint venture with (drumroll please).... IRAN.

I would so like to swear right now to portray my disgust at the hypocrisy and two faced politics of our leaders, but foul language is not acceptable on this site.

But for #s sake what the # have we done to the middle east, we have decimated it, created a power vacuum that the extremists are happy to fill. Well done allied leaders you bunch of useless corporate serving #tards.
Pikes 3rd world war is just another step closer it would seem.

Iraq is without a doubt one of the biggest mistakes in War history.
I was totally against Afghanistan,Iraq, Syria and Libya, but I think we have a duty to the world to go back into Iraq and fix what we set in motion.

Wouldn't call it a mistake, just politics corrupted by greed and misuse of power. It's a little thing called Treason. When Bush was puking dogma about the evil axis, I knew we'd be going to war and loosing, just as we did in Vietnam. They don't fight wars to win them, war is a corporate venture.

The oil barrel was at about $10.00 (dollars) before the Iraq campaign. Now its around $160.00 a barrel due to the constant and historic threats posed by war and speculation. That being said, oil price effects the cost of food, energy and housing to name a few.

Its another step toward a western cast system.

a reply to: Xcathdra

It amuses me how Americans find any country with oil under their feet a major security threat even though US has enough nuclear missiles to destroy this world many times over.

So what gives, can't you all work out that you are being played by your own government to plunder wealth from other nations. Are you really that dumb? If you are (with schooling as it is) perhaps you should educate yourselves by reading Zbigniew Brzezinski book, THE GRAND CHESSBOARD in which he spelled out in black and white how US should plunder the free worlds energy.

But the problem with Brzezinski plan is that it fails to recognize that America is not the only country with nukes. One day, either China or Russia or both, will get fed up with the US continually shutting the door in their face and plant nukes in all your major cities (if they havn't already) tick tick tick tick KABOOM And you won't know who did it!

That is something to be scared off. Not the bogey men that your government is trying to scare you with.

Karma will be a bitch.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: Xcathdra

It amuses me how Americans find any country with oil under their feet a major security threat even though US has enough nuclear missiles to destroy this world many times over.

So what gives, can't you all work out that you are being played by your own government to plunder wealth from other nations. Are you really that dumb? If you are (with schooling as it is) perhaps you should educate yourselves by reading Zbigniew Brzezinski book, THE GRAND CHESSBOARD in which he spelled out in black and white how US should plunder the free worlds energy.

But the problem with Brzezinski plan is that it fails to recognize that America is not the only country with nukes. One day, either China or Russia or both, will get fed up with the US continually shutting the door in their face and plant nukes in all your major cities (if they havn't already) tick tick tick tick KABOOM And you won't know who did it!

That is something to be scared off. Not the bogey men that your government is trying to scare you with.

Karma will be a bitch.

Forums seem to be the least likely place to find well informed people. But I will say that your comments are spot-on and I agree that we Americans are generally lacking in historically based contexts. I wish that those who know more would speak more.

a reply to: Gianfar

There are some great people trying to educate the world but they will always be blacklisted by corporate controlled media. India's Arundhati Roy is just one of many that shares the truth to anyone prepared to listen....

Misquote:

The oil barrel was at about $10.00 (dollars) before the Iraq campaign. Now its around $160.00 a barrel due to the constant and historic threats posed by war and speculation. That being said, oil price effects the cost of food, energy and housing to name a few.



The $160.00 barrel of oil price quote should have been $106.00 or thereabout.