52nd anniversary of the successful execution of operation Ajax

In 1953, the CIA and British intelligence orchestrated a coup d’etat that toppled the democratically elected government of Iran. The government of Mohammad Mossadegh. The aftershocks of the coup are still being felt.

In 1951 Prime Minister Mossadegh roused Britain's ire when he nationalized the oil industry. Mossadegh argued that Iran should begin profiting from its vast oil reserves which had been exclusively controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The company later became known as British Petroleum (BP).

After considering military action, Britain opted for a coup d'état. President Harry Truman rejected the idea, but when Dwight Eisenhower took over the White House, he ordered the CIA to embark on one of its first covert operations against a foreign government.

The coup was led by an agent named Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt. The CIA leaned on a young, insecure Shah to issue a decree dismissing Mossadegh as prime minister. Kermit Roosevelt had help from Norman Schwarzkopf’s father: Norman Schwarzkopf.

The CIA and the British helped to undermine Mossadegh's government through bribery, libel, and orchestrated riots. Agents posing as communists threatened religious leaders, while the US ambassador lied to the prime minister about alleged attacks on American nationals.

Some 300 people died in firefights in the streets of Tehran.

Mossadegh was overthrown, sentenced to three years in prison followed by house arrest for life.

The crushing of Iran's first democratic government ushered in more than two decades of dictatorship under the Shah, who relied heavily on US aid and arms. The anti-American backlash that toppled the Shah in 1979 shook the whole region and helped spread Islamic militancy.

The supreme irony is that if we (the US) hadn't intervened then on account of oil interests, we would today most likely have a powerful, america-friendly, and democratic power in the region.

-koji K.

And yet, because of harsh actions we are still seeing blood spilled and hatred grow for the United Stated of AmeREICHa. Funny cause today's my birthday aswell . Anyway, beware Iran and Jordan, you're next.

Originally posted by koji_K
The supreme irony is that if we (the US) hadn't intervened then on account of oil interests, we would today most likely have a powerful, america-friendly, and democratic power in the region.

-koji K.

america friendly? i guess invading Vietnam for rice makes us bad as well eh? i dont know if that works really well.

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by koji_K
The supreme irony is that if we (the US) hadn't intervened then on account of oil interests, we would today most likely have a powerful, america-friendly, and democratic power in the region.

-koji K.

america friendly? i guess invading Vietnam for rice makes us bad as well eh? i dont know if that works really well.

urmm.....

what?

-koji K.

Deltaboy, with all due respect, I am a fairly tolerant person and have abstained from commenting on this since your arrival. But I'm finding it hard to follow your posts sometimes. Is english your second language? It would also help if you typed out words completely, ie. "When" instead of "Wen", "That" istead of "Dat" etc.

cheers

Originally posted by koji_K

urmm.....

what?

-koji K.

lets say that nations that we have attacked like for example during the Bosnian or Kosovo war. would the critics around the world be mad at us or praise us? many people would still hate us even if we did not attack nations over oil. even if its humanitarian. like for example wen the American troops wanted to cross Greece to get to the Kosovo province, the people of Greece taunt and protest while American soldiers were crossing through. those are examples of wat the world views America if we attacked countries that dont involved oil.

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by koji_K

urmm.....

what?

-koji K.

lets say that nations that we have attacked like for example during the Bosnian or Kosovo war. would the critics around the world be mad at us or praise us? many people would still hate us even if we did not attack nations over oil. even if its humanitarian. like for example wen the American troops wanted to cross Greece to get to the Kosovo province, the people of Greece taunt and protest while American soldiers were crossing through. those are examples of wat the world views America if we attacked countries that dont involved oil.

OK, I think I understand your point, but I think this wouldn't be so in the case of Iran. Mossadegh, the overthrown leader, was very pro American. He viewed the Americans as an idealistic people with values he shared and also as, if not fair traders, at least better than the British (the British at the time took I think around 95% of Iran's oil profits, while the American policy in Saudi Arabia was to take 50%). Many Iranians even today still, unbeliavably, like America, in spite of the radically anti-American leadership they have. Given that fact, I'd say with an actual pro-American government in charge, both the policy AND the people would be pro-American.

-koji K.