Join INGunOwners For Free
Page 16 of 37 FirstFirst ... 6 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 26 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 369
  1. #151
    Grandmaster BugI02's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Alpo View Post
    A nudge. A term derived from the Norse: to push. I thought it was a yiddish term. Apparently not.


    Is "regime change" the same as a nudge?

    Is supporting despots in south America anti-nudges?

    Is selling weapons to Iran by Reagan and North a nudge....certainly a crime....but how does it relate to noogies?

    Now who's sequitur is drifting non-ward
    You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you

  2. #152
    Grandmaster Alpo's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Returning your serve, Larry.

    It's fun asking questions rather than being associated with an opinion.

    Also, when all questions aren't answered, you can upbraid the person for being non-responsive.

    Hilarious.

    Where is ATM when we need him?
    I all too often ran out of talent well before the exit of the turn. (© Señor Mouse)

  3. #153
    Grandmaster BugI02's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    *sniff* Dilettante
    You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you

  4. #154
    Grandmaster ghuns's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BugI02 View Post
    ...The oversimplification of very complex and opaque events to fit the narrative of 'US bad' is exactly what I am pushing back against...

    There was nothing complex about. Mosaddegh wanted to nationalize the oil industry. GB was having none of that, we went along for the ride. The CIA then helped the Shah create the SAVAK that brutally repressed dissent within Iran for the next 25+ years.

    That was bad.

    I'm not saying we, the USA, are always bad. I'm not even saying that supporting or installing the lesser of two evils is always bad. But our history in Iran is nothing to be proud of.
    Necessity is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.

  5. #155
    Grandmaster T.Lex's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    In the CIA's defense, Iran was won that "we" won. The Sovs played the same game, and won some the same way.

    At least Grumman got paid.
    Resident Warning Shot Statist.

  6. #156
    Grandmaster BugI02's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    For ghuns: https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nyti...cia-intro.html

    And remember, although not as overtly politicized as it is now, it's still the NYT in the post-Nixon era

    ETA:
    https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/
    CIA Confirms Role in 1953 Iran Coup

    Documents Provide New Details on Mosaddeq Overthrow and Its Aftermath

    National Security Archive Calls for Release of Remaining Classified Record

    National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 435

    Last edited by BugI02; 06-26-2019 at 13:46.
    You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you

  7. #157
    Grandmaster IndyDave1776's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ghuns View Post
    There was nothing complex about. Mosaddegh wanted to nationalize the oil industry. GB was having none of that, we went along for the ride. The CIA then helped the Shah create the SAVAK that brutally repressed dissent within Iran for the next 25+ years.

    That was bad.

    I'm not saying we, the USA, are always bad. I'm not even saying that supporting or installing the lesser of two evils is always bad. But our history in Iran is nothing to be proud of.
    I think I could live with the implications of being friends with a brutal regime more easily than being enemies with an even more brutal regime which happens to be the world's leading state sponsor of terror.
    Government and pedophiles both practice buggering those powerless to defend themselves.

  8. #158
    Grandmaster Alpo's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    A--->change agent--->B---->revolution---->religiocracy

    It seems to me that you cannot support a position that being friends with B is more prophylactic than not inserting the "change agency" in the first place.
    I all too often ran out of talent well before the exit of the turn. (© Señor Mouse)

  9. #159
    Expert two70's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Alpo View Post
    A--->change agent--->B---->revolution---->religiocracy

    It seems to me that you cannot support a position that being friends with B is more prophylactic than not inserting the "change agency" in the first place.
    It seems to me that you are making a big assumption (change agent=cause of Islamic revolution) based on facts not in evidence. The 25 year delay between the two events alone should induce some doubt into such a simple, direct causation. I really don't see the appeal of making excuses for Islamists but apparently its a thing for some.

  10. #160
    Grandmaster BugI02's Avatar

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ghuns View Post
    There was nothing complex about. Mosaddegh wanted to nationalize the oil industry. GB was having none of that, we went along for the ride. The CIA then helped the Shah create the SAVAK that brutally repressed dissent within Iran for the next 25+ years.

    That was bad.

    I'm not saying we, the USA, are always bad. I'm not even saying that supporting or installing the lesser of two evils is always bad. But our history in Iran is nothing to be proud of.
    Do you have a fact-based citation that the CIA had a hand in creating the SAVAK or is it just the usual drippings from the "US bad" swill?
    Last edited by BugI02; 06-26-2019 at 16:44.
    You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you

Page 16 of 37 FirstFirst ... 6 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 26 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Button Dodge