- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,070
You know the Iran, Iraq, Kuwait story before then? They fight among themselves and I agree the 'West' should not interfere but the U.S. (world) needs oil or the machines will stop and that supply disruption fear is the reason.
Know how in the 50s, Iran was a secular democracy?
Iran's secular president thought that maybe BP should pay more in royalty so that his country and his people can get more of that black gold and build schools and fund healthcare and stuff like that.
So women were free, religion (Islam) was out and the country was democratic.
Guess what happened?
A secular, democratic republican Iran needs to be liberated and the weakest of the Shah's son was installed. The CIA call it operation Ajax...
Then when the Shah was overthrown, the Islamic Ayatollahs came to power... the US then got friendly with Iraq and our friend Saddam. Why? To keep Iran busy and get some payback for daring to become independent.
This is not to say that theocratic Iran is a great and wonderful place. I wouldn't want to be there. But we shouldn't be on our high horse thinking that our boss, the US, aren't some sort of imperial power. Or it is an imperial power but uses its power for good and noble aims.
And no, to secure against supply disruption is not a valid reason to take people's country and their resources. Whatever happen to the free market? Or international law?
I mean, some of us might be very rich if we could just go over to the neighbours' place and take their stuff. You know, secure our livelihood because we need to.