|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
That is correct: the United States and its allies and their combined interests have been building a sphere-of-influence in the Middle East since the British and French collapsed following the Second World War. The Iranian empire-project conflicts with ours -- no more no less. I make no apologies. After all, everyone wants to influence the world around them in their image and I prefer ours to theirs -- but neither will I get caught up in one or the other side's propaganda, either, Cheeseface.
Re: your outraged claim that "as for the contra affair, the US pissed off the hard liners who now rule Iran," please elaborate. What happened here and how exactly did "the US" annoy "the hardliners who now rule Iran," and who exactly are they, by the way?
Are you sure you understand the basic outline of the Iran-Contra Affair, Cheeseface?
Last edited by Gopher on Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kimbop
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cheeseface wrote: |
Enemy? What the you mean someone actually stepping up and taking a stance at US hegemony?
|
Hegemony? Most sane people on this planet accept that Iran/islamism is inferior. Only maniacs take a stand against 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' Notice the 'hegemony' of every democratic country on earth; notice also how often they've warred with each other.
| cheeseface wrote: |
I'm neither with or against the US or your percived ememies.
Iran has been actively building a sphere-of-influence in the Middle East
The US has been doing the same, what's your problem with Iran,
|
My problem with Iran is that they are maniacs who execute children, support militants in Iraq and afghanistan, etc. I'm not sure what you're trying to prove: we are approaching the anniversary of the murder of Ms Bhutto; Pakistan has nuclear weapons already; you have no idea who we (the free world) are up against.
Riddle me this, Batman: would the world benefit more from the spread of Iran's ideals, or from the west's?
| cheeseface wrote: |
the US actually put Iran into the position of power it is now in thanks to the invasion of Iraq. You boosted Iran's political clout ten fold in the region.
|
Please expand on this, I'd luff to hear your thoughts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheeseface
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Location: Ssyangnyeon Shi
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| That is correct: the United States and its allies and their combined interests have been building a sphere-of-influence in the Middle East since the British and French collapsed following the Second World War. The Iranian empire-project conflicts with ours, no more no less. I make no apologies. after all, everyone wants to influence the world around them in their image -- but neither will I get caught up in one or the other side's propaganda, either, Cheeseface. |
This thread seems to me like you are been towing at least one sides propagander.....
| Gopher wrote: |
Re: your outraged claim that "as for the contra affair, the US pissed off the hard liners who now rule Iran," please elaborate. What happened here and how exactly did "the US" annoy "the hardliners who now rule Iran," and who exactly are they, by the way?
Are you sure you understand the basic outline of the Iran-Contra Affair, Cheeseface? |
The Iran-Contra affair was a political scandal which was revealed in November 1986 as a result of earlier events during the Reagan administration. It began as an operation to increase U.S.-Iranian relations, wherein Israel would ship weapons to a moderate, politically influential group of Iranians opposed to the Ayatollah Khomeini;
Ayatollah's are the hard liners. They are the ones calling the shots now. They weren't happy about the Iran-Contra Affair. Still aren't I imagine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheeseface
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Location: Ssyangnyeon Shi
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kimbop[quote="cheeseface wrote: |
the US actually put Iran into the position of power it is now in thanks to the invasion of Iraq. You boosted Iran's political clout ten fold in the region.
|
Please expand on this, I'd luff to hear your thoughts.[/quote]
Iran and Iraq are closer allies than they ever have been in the past. Thanks to the US.
Now they can unite together under a common bond, instead of fighting each other as was the case under Saddam. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cheeseface wrote: |
| This thread seems to me like you are been towing at least one sides propagander... |
How so? This thread discusses Iran's development and testing of strategic missiles -- a current-events event. Should we ignore this or cheer it or what? What is your objection to discussing it?
| cheeseface wrote: |
| It began as an operation to [reopen] U.S.-Iranian relations... |
Yes. But you are missing the specifics of the arms deals, the hostages, and the "contra" parts entirely.
| cheeseface wrote: |
| Israel would ship weapons to a moderate, politically influential group of Iranians opposed to the Ayatollah Khomeini... |
Yes on the first part, not necessarily opposed to Khomeini, however. The Reagan Administration wanted to win influence with those who could influence him before Moscow could, no more no less. R. MacFarlane wanted to be H. Kissinger, too. Khomeini was his Mao.
| cheeseface wrote: |
| They weren't happy about the Iran-Contra Affair. Still aren't I imagine. |
Oh yes they probably were, on the whole. Washington got egg on its face. Tehran got arms and kept taking hostages for more arms, thus exposing America's continuing powerlessness on the ground there.
Things have changed since then, of course. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They weren't happy about Iran-Contra? Say what? Dude, no. Iran came out pretty good in that deal for the reasons Gopher explained.
And you're wrong about the group opposed to Khomeini. Either that or the Reagan administration was really out to lunch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cheeseface wrote: |
As for the contra affair, the US pissed off the hard liners who now rule Iran. |
As I and Gopher before me noted, this is false. If you have anything to back up that assertion, that would be awesome. Here is what the hard-liners use to rally support against the US:
1. Mossadiq in 1953
2. Support of the Shah
3. Being part of the Axis of Evil
Of course in the case of #3, I suppose they are happy that happened because it helped their propaganda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
