Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Iran - is war likely?

Discussion in 'Non-World War 2 History' started by Ricky phpbb3, Feb 12, 2007.

  1. TIRDAD

    TIRDAD Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2016
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    133
    Location:
    TEHRAN - IRI
    They are destroying their hometown to build neighbors country!!!

    even they are not Iranians!

    I don't accept them as leaders of my country!

    they are arab's servants, slaves!

    mother whores!
     
  2. TIRDAD

    TIRDAD Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2016
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    133
    Location:
    TEHRAN - IRI
    they don't live in tehran! or iran...

    so it's better to say to them:

    "Just Fuck Off!!! you mother whores!

    You've fled like rats from sinking ship!

    Traitors! Bastards!"
     
  3. TIRDAD

    TIRDAD Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2016
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    133
    Location:
    TEHRAN - IRI
    Even hell won't accept those fucking creatures!
     
  4. rkline56

    rkline56 USS Oklahoma City CG5 Patron  

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,188
    Likes Received:
    210
    Location:
    CA Norte Mexico, USA
    You should edit your posts, man.
    You will get the boot here for that kind of language.
    Just saying, up to you. Tell us all about Iran but keep it on point and clean - no?
    Those guys left Iran to avoid the persecution, prison or worse. What's wrong with that, their opinion was anathema to the state so they took their philosophies elsewhere.
     
  5. Ken The Kanuck

    Ken The Kanuck Member Patron  

    Joined:
    May 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,279
    Likes Received:
    465
    Intolerance breeds intolerance. The Shah introduced tolerance and the intolerant removed him.

    KTK
     
  6. green slime

    green slime Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,068
    Likes Received:
    535
    Actually,... the Shah's SAVAK tortured and killed their own citizenry. Hardly a beacon of tolerance The revolution was Marxist-based, but they were usurped by the better organised and, within Iran, widely recognised figure of Ayatollah Khomeini. Also worth noting, is the rigid class system (with royalty) meant that almost all Iran's resources and land were owned by a relatively small number of enormously rich families. This still exists to a lesser degree today. Fundamentally, the Shah's "freedoms" meant very little for those with little. The Shah's attempt at land reform was an abject failure. Now, nearly 40 years after the revolution, you can still find enormously wealthy families with vast estates living in Iran still bemoaning the land, factories, and wealth they've lost.

    And let's not forget it was the CIA-lead coup of '53 which prevented the nationalisation of the Oilfields, the CIA strengthened the Shah's power, and supported the activities of the SAVAK.

    Of course, nowadays, after the almost total destruction of the middle class by the embargo, corruption, and neopotism, the Shah's ruthless oppression of dissidents, looks almost benign. But the rich were never tolerant of the ambitions of the poor in Iran.
     
  7. Ken The Kanuck

    Ken The Kanuck Member Patron  

    Joined:
    May 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,279
    Likes Received:
    465
    Having lived and worked in Iran when the Shah was in power and seeing what has happened after he was ousted, it is my belief that the Shah's reign was much more tolerant.

    Naturally you must factor in that Iran is a predominantly Shite Muslim country, and tolerance is not a defining aspect of that society/religion.

    KTK
     
  8. green slime

    green slime Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,068
    Likes Received:
    535
    The same people working for the SAVAK worked for the Ayatollahs after the revolution. Their skills were needed. But we know where and when they learned their tradecraft.

    The Marxists of the time certainly didn't think the Shah was particularly tolerant, and it was getting worse, as opposition to his reign grew. The high level of illiteracy didn't help either... Life was grim for many.
     

Share This Page