|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Seems to me that Mr. Kepha needs to study history moreReader comment on item: Washington Puzzles over the Mujahedeen-e Khalq Submitted by Debanjan Banerjee (India), Dec 4, 2011 at 11:26 Dear Mr. Kepha , Most of your comments make it clear that you know nothing about either Mossadegh or the politics in Iran in the 1950-s. Listen , it was UK and USSR which together conquered Iran during the second World War , so it was legitmate for the Iranians to see both these two powers as hostile. The condition in the refinery in Abadan which allowed Britian to survive the Blitz also ensured that Britian stole all the oil from Iran without offering proper compensation to Iran. Can you believe it , that Iran never had any board of directors or auditors to look in the books of Anglo-Persian oil company (now BP) before Mossadegh. The British intentionally prevented educating Iranians from managiing their own oil successfully. First Mossadegh wanted a 50-50 sharing of Iranian oil profits with Anglo-Iranian corporation (like thearrangement US worked out with Saudi Aramco at the same time) but when the British refused to give a 50-50 deal , Mossadegh had no option to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian oil. "Nor was he a liberal. He let his rankled sense of entitlement as kin to the deposed Qajar dynasty drive him into the arms of the Tudeh." My ANswer --- > It seems that you are unaware that you yourself said that Tudeh were communist so how on earth the Tudeh would welcome someone like Mossadegh who according to you was a relic of the old Qazar dynasty ? On another note , remember FDR supported USSR in his war against Hitler so does that make FDR a communist ? Your past comment just points to that way. "Perhaps he and his Tudeh friends should have won. It would have given the Soviets a bloody guerrilla war in the Islamic world during the 1950's and '60's, and might have resulted in several of the clerical families that gave us the 1979 revolution being decimated." My Answer --- > Perhaps Hitler should have won. It would have been great had that bald abomination Winston Churchill been shot by the victorious SS in that sceanario. That filthy bald abomiation Churchill was responsible for the great Bengal famine which killed thousands of innocent Indians during the second World War. Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments". << Previous Comment Next Comment >> Reader comments (17) on this item
|
Latest Articles |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes (The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code. Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998. For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.) |