More drivel from Debanjan

Submitted by Shishir (United Arab Emirates), Jan 19, 2012 at 12:54

Debanjan:I have done some research on Mossadegh and request you to read Steven Pinker's two books i.e. "Downfall" and "All the Shah's men" to understand the personality of Mossadegh. Mossadegh's only fault was that he wanted his poor people to get a fair share of revenue from Iranian oil , the same revenues which were stolen from them by the thugs from the Anglo-Iranian oil company (now known to posterity as British Petroleum).

Shishir:You will forgive me if I dont take the word of a communist sympathizer like Steven Pinker at his word.As for the Anglo Iranian oil company which you claimed "looted" Iranian peasants,I would like to remind you that the surveying,discovery,drilling and rigs and other infrastructure were done overwhelmingly by the British and this was at the invitation of Iranians.Is it possible that the Iranians may have gotten an unfair deal-possibly but Britian had protected Iran from Soviet aggression.How much do you THEY would recompensate the Iranian peoles for the oil?

Debanjan:On the question of whether Mossadegh was a Soviet Sympathizer I would like to give few examples to prove you are not only wrong but laughable.1. When the British had embargoed the Iranians after the nationalization of their oil industry so that they were not able to sell Iranian oil to the World , thereby financially choking Iran (much of what the US is seemingly doing now) , what Mossadegh needed to do was just make a phone call to Comrade Stalin across the border telling him that he and the Muslim people in Iran needs Soviet protection and Soviet ships would be queuing up in the port areas around Abadan to purchase Iranian oil. The KGB would be busy rounding up the Western sympathizers who were trying to overthrow the Mossadegh regime and hanging them. In that way Mossadegh could easily have prevented his downfall. But you know what , he did nothing as he was a proud Iranian Muslim to lease the sovereignity of his proud Islamic nation to that of an Atheist Soviet Union.

Shishir: Your take on the Soviet and Stalin is what is truly laughable! You think that with just one phone call to Stalin as you put it,the Soviets would send in the cavalry?Even if he wanted to(which you claim is the reason that he hadnt) ,that wouldnt happen!There was very little to be "proud" of re Irans Islamic heritage.Most city dwellers were non observant.For most of the past 1000 years Iran had been ruled by foreigners either Arabs,Mongols or Turk.As for Iranian nationalism, not just Shah Pehlavi but Iranian society in general wanted to take the Ataturk approach and Europeanize (which is one of the reasons they canged the country's name to Iran-a cognate of Aryano aka Aryan)

Debanjan:2. Whenever Mossadegh wanted to stress upon something in the Iranain parliament , he would take out a copy of Quran from his pocket and swore upon it. Hardly the behavior of a Soviet sympathizer in the 1950-s right ?

Shishir:Your naivete is laughable.Just because something swears on the Quran why does that preclude him from being a Soviet sympathizer?

Debanjan:Think about this. During the rule of the Ottoman empire , Greeks , Armaneians , Maronites , Jews , Sunnis , Shites , Druzes , Alawites all lived togther as long as no one single nationality wanted to impsoe itself over the rest.

Shishir: Ah but one nationality did impose itself over others:Ottoman Turk.Debanjan you are a joke a minute,what is point of providing half baked information if you cant transform it into knowledge?Obviously to do so you need common sense which you desperately lack!

Debanjan: Language-based nationalism did bring about the nation states in the West but empires with plenty of economic prosperity also helped to bring disparate peoples in the British Isles or elsewhere in Europe to come together under the guise of "nation-state". Without that glue , it is no wonder that these states are falling.Same is true for the Arab world. The Arab seculars never managed to provide sufficient economic upliftment to the masses as a result their states are crumbling.

Shishir: Not only are you historically ignorant but also you are utterly oblivious of contemporary developments!The current dismal economy in the EU is NOT due to the lack of empire but due to collapse of socialist entitlements coupled with easy credit based on phantom money which fuelled real estate bubbles.Also what "empires" did Poland,Czech,Slovakia,Romania,Bulgaria,Greece and Ireland did enjoy?!Even former empires like Spain and Portugal were already hasbeens by the 18th century whose ill begotten gold from the American natives led to inflation and wasteful wars against the English and others leaving them virtually destitute!Even Britain granted independence to India because after WWII, possessing India was costing the British rather than enriching.The British economy was very nearly devastated due to war rationing and Nazi bombings and that is BEFORE the Normandy invasion.

Arab secular rulers like Gaddhafi,Saddam,Hosni et al hoarded their nations wealth and stored it away.Hardly any Arab country used the honored Western traditions of thrift,punctuality,work ethic,investment,risk,entrepreneurship,freedom of speech,freedom of religion,low taxationrespect for rule of law rather than fear of despot,intellectual property,minimal beureacracy and red tape among others.Virtually no Middle Eastern country has these things except-you guessed it -Israel.And Im sure you will make the lame argument that U.S funds Israel to the tunes of billions of $.True but so what.It even funds Egypt and Jordan-where is their miracle economy? Furthermore I as well as many conservative Americans and Zionists(including the late Meir Kahane) are against this aid to Israel as it enables political corruption with Israel.

Debanjan:For example , the four states in the Levant i,.e, Israel , Syria , Lebanon and Jordan (as well as the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza) , to my mind are created from the Western-backed ideologies and henceforth none of them can be stable or prosperous in the long run.

Shishir:I dont care too much what those states are "to your mind" as I dont think too highly of your mind.Actually present day Jordan is occupied a Bedouin family from the Hejaz.Syria and Lebanon are a witches cauldron of various ethnicities.With or without "Western" backed ideologies they will remain incohesive basketcases.Israel-the most Western of all these nations actually is doing very well, the only threats it faces is from the less Western failed nation states.So your argument has the same strength and resilience as the Greek economy.

Debanjan:I would like to call that state as "Abrahamia" where all the different peoples from different faiths i.e. Jews , Muslims , Christians can live and work together.

Shishir: Hahahahaha!From one crackpot notion(Islam brining people together) to another!! Abrahamia indeed,tell me how what is the national flag of Abrahamia,what region(s) will it comprise,what would be the composition of the army,the parliament.What are its offical languages.How will you prevent the inevitable internecine warfare and attempts to wipeout Jews and Christians by an obviously large Muslim majority?

Debanjan: You really need to brush up your history skills. I suggest reading Robert Fisk's magnum opus , "Conquest of the Middle East" to understand your follies. Buy that book and read the chapters regarding the prelude to the Iraq-Iran war. Was visits by Pentagone officials (including Donald Rumsfeld) to Saddam Hussain were not encouragements enough ? Was the Western supply of plenty of nerve and sarin gasses to the Iraqi tyrant which ultimately ended up killing a lot of innocent Kurds in Hallabja , were not encouragement enough ? Was providing Saddam with GPS info. about the positioning of Iranian troops in the ground , was not good enough encouragement ? Please tell me what considers as good enough encouragement then ?

Shishir:Debanjan,it is obvious to me are you utterly lacking in sound judgement,common sense ,logic and reading comprehension.I said the West didnt encourage the invasion but once it did go through it tried to make the best of the situation by bleeding both Arab and Iranian despots while keep the oil prices stable.Donald Rumsfeld ties into my "making lemons out of lemonade" statement.Your argument would stand only if Rumsfeld visited Saddam BEFORE the invasion.Seriously it is obvious you lack common sense.

---

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".