Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (86534)	3/26/2003 3:12:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

However, we armed and kept contacts with the Iranian military from the moment the Ayatollah's took power. The only arming of Iran's military was the in the Iran Contra scheme. This was not "from the moment the Ayatollah took power". Nor was it ever a significant portion of Iran's arms. I also see now what that it weakens the regime, it rather put more weapons at the hands of the ayatollahs. The act should probably be condemened for that reason, but not as part of a coup attempt or an attempt to encourage one. Tim

To: Thomas M. who wrote (86534)	3/26/2003 3:25:07 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 281500

Among other efforts (and I can do more research if there is interest), note this from a previous post of mine. ST This brings us back to our talk that there is nothing short of direct action that US did not do to overthrow the Islamic regime. MEK, which you dismiss so readily, had been in armed conflict with Shah for a long time. It is a little known fact that even during Shah's regime, MEK had the support of UK and US. They were widely considered one of the main contributors to the revolution (though I personally think their role was exaggerated). After revolution they capitalized on a highly appealing "intellectual-Marxist-Islamic-militant" image (yup, they had all the bases covered and had something for everyone). They were astute enough to penetrate the universities (actually opening student offices). They were also smart enough to align themselves with one of the strongest figures in Iranian revolution, Ayatollah Taleghani, and thereby getting a jail free card for a long time. So all in all, considering them to be unimportant does not match the facts of the time...oh, and I forgot, they had ample weapons...and if you still think they were nothing, consider that Bani-Sadr, the first president of Iran who later turned against Khomeini, decided that MEK were the best option for over throwing the regime and married Rajavi's daughter (Rajavi is the MEK leader). And then there is the matter of failed coup d'eta just a month or two before Iraqi invasion. Given the massive extent of personnel involved, it is hard to believe US had nothing to do with it. And there is all those terrorist bombings in Tehran, from the one in Jomhuri Islami's head quarters that killed around 80 of the thinking heads of the regime, to the one planted inside the government session which no one took responsibility for, to assassination attempts at various heads, especially the more extremists.