Pardon my ignorance When exactly did we have a "act of war" committed against these United States? The Japanese attacked a navy base located in these United States and were part of a coalition of nations that were attacking other nations across the world. The response to that act was fully justified based on the facts in play at the time. The facts as I know them in regard to Iran are not even in the same ballpark as WWII so that parallel is invalid imo.
The navy base attacked by the Japanese was in fact not within the United States (as constituted at the time, Hawaii became a state later). As for when Iran commited an act of war, they have attacked Americans and our allies through proxies, such as Hizballah, as well as using actual Iranian personnel as was discovered while Israel was fighting against Hizballah in Lebanon.
My point is those are acts of war. Just as the US would be escalating the war with Iran, I guess Iran would be justified escalating war with the US. What is your point?
Um, yes? Also yes. Anyone who is at war is justified in escalating, IMO. I didn't go in for the disproportionate response argument against Israel (for example). As a wise man once said, "Don't start nothin', won't be nothin'."
Ok. So we all agree that both Iran and US committed "acts of war" to each other. But does that mean then you have to escalate it to full scale war? Whether to escalate the war is a choice for both countries. For me, I don't think it's worth it to escalate. Your mileage might vary however. I think we can agree to disagree.
Care to prove that. if anything the us isnt doing enough or anything to help the large and ever growing opposition to the mollahs.stop throwing around baseless accusations.
Check out the offer from Iran to cut off funding Hezzbolah and Hamas, and help out in Iraq if the U.S. stops funding the rebel group, and drops sanctions. It was a request from Iran. While they are based inside Iraq, they operate in Iran. The story is linked in one of the Iran threads. I am sorry I don't remember right now which one.
Oh good lord. Google "US funding counter-revolutionary groups in Iran" 44,000 hits And we won't even get into Iran-Contra. No telling where those weapons ended up.
Pardon me but I might've missed the Congressional declaraton or AUMF against Iran. This is the kind of attitude you hear out of clan warfare or gang fights and it leads to stuff like what's going on between Fatah and Hamas in where both sides believe they are justified in escalating without considering whether it is in either of their interests.
This of course means that there is not a war being fought, right? Testifying against the mob may or may not be in your interest, but that has nothing to do with the morality of doing so.
Morally we are in the wrong as well. We were the one who inserted a Shah there before Iran did anything to us. From then on, the relationship spirals down the drain. But then we in general have short memories. That's why we are easily manipulated by the government.
Just to clarify we funded and assisted local supporters of the Shah who kicked out Mohammad Mosaddeq and his communist party. We did not send the Army to invade, and I'm not entirely sure that the Mullahs would prefered an atheistic communist government and Mosaddeq to the Shah.
In fact, there is a partially redacted formerly classified CIA history document at The National Security Archives at George Washington University which indicates there was some support for the ouster of Mossadeq from some of the Ayatollahs.
Well, our meddling caused many deaths. If the mullahs don't like the commies, they will fight them. Our meddling interfere with their self-determination. In their eyes, we are partly responsible for the deaths. This was very similar to what we are doing to Iraq now. It is no wonder that the Iraqis are not grateful to our "liberation"
Really? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...lutionary+groups+in+Iran"+&btnG=Google+Search (I know what you meant, I'm just nitpicking.)
Again, if these Ayatollas were supportive of the coup and they now are trying to assign us blame, that makes me believe that they would have blamed us, (either because it was politically expedient, or because they were delusionally paranoid) no mater what level of involvement was given. There are many things that the United States legitimately deserves blame for, such as the screw up in Iraq, but that doesn't mean that every incident where blame is put on the United States is legitimate or valid. What happened in Iran and what is happening in Iraq are completely different and seperate situations. I appreciate your anger at the situation in Iraq, but I don't know that it should be crossing over to this situation. Most of the people who were involved with Mossadeq and Iran are long dead at this point, completely removed from the situation in Iraq. I wonder if you are letting your anger at current events cloud your vision of the past.
