Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

We just paid 1.7 billion in debt and interest to Iran?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • We just paid 1.7 billion in debt and interest to Iran?

    What kind of crap is that?

    US Secretary of State John Kerry speaks to journalists about his negotiations with Iran upon his arrival from Vienna at Joint Base Andrews on January 17, 2016© Provided by AFP US Secretary of State John Kerry speaks to journalists about his negotiations with Iran upon his arrival from Vienna at Joint Base Andrews on January 17, 2016
    The United States is to repay Iran a $400 million debt and $1.3 billion in interest dating to the Islamic revolution, Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday.

    The repayment, which settles a suit brought under an international legal tribunal, is separate from the tens of billions of dollars in frozen foreign accounts that Iran can now access after the end of nuclear sanctions.

    But the timing of the announcement, one day after the implementation of the Iran nuclear accord, will be seen as pointing to a broader clearing of the decks between the old foes.

    US President Barack Obama defended the settlement in a televised statement from the White House, saying it was for "much less than the amount Iran sought."

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...Xfd?li=BBnb7Kz
    Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
    Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

  • #2
    For the ilk of traitors like John Kerry, the US is always at fault and wrong for its actions with other nations. We are evil incarnate for duplicitous Leftists like him.

    Comment


    • #3
      The wussyfacation of the US continues...
      Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
      Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
        For the ilk of traitors like John Kerry, the US is always at fault and wrong for its actions with other nations. We are evil incarnate for duplicitous Leftists like him.
        What have I been trying to tell people for the last 10 years?
        Meh... let the maggots feast.
        "Why is the Rum gone?"

        -Captain Jack

        Comment


        • #5
          Remind us all again: what exactly did the US get out of Obama's "deal" with Iran?
          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi

            from the same story:-

            He (Kerry) went on to say all of the US claims against Iran at the tribunal had long been settled and had netted American companies and individuals $2.5 billion.

            But Kerry added there are more Iranian claims pending and that the United States would try to negotiate to resolve them.
            Regards

            Andy H
            "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

            "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
              For the ilk of traitors like John Kerry, the US is always at fault and wrong for its actions with other nations. We are evil incarnate for duplicitous Leftists like him.
              You feel we were in the right with the coup? Overthrowing a democratically elected leader who posed no threat to us in order to prop-up a puppet?
              "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
              - Benjamin Franklin

              The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

              Comment


              • #8
                Which justifies the atrocities of the Islamic Revolution and everything Iran has done as a criminal state since then?

                You're kind proving his point actually. "Everything is the US's faulta d we brought this on ourselves." That's exactly the kind of cliche anti-American logic that people like Kerry use for every situation. In this case it's the Shah but the same formula applies to everything. It's one of the first things in the left wing playbook and its an extremely broken record.
                "Artillery lends dignity to what might otherwise be a vulgar brawl." - Frederick the Great

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm not saying that we brought anything on ourselves. His comment implies that we haven't done anything wrong, so I'm curious what his take on the coup is. Were we in the right or not?
                  "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                    I'm not saying that we brought anything on ourselves. His comment implies that we haven't done anything wrong, so I'm curious what his take on the coup is. Were we in the right or not?
                    What *exactly* did the US do to Iran. I am asking for specifics, not arm waving about "overthrowing a democratically elected leader."
                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                      What *exactly* did the US do to Iran. I am asking for specifics, not arm waving about "overthrowing a democratically elected leader."
                      That's specifically what we did. We played a significant part in orchestrating a coup. What more are you looking for exactly? This is a history forum correct? We should all know our history here? If not primer is below.

                      In August 2013, 60 years after the coup, the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) admitted that it was involved in both its planning and its execution, including the bribing of Iranian politicians, security and army high-ranking officials, as well as pro-coup propaganda.[11][12] The CIA is quoted acknowledging the coup was carried out "under CIA direction" and "as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government."
                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_I..._d%27%C3%A9tat

                      http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...3-iranian-coup

                      The article also discusses what led to the coup.
                      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                      - Benjamin Franklin

                      The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                        That's specifically what we did. We played a significant part in orchestrating a coup. What more are you looking for exactly? This is a history forum correct? We should all know our history here? If not primer is below.
                        I asked the question because I didn't thhink you had a clue as to what the answer was.

                        And you clearly didn't...

                        Originally posted by TactiKill
                        Arm waving and Wikipedia posts...

                        Admitting a "role in a coup" and overthrowing a democratically elected government are not synonymous...
                        Six Myths about the Coup against Iran's Mossadegh

                        Morgan Carlston
                        September 2, 2014

                        The United States government, namely the CIA, is often blamed for the August 1953 coup removing Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh from power, however a careful examination of older studies, in addition to newly accessible information, reveal that common conceptions of the events and chronology are flawed, despite their prevalence.

                        [...]

                        These misconceptions are problematic because of how they have engrained themselves into our understanding of the events. The preeminent scholar of Iran, Richard Cottam—who himself lived in Iran for many years and was an employee of the CIA as well as the State Department—wrote in the 1960s edition of ‘Nationalism in Iran” (also included in the 2nd edition published in 1979) that "The distortions of the Mossadegh era, both in the press and in academic studies, border on the grotesque.”

                        Since this time there have been many new accounts, ranging from Kermit Roosevelt’s fundamentally flawed yet influential memoir ‘Countercoup’, to the scholarly work of Mark Gasiorowski, to Stephen Kinzer’s highly popular “All the Shah’s Men” and the most recent revisionist histories of Dariush Bayandor and Ray Takeyh. Though the academic work is considerably more accurate than that of Roosevelt and Kinzer, there are still significant errors in both traditional and revisionist narratives, which have affected the mainstream understanding of this monumental event.

                        Misconception #1: The United States wanted Iran’s oil

                        The United States had no oil interests in Iran (it was the British that did). The primary goal of the Americans was to prevent the spread of Communism, and to secondary was to resolve the dispute as quickly as possible (see National Security Council document NSC 136/1).

                        [...]

                        Misconception #2: Mohammad Mossadegh was a democratically elected Prime Minister

                        While Mossadegh was elected to the Majles (the Iranian Parliament) by democratic means (Iran at the time was not a democracy by any means, though some aspects of it were democratic in nature), the office of Prime Minister was nominated from amongst the Majles deputies by the Shah. In turn, the Majles members either voted for or against the nomination (In his initial appointment Mossadegh was approved by a tally of 79-12). Mossadegh enjoyed massive popularity at different times during his political career, but his position as Prime Minister was never due to a nationwide poll (he was PM on two separate occasions).

                        [...]

                        Misconception #3: The Eisenhower Administration was determined to remove Mossadegh from power from Day 1

                        [...]

                        Misconception #4: The CIA coup was successful

                        It is clear from the record that the attempted coup (code-named TPAJAX) which was undertaken on the night of August 15th, 1953, was a dismal failure. Not only did the Iranian military officers fail in their task to arrest Mossadegh, the CIA did not have a backup plan. Even though Kermit Roosevelt claimed to have magically turned the situation around in only 3 days, the circumstances of what really happened between the failed coup of August 15/16 and the successful one of the 19th is highly contentious. How did the situation turn around so quickly, despite the early setbacks including the arrest of pivotal Iranian conspirators such as Colonel Zand-Karimi, the conduit for communicating with Tehran-based commanders? Roosevelt’s version of events is difficult to accept without reservation, not only because of the style and substance of his writing, but also because of his well-known questionable reliability.

                        Misconception #5: CIA documents corroborate each other

                        [...]

                        Misconception #6: Westerners and Royalists were the only ones who wished to remove Mossadegh from power

                        This is perhaps the biggest misunderstanding of all. While Mossadegh had enjoyed great popularity earlier in his term, his coalition had come under great pressure, and former allies had begun to oppose him. Chief amongst these was Ayatollah Kashani, the speaker of the Majles, and a vital influence for the next generation of politicized clerics, significantly, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

                        [...]

                        During the oil crisis, Mossadegh became very unpopular. Things were so bad that when it was clear that his now fractured party would not gain a majority, he cancelled parliamentary elections. In February 1953 there were mass demonstrations against Mossadegh (possibly arranged for or instigated by foreign agents including the CIA); demonstrations of enough severity for Mossadegh to increase security measures in Iran.

                        The tendency is to blame the CIA and Americans because we know from the record that there was an attempt to overthrow Mossadegh, but this does not absolve the other participants. There are instances in both the Wilber Report and FRUS where an Iranian general and the former Prime Minister of Iran (allegedly on behalf of a group of military officers) separately contacted US officials inquiring on their interest in conducting a coup d’etat.

                        [...]

                        Morgan Carlston received an MA in Middle Eastern History at Tel Aviv University. He received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Geography from Macalester College, and blogs on Iran and the Middle East at Persophilia.blogspot.com.

                        This piece originally appeared here and has been republished with the author’s permission.


                        http://nationalinterest.org/feature/...h-11173?page=3

                        Iran had illegally seized British assets. The UK imposed very harsh sanctions against Iran. This opened the door wide open for the Soviet Union.

                        Key Points
                        1. Ike's primary interests were to (1) end the crisis as quickly as possible and (2) prevent Iran from falling into the Soviet sphere of influence. These things were in the national interest of the United States.
                        2. Mossadegh was not democratically elected by the Iranian people and he cancelled parliamentary elections when it became clear he would lose.
                        3. The coup backed by the CIA failed.


                        In the historical context of 1953 and the Cold War, Ike did the right thing.
                        Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Well, in any case, much of the problem with Iran today can be laid at the feet of Jimmy Carter and a horrible foreign policy during his administration.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                            I asked the question because I didn't thhink you had a clue as to what the answer was.

                            And you clearly didn't...



                            Arm waving and Wikipedia posts...
                            What's a better source, a random blog or wikipedia with citations to actual news sources? The article you're posting is pulled from a random blogspot.com post. They're both one in the same which is why I also posted an article from the Guardian.

                            Regardless nothing I said was incorrect. I said the CIA orchestrated a coup, they did.

                            The US wanted to remove Mohammad Mossadegh from power and they did. They wanted to gain influence over Iran and they did, albeit for only a short period of time. Hard to say that the coup was not successful when the person you want removed from power is in fact removed. Which imo, is also an act of war.

                            While their government was vastly different from ours, the people viewed their selves as free and democratic.

                            US interests are always power and influence related, UK in this regard oil did play a factor.

                            If you still feel our actions were morally just, then at least you're not contradicting yourself.

                            But, it begs the question. Does every country that chooses not to align their selves with the US deserve to be punished? Is the our side or die mentality appropriate when discussing nations who have shown no transgressions, at the time, against us. Should we not allow other nations to act independently, or does every single nation have to be our puppet?

                            Can you not at least understand how in the eyes of the Iranians our actions were wrong?

                            Is it that difficult to fathom why independent nations do not want outside countries meddling in their politics and would view a coup (successful or not) as a clear violation of their sovereignty? Or, does none of that matter because their government didn't throw their selves at the feet of the US...
                            Last edited by TactiKill J.; 18 Jan 16, 17:22.
                            "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                            - Benjamin Franklin

                            The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                              What's a better source, a random blog or wikipedia with citations to actual news sources? The article you're posting is pulled from a random blogspot.com post. They're both one in the same which is why I also posted an article from the Guardian.

                              Regardless nothing I said was incorrect. I said the CIA orchestrated a coup, they did.

                              The US wanted to remove Mohammad Mossadegh from power and they did. They wanted to gain influence over Iran and they did, albeit for only a short period of time. Hard to say that the coup was not successful when the person you want removed from power is in fact removed. Which imo, is also an act of war.

                              While their government was vastly different from ours, the people viewed their selves as free and democratic.

                              US interests are always power and influence related, UK in this regard oil did play a factor.

                              If you still feel our actions were morally just, then at least you're not contradicting yourself.

                              But, it begs the question. Does every country that chooses not to align their selves with the US deserve to be punished? Is the our side or die mentality appropriate when discussing nations who have shown no transgressions, at the time, against us. Should we not allow other nations to act independently, or does every single nation have to be our puppet?

                              Can you not at least understand how in the eyes of the Iranians our actions were wrong?

                              Is it that difficult to fathom why independent nations do not want outside countries meddling in their politics and would view a coup (successful or not) as a clear violation of their sovereignty? Or, does none of that matter because their government didn't throw their selves at the feet of the US...
                              Iranians removed Mossadegh from office.
                              Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X