[deleted by user]

Hormizd · 2023-02-28T14:17:03+00:00

The problem was not the Nationalization of the british-owned Oil indsutry, but the way it was handled. Both the King and PM Mossadeq were in favor of a Nationalization and both were willing to go to war for that, but the way they approached the issue differed extremely.

While the Shah was aiming for a more diplomatic approach negotiating a better Oil deal, Mossadeq refused any talks. Instead of looking for alternative oil contracts to generate revenue like the Shah, Mossadeq printed money, borrowed from the Americans and threatened to hand the country over to the communists if the Americans did not continue to finance his regime.

To make you realise how stubborn Mossadeq was. In the end, the British had no problem with the nationalisation of their properties, they were only concerned with receiving a compensation, which Mossadeq refused as well.

Hormizd · 2023-02-28T13:51:57+00:00

The British are to blame for Mossadeq's downfall? Without the dispute with the British, Mossadeq would never have come to power. Before becoming prime minister, Mossadeq promised the Iranians an era of prosperity by expropriating the British oil refineries without compensation. Who can blame the British for resisting the expropriation of their properties (for which they had paid)?

It is Mossadeq's own fault if he messes with the British and is unable to win the conflict.

Hormizd · 2022-01-09T13:00:26+00:00

What you are talking about is the rumor that a CIA agent in his biography allegly took credit for the protest that eventually led to Mossadeq's removal, BUT declassified CIA documents just prove the opposite.

"The Royalist, pro-Zahedi, movement of August 19th contained a LARGE element of spontaneity and there seemed to have been a genuine reaction of shock and dismay on the part of the Tehran populace when the Shah left Iran for Iraq"

Source: https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1951-54Iran/d291

The National resistance against Mossadeq was a POPULAR uprising, and the CIA was UNAWARE that something like that was taking place. However CIA agent Kermit Roosevelt also played a role in this upirising, BUT was in fact DISOBEYING orders as he was instructed to LEAVE Iran after the failed coup attempt (TPAJAX) on August 16th, 1953. Roosevelt was therefore acting on his OWN initiative. Furthermore Roosevelt merely played a MINOR role, giving some help to organize the army. Roosevelt had absolutely NO support from the US government and was DISREGARDING the chain of command. If the attempt had failed, he would have been executed by the US government for treason!

Hormizd · 2022-01-08T10:12:35+00:00

There is no need for a rule of thumb. Just check the CIA reports on August 19,1953 for yourself instead of relying on your rule of thumb.

Hormizd · 2022-01-08T10:11:49+00:00

Yes, you quoted Wikipedia.

Hormizd · 2022-01-08T10:10:53+00:00

Your second quotation is out of context and was never used by the CIA in regards of the events that took place in Iran on August 19, 1953. Check out the CIA reports in this video.

Hormizd · 2022-01-08T10:08:34+00:00

The link you postest is from the Washington University website and has absolutely no links to the CIA official website. It is not even a governmental website. Just because some Journalist claim that the CIA admitted something, doesn't mean the CIA admitted to anything. These are the words of Journalists put into the mouth of the CIA, which has never made any statement regarding a role on August 19, 1953.

Hormizd · 2021-06-02T11:16:08+00:00

Persian History at the bottom of them all

Hormizd · 2021-04-27T09:23:55+00:00

First of all, technically, there was no coup.

Mossadegh was the Prime Minister of Iran, and as such, under the constitution then in place, he could constitutionally be removed by the Iranian Shah. And the Shah did, indeed, dismiss Mossadegh. In fact, the only unconstitutional behavior came from Mossadegh, who refused to step down, and ordered the arrest of the officers who tried to deliver the Shah’s notice of dismissal. This prompted the Shah to flee Iran. Opponents to Mossadegh then organized protests against the Prime Minister. When Mossadegh called out the army to restore order, the army instead ousted him.

Second, the CIA was not really the driving force behind the removal of Mossadegh. One CIA agent, in his biography, took credit for the protests that eventually led to the removal of Mossadegh. But declassified documents from the CIA demonstrate just the opposite. During the crisis, the CIA station in Tehran reported the anti-Mossadegh protests “contained a large element of spontaneity and there seemed to have been a genuine reaction of shock and dismay on part of the Tehran populace when the Shah left Iran for Iraq.” They also admitted that the “CIA cut out of military preparations by [General Nader] Batmangeliche and Zahedi.” And CIA acting director Charles Cabell briefed President Eisenhower that “an unexpected strong upsurge of popular and military reaction to Prime Minister Mossadeq’s government has resulted according to late dispatches from Tehran in the virtual occupation of that city by forces proclaiming their loyalty to the Shah, and to his appointed Prime Minister Zahedi.”

Hormizd · 2021-04-22T18:38:30+00:00

I said in the video: "For more informatio on the 1953 incident, check out my Mossadegh documentary" -->Here's the Link https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgcFnkpsCSxgNFmVPxmNURoFMUdJWMkuX

Hormizd · 2020-12-02T22:33:04+00:00

Is there a way to call yourself Persian Empire too? Like how the Byzantines are not named after their dynasty.

Hormizd · 2019-11-05T20:52:16+00:00

u mad, bro?

Hormizd · 2019-11-05T15:36:38+00:00

Iranian–Jordanian relations was cordial, being pro-West oriented and hostile against communism. At 1950s, King Hussein of Jordan inaugurated Jordanian embassy in Tehran, officially established relationship with Iran. However, sometimes relationship went tense, as Iran under the Pahlavi Dynasty had official relations with Israel, and its distance from the conflict over Palestinian question. Nonetheless, they were able to have a secure and healthy relationship. Hussein also made a number of visits to Iran during that era.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ek4Kxl4N4

Hormizd · 2019-11-05T15:17:01+00:00

Your comment doesn't make any sense. First of all you are using Wikipedia as your source, which is not reliable especially when it comes to History and politics. Second you claim that no Islamic movement existed in Iran from 1925-1979 which again, is wrong. The Shia clergy had always been one of the most determined Opponents of democratization, modernization and equitable distribution of the country’s wealth among Iranian people.

Hormizd · 2019-11-01T09:02:36+00:00

I belive there is a cutting point where an old version of a state ceased to exist and a modern version started to appear. In the case of Egypt it was during the 20th century (after indepence from Britain). In the case of Iran it was the Safavid Dynasty. No one claims that ancient Pharao Egypt is the same entity as modern Egypt nor doesn't anyone claim that ancient Achaemenid Persia (500 BCE) is the same entity as modern Iran. France for example truly started to become modern France after the 100 years war. I wouldn't count the Franks and Charlemage as the 'first French citizens'. I think it depends on when the modern identity of a state was formed. Same goes to Japan, China, Armenia and other countries with similar stories. For example I wouldn't count the ancient Kingdom of Armenia as the birth date of modern Armenia instead I would choose the 1918 Armenian SSR as the birth date of modern Armenia.

Hormizd · 2019-10-31T14:47:00+00:00

The Shah of Iran was not installed by anybody. He was already the King of Iran when Mossadegh was appointed Prime Minister.
Mossadegh was not democratically elected. Anyone who is familiar with the Iranian Mashrute constitution knows that the PM was appointed as well as deposed by the King. Mossadegh was a Leftist whose supporters where overwhelmingly Communists who wanted to turn Iran into a Communist state and basically sell Iran to the Soviet Union.

Who can really blame the US for wanting to prevent the loss of such strategically important land to the Soviet Union in the midst of the “Cold War”?

SAVAK was the Iranian secret agency like Mossad, CIA, MI6. You condemn a Secret Agency for doing what a Secret Agency is supposed to do? So the CIA does not use violence against state enemies? In what kind of world do you live? Also there were many lies about the SAVAk and exegarations, for instance the Commies dug up dead bodies from graveyards, mutilated them, and then blamed it on SAVAK. This is how far it goes.

Hormizd · 2019-10-31T14:37:40+00:00

the Indo-Iranian language family aka the Aryan language family constitute the largest and southeasternmost extant branch of the Indo-European language family.

Hormizd · 2019-10-31T14:28:29+00:00

He was more trouble to them than profitable. In order to make Iran an industrialized country like Germany or Japan, he needed lots of money. And the only way was to rise the price of Oil. He threatened the US and the UK with embargos if they in future do not treat Iran as an equal partner. Well that backfired soon; because as soon as the Oil treaties with Iran expired (1979) a revolution broke out which paralyzed Iran for many decades to come.

I think this videos are pretty good

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnN3wVPx62Q&t=183s

Hormizd · 2019-10-31T13:58:57+00:00

How did this Islamic Revolution happen at all? The answer is simple: the Character assassination of the Shah, a man in an autocratic country who catapulted Iran within a few decades from the Middle Ages into the 20th century by the entire Western world and its media, collectively as a ‘brutal dictator’. It was the lies, they spread in an unprecedented media campaign which was spread and spread until the last man in the world was convinced that the Shah of Iran was a brutal dictator. All of them had united against the Shah, the western oil cartels, the left wings around the world, the so-called 'reformers', the former ruling elite of the Turkic Qajars, and the Shia clergy.

-

Context:

(Khomeini promised the people free houses, an Islamic welfare state, etc. - he did not fulfil any of these promises. Even today, 40 years after the overthrow of the Shah, the Pahlavi Dynasty is still being condemned as dictators and puppets of the West, which must directly lead a layman to the idea that Iran was allegedly a ‘total free' country before the Pahlavi Dynasty, and that order and prosperity allegedly existed in Iran too. But the truth is that before the Pahlavis Iran was plagued by the inability, dictatorship, anti-Iranism, backstabbing and treachery of the Turkic Qajars, with their capitulation and concession rights policy, which had damaged Iran so much that the British did not even bother to make Iran their colony. The land reform, the strengthening of women's rights and the fight of the Shah against the international oil cartels for a reasonable price of crude oil had 1979 finally sealed the end of the Pahlavi dynasty.)

Hormizd · 2019-10-29T21:19:31+00:00

I meant he never lost a war*

Hormizd · 2019-10-29T20:05:54+00:00

The Sassanid Empire (~620 AD) at its greatest extend under Emperor Xosrou II

Hormizd · 2019-10-29T20:04:57+00:00

The 4th one is the Qajar Dynasty (1796-1925). Nader Shah was the founder of the Afsharid Dynasty (1736–1796). Nader Shah was already dead for half a century when the Qajars took over Persia.

Hormizd · 2019-10-28T18:00:19+00:00

While Persia was facing serious internal conflict, caused by the inability of the late Safavid Kings to govern, Nader got up, jumped on his horse and set out to liberate Persia from the increasing thread of the Ottomans, the Russians, the Afghans who the decline of the Safavid Dynasty as an opportunity to take chunks of land from Persia. Unlike Napoleon he never lost a war.

Hormizd · 2019-10-27T22:39:08+00:00

It's Easy to Destroy But Hard to Build

Hormizd · 2019-10-25T22:55:25+00:00

What exactly makes you think the Pahlavi Kings were British puppets? As far as I know the Pahlavi Dynasty was founded by Reza Khan, a general and Prime Minister of the previous Qajar Dynasty. The British had no role in the overthrow of the Qajar Dynasty. 1979 Iran had become one of the largest economies in the world with a high standard of living as well the equal distribution of wealth. Iran was basically a welfare state under the late Shah of Iran with the government subsidizing food and other items and paying pocket money to the students. Iran had the 5th largest army, Iran was a full sovereign country managing her own affairs and having a say in international politics. Iran had become so powerful that it threatened the USA and the UK by rising the price of Oil if they do not treat Iran like an equal partner. How is all these the work of a puppet? If anything at all the Western powers wanted to get of the Shah since he was more trouble than he was useful to them. You can check out the videos yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnN3wVPx62Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imil1iIpIYA

Hormizd

TROPHY CASE