If Carter had backed the Shah of Iran, and forced the French to arrest the Ayatollah in Paris, none of this would have happened:
If Carter had backed the Shah of Iran, and forced the French to arrest the Ayatollah in Paris, none of this would have happened:
Laura Ingrahm vs Wahn
Heh heh heh....
It is my opinion that Islamic Terrorism got its start due to Carter. Before that, terrorists were mainly the anti-Israel and IRA types, and even though the PLO were Muslim, they were closer in political thought to the Communists than the Islamic Fundamentalists.
As a point of historical fact, the PLO were more or less created in Moscow, and Arafat was ENTIRELY created by Andropov’s KGB.
An argument FOR Carter (as if!) would be that he undercut Andropov by helping advance the weakened Islamist agenda of the 1970s.
Enough of this argument was available to give the US support of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan in the 1970s and 80s a pro-Islamist bent.
Some strange twists along the way, proving both the US and the Soviets were dramatically naïve about Islam.
I’ve read that Carter wanted to get rid of the Shah, because he wouldn’t agree to terms of Carter’s buddies for oil.