To: freedom44
> the Shah of Iran fell to the Islamic Revolution, ending a tradition of monarchic rule that had persisted in Iran for thousands of years since the rule of Cyrus the Great.
Mohammad Mosaddegh would have been very surprised to hear about that.
But I guess war propaganda doesn’t need to concern itself with measly easily-checked facts.
9 posted on
07/03/2016 1:17:05 PM PDT by
thoughtomator
(Wisdom is doing due diligence before forming an opinion)
To: thoughtomator
Yes, Mosaddegh tried to be a usurper indeed.
The Shah held his position from 1941 until he was deposed by that disgusting “revolution”.
12 posted on
07/03/2016 1:22:21 PM PDT by
Olog-hai
To: thoughtomator
I guess war propaganda doesnt need to concern itself with measly easily-checked facts. I think
a tradition of monarchic rule that had persisted in Iran for thousands of years
is a vague enough construction to be more or less unfalsifiable.
40 posted on
07/03/2016 2:47:19 PM PDT by
Lonesome in Massachussets
(I'm not a smug know-it-all; I just want you to experience epistemological closure.)
To: thoughtomator
Mohammad Mossadegh was a communist pig and stooge of the soviets and thus Iran (and the rest of the world) was A LOT BETTER off when he was overthrown by the CIA and British Secret Service, arrested, convicted, imprisoned and finally held in house arrest until dead and buried in his own home and permanently denied office. Churchill had presciently warned Eisenhower of Mossadegh's inclinations towards the soviets. It would have been better still had he been publicly and memorably and splashily executed together with his key co-conspirators.
Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlevi's son ought to be installed as the new shah, the criminals misruling Iran should be executed en masse and normality restored.
52 posted on
07/03/2016 4:46:38 PM PDT by
BlackElk
(Dean of Discipline Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Society: Rack 'em Danno!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson