Posted on 12/24/2005 2:49:36 AM PST by F14 Pilot
True ... further, as I recall, the Shah was having health issues that required treatment outside Iran. This was perceived as an opportunity by his enemies to move towards his overthrow. Carter, in his ineptness, certainly accelerated the process ... however, it ultimately cost him his presidency when the American Embassy was attacked and the hostage situation drug out for well over a year.
Clinton/Carter left their stains on the nation... Nixon left his on himself.
Thank God Jimmie Carter wasn't allowed to implement all his whacko policies. Can anyone imagine if Carter and his fellow Democrats, which contolled both houses of Congress at that time, actually got along and worked as one during his administration? The amount of devastation to this country would have been freightening, if we could have survived at all.
Some other things which happened under the Carter Presidency include: a.) shutting down state hospitals for the insane as cruel and unusual punishment and releasing a lot of them unto the streets. b.) instituting law libraries in all state and federal prisons. I worked at one during this time, and suddenly all the inmates wanted to become their own lawyers and file appeals and they had the right now to go to these libraries anytime but lockdown time. What a security mess that became.
Iranian people despise Carter
"The man had no support among his own people."
BS!
That's what you believed from taking in what the communist loving media of this country fed you.
Talk to an Iranian that escaped and came here when that was going on if you want the truth.
Any communist needing help in the world is supported by Carter, even to this day.
Being a child can be useful sometimes. I don't remember any of this stuff, although it doesn't surprise me. Carter is an idiot.
silly!
wow!
very well put and I am surprised to see that comment from you
I recommend this book
http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/top3mset/f24e826a2df4263da19afeb4da09e526.html
I'm curious about what the Iranians think of Reagan. On a separate thought, it seems to me that the mullahs should have been "grateful" to Carter since he made their takeover possible, but it looked like they were deliberately trying to humiliate him by releasing the hostages on the day Reagan was inaugurated. I suspect rulers in the Middle East--even tyrants--have no respect for weak American presidents, even ones who help them achieve their ends.
No truer words.........
No it was fun, I like pulling peoples chains.
================================================
Carter didn't throw the Shah out. The leftist press didn't throw the shah out. The iranians who were tired of his gestapo threw him out and it didn't happen in one day or without some of them being tortured and killed.
If the shah was beloved by iranians nothing Carter or anybody else said or did could have forced them to take to the streets in the face of his SAVAK. Unless of course the iranians are witless, spineless people who can't think for themselves. I don't think they are but is that what you're suggesting? What other possible explanation could there be for them to risk death to rid themselves of your beloved?
Real swift Jimmy.
who cares what you say?!
I personally feel good about him!
But since an Iranian Airliner went down due to the US Navy attack in mid 80s and that the commander of that vessel was awarded by the administration at the time, there are some doubts about Reagan in Iran as well!
I can't tell you much about Pres. Reagan popularity in Iran though
And I often wonder how much longer we will be paying for the peanut farmer from Georgia?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.