To this day you see people blaming the Shah for the rise of the ayatollahs.
They still do not understand that he fought on two fronts holding the communists and the ayatollahs at bay his entire adult life.
Or they do understand and hate him for it.
Jimmah Catarrh is a walkin’, talkin’ suppurating pilonidal cyst!
The Shah was dying of cancer and probably could not have done much. Maybe if he had made his Son the Shah then he could have more strongly fought off the Ayatollahs.
Jimmy Carter did what he did because he feared the above scenario could happen.
There is a pattern in that part of the world, of dictators being removed, and radical Islam rising up after dictators are gone.
It happened in a number of countries. Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, come to mind. Could it be that these dictators were able to keep radical Islam in check? And now the genie is out of the bottle? Just a thought.
What if we had let Spain keep Cuba and Puerto Rico in 1898? Cuba would be a lot better off than it is under Castro. And we wouldn’t have idiots trying to make PR a state.
It must really suck to be Iranian and see pictures from 40 years ago and see a more modern world than the one they live in now.
If he had remained in power, he would be the oldest head of state in the world.
No WMD sales to Saddam, he probably wouldn't have over thrown Kuwait. So no gulf wars.
A few years back, Glenn Beck had a compelling interview with Rocky Sickmann who was a USMC guard when the embassy was stormed. Sickmann detailed how they had been given orders not to resist and defend the embassy grounds and had been told to stand down. He recalled the mobs had a few women in the front as human shields, and to this day he regrets not pulling a trigger. Sickmann has been very successful in his later life; at the time of the interview he was a senior executive for Anheuser Busch in charge of their entire military sales program, but in the interview he said he would have given up his entire future, his job, his kids, his grandchildren for the opportunity to go back and pull the trigger. It’s his belief that the Beirut USMC bombing, the 93 WTC bombing, 9/11 etc. were all a direct result of the US not standing to defend its embassy on November 4, 1979.
Definitely sounds like a far better scenario than what happened in reality.
I blame carter for the complete lack of paragraphs!
What is wrong with these Democrat Presidents. They are certainly showing they are not on the side of America.
Seeing as his sponsors in running for office were among the Rockefeller clan, I can't imagine why. /s
Just goes to show how presidential f-ups can still damage a country over 30 years later.
I can only imagine what Obama’s numerous epic failures will do to us down the road.
The American people and their president in 1977 said the shah was mean and he had to go. People probably still believe that too.
Again, thank (or maybe a different verb) you, Jimmy Carter.