Russia plans to arm Venezuela to counter US backed Colombia.

[Ned]

Oncle, correcting me on Mossadegh? Did you ever think the fact that he assumed dictatorial powers a year earlier had in a small way motivated the US to support the British coup?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Oncle, correcting me on Mossadegh? Did you ever think the fact that he assumed dictatorial powers a year earlier had in a small way motivated the US to support the British coup?

Did you even read the linked encyclopedia article? The plots against Mossadegh started before he abolished Parliament and prompted that dismissal.

[Ned]

Che, there is more history about this of which you seem to be unaware. A year earlier, Mossadegh had assumed dictatorial powers, broke off negotiations with the Brits and virtually declared war on them, and then began a series of radical land grabs to collectivized farming in Iran. It was after he did this that Ike OKed the Brit plan. I am sure, or reasonably sure, that Ike would not have agreed to back the Brits if there was any reasonable possibility of Mossadegh again subjecting himself to a democratic process.

[Tripledoc]

Ned writes,"I am sure, or reasonably sure, that Ike would not have agreed to back the Brits if there was any reasonable possibility of Mossadegh again subjecting himself to a democratic process."

Would it have mattered at all if Mossadegh had not threatened to nationalize the oil industry? I would guess he could have installed the most brutal form of dictatorship, as long as British Petroleum or other were allowed to operate in the country.

I am also curious about the chronology of the whole thing. Clearly this was a tug of war between British and American Capitalists on the one side and Iranian nationalists on the other. When Mossadegh inched towards dictatorship was this not a response to the efforts at destabilisation by the Capitalists?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Ned writes,"I am sure, or reasonably sure, that Ike would not have agreed to back the Brits if there was any reasonable possibility of Mossadegh again subjecting himself to a democratic process."

Would it have mattered at all if Mossadegh had not threatened to nationalize the oil industry? I would guess he could have installed the most brutal form of dictatorship, as long as British Petroleum or other were allowed to operate in the country.

I am also curious about the chronology of the whole thing. Clearly this was a tug of war between British and American Capitalists on the one side and Iranian nationalists on the other. When Mossadegh inched towards dictatorship was this not a response to the efforts at destabilisation by the Capitalists?

If one does some searching, one can find a fairly complete chronology on the Web. Most of the capsule histories omit most of it. The anti-US site omit all of the Mossadegh was a dictator information.

But, your basic point is sound. The Brit-built oil industry was nationalized before Mossadegh came to power, IIRC. What he did was immediate get into a power stuggle with the Shah over command of the Army. He won that struggle, then had himself given emergency dictatorial powers. He cut off negotiations with the Brits, who then blockaded Iranian oil exports. He then declared war on the Brits (or close to it, I am going from memory). But he used his dictatorial powers to go after the landowers. He took their property and started forming collectives. At this point, a lot of the old Iranian power base turned against him, including the mullahs. The next year, he apparently lost control of Parliament. In response he rigged an national referendum dismissing it. Shortly after that, the Iranians revolted and threw Mossadegh out of power. This revolt occurred spontaneously AFTER the Brit/US coup had failed.

[chequita guevara]

It's clear Ned hasn't bothered to read the Wikipedia article. If he had, he wouldn't be stating things which are the exact opposite of history.

[Tripledoc]

Ned writes "But he used his dictatorial powers to go after the landowers. He took their property and started forming collectives. At this point, a lot of the old Iranian power base turned against him, including the mullahs."

Well maybe the land reform was dictatorial, but are land reforms usually not very popular? It was in North Korea, for example. If land reform is not done through dictatorial power, it is done through the tyranny of the majority.

Now you say that the Mullahs turned against him. But I would think that this would work to the advantage of Mossadegh, for surely you cannot lend support to reactionary Mullahs, and at the same time profess support of Democracy?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
It's clear Ned hasn't bothered to read the Wikipedia article. If he had, he wouldn't be stating things which are the exact opposite of history.

I don't know about that. We are talking about Ned here.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned

Democracies are inherently stable.

Anytime you create mechanisms in your 'democratic' political system to maintain the status quo, or keep out certain parties with certain political ideologies you don't have anything resembling a real democracy. Stability maintained by the political system is not democracy.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned


PAX, the only people who seemed to be upset by America upending dictators are the dictators themselves, the people who depended on his regime and liberals like you. The people of the liberated country are greatly appreciated of American help.

You're too much Ned.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned


There's an old saying about a duck. If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

Did McCarthy say that?

[Tripledoc]

Land reform: an interesting subject.

When Tiberus Gracchus tried to implement a land reform through the republican senate in 133 BC he was clubbed to death. Maybe if the Romans had been succesful in agrarian reform they woulrd have been more sucessful.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
Pax, now you are talking some sense.

That makes one of you.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned


I know Che. All commie dictators are bad people, murderers of political opponents and the like, because of the United States.

Pot calling kettle black.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
It's clear Ned hasn't bothered to read the Wikipedia article. If he had, he wouldn't be stating things which are the exact opposite of history.

I have read the article. It is incomplete.