I know you don't like "copy and paste" replies but i've already said what i had to say WITHOUT copy and pasting but you're under the mistaken impression that i've incorrectly outlined the history SO instead of just insisting i'm correct, i'll quotes some sources.
to backup the accuracy of my original.
"Mosaddegh reentered public service in 1944, following Reza ShahÂ’s forced abdication in 1941, and was elected again to the Majles. An outspoken advocate of nationalism, he soon played a leading part in successfully opposing the grant to the Soviet Union of an oil concession for northern Iran similar to an existing British concession in southern Iran. He built considerable political strength, based largely on his call to nationalize the concession and installations in Iran of the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (see British Petroleum Company PLC). In March 1951 the Majles passed his oil-nationalization act, and his power had grown so great that the shah, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, was virtually forced to appoint him premier....
...A continuing struggle for control of the Iranian government developed between Mosaddegh and the shah. In August 1953, when the shah attempted to dismiss the premier, mobs of Mosaddegh followers took to the streets and forced the shah to leave the country. Within a few days, however, Mosaddegh’s opponents overthrew his regime and restored the shah to power in a coup orchestrated by the U.S. and Great Britain. Mosaddegh was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for treason and, after he had served his sentence, was kept under house arrest for the rest of his life. Iran retained nominal sovereignty over its oil facilities, but, under an agreement reached in 1954, it split revenues 50–50 with an international consortium that controlled production and marketing..."
Britanica
"Like most foreign-policy insiders, Rumsfeld was aware that Saddam was a murderous thug who supported terrorists and was trying to build a nuclear weapon. (The Israelis had already bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak.) But at the time, America's big worry was Iran, not Iraq. The Reagan administration
feared (Iran Never militarily attacked any other nations EVER) that the Iranian revolutionaries who had overthrown the shah (and taken hostage American diplomats for 444 days in 1979-81) would overrun the Middle East and its vital oilfields. On the-theory that the enemy of my enemy is my friend,
the Reaganites were seeking to support Iraq in a long and bloody war against Iran. The meeting between Rumsfeld and Saddam was consequential:
for the next five years, until Iran finally capitulated, the United States backed Saddam's armies with military intelligence, economic aid and covert supplies of munitions."
https://archive.globalpolicy.org/com...ack/34978.html
AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS used on the Iranian people.
Khomeini created a state of affairs? Seems like our known support of Saddam might CREATE a state of affairs alone but then ADD what went before.
After the U.S. supported the Shah who ruled of Iran from 1942 until 1979 spanned eight U.S. presidents.
"From 1942 onwards, the U.S started to take interest in IranÂ’s internal matters.
Contracts for oil projects and construction projects were usually given to American, British, and West German companies. Western companies dominated Iranian industries. An American, Arthur Millspaugh was the Treasurer-General of Iran from 1942–45. At the time of the Islamic Revolution in 1979, more than 50,000 Americans were working in Iran. The entire oil industry was dominated by British and American companies. U.S. oil companies owned 40 percent of the foreign consortium that controlled the purchase of Iranian oil.¹
atrocities
In 1957, with the U.S., Israel, and FranceÂ’s assistance, the Shah established the SAVAK (a secret police agency), which had the mission of controlling antiregime activities, in doing so the agency committed human rights abuses on Iranian people.
The first generation of SAVAK agents was trained by the CIA. SAVAK was one of the biggest secret police forces in the world. In 1971, a SAVAK official confirmed that their informers included “workers, farmers, students, professors, political parties and other associations.” In 1974, Newsweek claimed SAVAK’s informants to be three million,² about 12% of the adult Iranian population.
John Barry in his article “Watching Torture” writes about his experience when he watched a film with victims being tortured by the SAVAK:
“I recall the reel unspooling with a clatter through the 16mm projector in that apartment with its curtains drawn. The film lasted, I think, for close to an hour, though my memory may be at fault. It seemed endless. I have no words to convey the horror. The film showed sequences of torture on living victims, men and women, all naked and shackled to what looked like a bed frame.
A variety of techniques were demonstrated: cigarette burns to sensitive parts of the body, the effects of electricity, and then on into other savageries I shy from recalling. One technique shown on the film used water. The film was clearly professionally made. There was a commentary, which Ghotbzadeh translated — explaining, among other things, the varying sensitivities of men and women to different techniques, with a filmed example to illustrate each lesson. This was an instructional film. These torture sessions were not even designed to elicit information. The film was intended to teach Savak recruits.³”
link...
Yes, "the Shah was a corrupt imperialist" with a secret police created by the U.S. Israel and France and trained by the CIA.
What can you expect from that but 30 years of U.S. backed authoritarian control and torture.
Gunny you can incorrectly think what you want, white wash Americas bloody hands if you like.
And ignore the list of legitimate grievances of the Iranian people against the U.S. if you like but don't pretend that Iran has been worse... much less a "threat".
because they have not been.
they'd have to to a LOT more to reach the level of blood and theft that we've waged against them since the 1950s to present day.
"international behavior"
hah. the US needs a clean mirror.
"supporting every Islamic terrorist organization in the World"
not really,
the biggest supporters of islamic terrorist/ism via cash, training and ideology have been the Saudis and the USA.
Exhibit A: Osama bin Laden Saudi raised, funded and U.S. trained, supplied and supported.... until he wasn't... supposedly.
Same for most other major islamic terrorist groups... including those that have attacked Syria, were in Libya etc etc etc.
Iran is played as a boggie man by the western oligarchs who just want to ride it like a call-girl again like they did for 30+ years.