Iranian and American foreign relations: including Kermit Roosevelt, Jr.

People often wonder why *bad* relationships exist between two or several countries.

I am about to show you why.

First. I must introduce you to someone in this history lesson. His name is Kermit.


Second. President Obama states in this video at 3:00 "the United States has gone out of it's way to not interfere with the election process in Iran..."


Third. The Iranian Hostage "crisis" of 1979. I remember watching the network broadcasts every night they always showed the number of days on the evening news.

Sorry for the advertisements at ABC.scam

Here is a report form day 26 of the hostage crisis.
Iran Crisis: America Held Hostage
11.29.1979: Ted Koppel anchors ongoing coverage of Iran hostage crisis.
abcnews.go.com...

Ted Koppel ABC News : "...crowds whipped themselves into a religious frenzy for a Muslim holy day..
This is what American propaganda looks like from the 1979 Iran Hostage Crisis...


Fourth. Serious questions. Is the government of Iran willing to let by-gones be by-gones? Will the illegal factions of the USofA government cease from interfering in Iranian domestic affairs?

Fifth. There are many episodes in history which indicate that the human species has only one way of resolving conlflicts and that is to let the bodies hit the floor. Will you obey your master?



Conclusions? Iranian and American foreign relations have a damaged history and this history must be fully acknowledged before it can be fully mended. Iran does not need to apologize for being suspicious of western motives. The Americans contingent at the U.N. has acted badly by walking out on speeches of Iranian President Ahmadinejad. It is a childish behavior for a childish diplomacy.

How many bodies will hit the floor this time? Who is the master of puppets here? Please take some time to investigate for yourself the history of Iranian and American diplomacy. Research for yourself and deny your own ignorance!

hahaha lol someones parents was a Muppet fan

Originally posted by camouflaged
hahaha lol someones parents was a Muppet fan

Are you calling Ted Koppel a muppet, sir?
Do you think that Ted Koppel is a puppet, sir?
Please expand on your hahaha lol

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


he did not say he was a muppet,
would not, could not call him puppet,
why though do you Dr. Seuss him?
Such talk will only confuse him.

...seriously though, does anyone genuinely believe that Obama can be taken at his word? The US has "gone out of its way" not to meddle in their elections? How exactly does one "go out of their way" not to meddle? Doesn't that imply that they were IN THE WAY in the first place, then diverted from that course briefly?

If the US is genuinely concerned over Iran's potential ability to obtain nuclear weapons, then they would (and probably SHOULD) be doing everything that they can, including being subversive politically, to reach a peaceful end to the conflict. If, on the other hand, that concern is a mere pretext for a more pragmatic or simply less honest desire (e.g financial concerns, perhaps a diversion from economic realities, maintenance of oil flow etc. etc.) then it stands to reason that they'd lie about their alterior methods of coercion.

Either way the US comes out of it looking like a deceptive and hostile force...
which it is. And this, coming from someone with no love for the Iranian regime (or their violent rhetoric).

Originally posted by Awen24
...seriously though, does anyone genuinely believe that Obama can be taken at his word? The US has "gone out of its way" not to meddle in their elections? How exactly does one "go out of their way" not to meddle? Doesn't that imply that they were IN THE WAY in the first place, then diverted from that course briefly?

Iran deserves the right to pursue it's own destiny. The western countries need to step back and let Iran globalize at it's own pace. Let's put it another way : if Kermit Roosevelt and the CIA failed to overthrow Iran in 1953 the world would be a much safer place today.

Btw, I liked your Dr Seussian continuation!

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


All the Shah's Men www.amazon.co.uk...

This gives a really full account of Kermit's actions in the 1950's in Iran and the CIA bloody coup.

Nice OP

en.wikipedia.org...

Mohammad Mosaddegh....His administration introduced a wide range of social reforms but is most notable for its nationalization of the Iranian oil industry, which had been under British control since 1913

Wikipedia, bless it's digital soul, has a huge page on Iranian - American relations. It is very important to understand this history because the western media will not take a serious look at it. We have to inform ourselves and deny our own ignorance.
en.wikipedia.org...

The Iranians lionize Mossadegh for the same reasons Americans idolize JFK: he wasn't around long enough for his effectiveness to be truly evaluated. No-one knows how successful his reforms would have proven. Since he did nothing to redistribute the actual land, which is the basis of the mullahs' power, things would probably not have improved much for the Iranian people. The United States and Britain had reason to fear that a "socialist" Iran would ally itself to the Soviet Union, which would then be able to project its power through central Asia all the way to the Gulf. The "Containment Policy" dictated that Iran must be preserved as a "buffer state." The main impetus for the coup came from Britain, as the loss of Anglo-Persian (now called BP) oil assets was a heavy blow. If it were not for this, the US and Britain might have settled for accepting Iran as an "unaligned" state; a Yugoslavia on the Gulf.

The Anglo-American coup was worse than a crime, it was a mistake. Iran continues to blame all of its woes on an event that happened over a half century ago. Incidentally, the Islamic "Revolution" did not redistribute the Mullah's land either, as it would have eliminated their feudal seats of power.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by Awen24
...seriously though, does anyone genuinely believe that Obama can be taken at his word? The US has "gone out of its way" not to meddle in their elections? How exactly does one "go out of their way" not to meddle? Doesn't that imply that they were IN THE WAY in the first place, then diverted from that course briefly?

Iran deserves the right to pursue it's own destiny. The western countries need to step back and let Iran globalize at it's own pace. Let's put it another way : if Kermit Roosevelt and the CIA failed to overthrow Iran in 1953 the world would be a much safer place today.

Btw, I liked your Dr Seussian continuation!

This is what I'm getting at. I consider myself to be a right-wing conservative (for want of a better term), and feel that the US right-wingers (i.e the Republican party / GOP) have really hijacked that set of ideologies to further their own goals. The immense selfishness of US politics is astounding; arrogance in the highest degree. While I agree that many of the comments made by Ahmadinejad are unforgivable (particularly given his constant statements regarding wiping Israel off the map / death to America etc.), I also don't believe that the US can be considered blameless in the affair. For too long, the US has been playing both sides of every conflict around the globe, seeking only to advance its own standing. There is no moral stance here, no right or wrong, simply what is or isn't advantageous to the American cause.

This is why we have the conflicts we do today in Iraq, Afghanistan, and so on (I realise that this is an overt simplification of the situation, but I'm not going to go into detail on the same facts that have been repeated so many times on this site and others).

The US needs to realise that the rest of the world does not exist to serve her interests; likewise the Islamic world needs to realise the right of divergent groups and ideologies to exist.

Maybe it's just me, but the more I look at global conflict, the more I wish Nation-States would stop worrying about everyone else, and start taking care of their own citizens.
I wish they'd stop using their people as pawns in ideological conflicts and start protecting, caring and empowering those who give them the right to rule in the first place. It drives me bonkers, it really does.

reply to post by Awen24


You do realize you live in a nation state?

(Aside to Sayanara: I'm bumping this one for you. )

reply to post by Awen24

Maybe it's just me, but the more I look at global conflict, the more I wish Nation-States would stop worrying about everyone else, and start taking care of their own citizens.
I wish they'd stop using their people as pawns in ideological conflicts and start protecting, caring and empowering those who give them the right to rule in the first place. It drives me bonkers, it really does.

I am way past bonkers... but many on ATS boards are much further gone than we are. In fact, the ridiculous keyboard warriors often invoke the term "Iranian Glass"? I'm sure you have heard it. It is the impotent fantasy of a powerless and anonymous voice in the digital realm.. actually, it is no different than Iranians chanting "Death to America".

Now those people are truly living in an ideological conflict without access to critical thinking!

Originally posted by DJW001The Anglo-American coup was worse than a crime, it was a mistake. Iran continues to blame all of its woes on an event that happened over a half century ago. Incidentally, the Islamic "Revolution" did not redistribute the Mullah's land either, as it would have eliminated their feudal seats of power.

I'm glad we agreed on something I believe Mohammad Mosaddegh wasn't allowed enough time in office to complete his reforms before he was busted by Kermit Jr. And incidentally, Salvador Allende got the same treatment in Chile, but Allende got busted by Kissinger almost exactly 20 years later.

In Iran's case it was for oil. In Chile, it was the copper mines. But back to Iran and something else you said about a "socialist" Iran and the need for buffer states during the Cold War.

What do you think about the Nixon connection?
Mosaddegh, the Prime Minister of Iran 28 April 1951 – 19 August 1953.
Allende, in office from 4 November 1970 – 11 September 1973.

Mosaddegh, 1953, relieved of his duties by Ike & Nixon courtesy of CIA Kermit Roosevelt.
Allende, 1973, relieved of his duties by Nixon & Kissinger courtesy of CIA paid interlopers.

Ah, in too much of a hurry on that last post. What DJW mentioned was,

The United States and Britain had reason to fear that a "socialist" Iran would ally itself to the Soviet Union, which would then be able to project its power through central Asia all the way to the Gulf. The "Containment Policy" dictated that Iran must be preserved as a "buffer state."

You are attributing "fear" to both the United States and Britain, each of them by 1955 were operating as quasi-socialist countries. Retirement and pension programmes? yes. A vast military industrial complex, yes. Heck, even a state funded school system could be considered a type of "socialism"!? Yes.

The GI BIll is a type of state sponsored socialism, paid for by the public at large, awarded for being a dutiful servant to the State.

This is where we disagree. The 1950's were not rational. The Korean War was not rational. The American people were under a blitz of anti-Communist propaganda and this went on for years and years. Very hardcore and scary stuff. Especially nuclear warfare propaganda and the Red Scare that was going on at the time.

Meanwhile, in Soviet Russia, the humble bus driver was among the most highly respected jobs in the land. Why? Because he took people to their jobs every day.

Then you have Iran. Mosaddegh was democratically elected by his own people to improve the conditions of his homeland and better the lives of his countrymen. The United States, hyped up by anti-Communist and irrational paranoia, approves of the staging of this coup.

This was not the most violent form of subversion ever done by the CIA. There are far worse and bloodier examples. In my view the USA has not paid off that karma which is why I started the thread to remind people of how this all began. It began 28 April 1951 with Mosaddegh's dream. But that dream was interrupted on19 August 1953 when Kermit Roosevelt Jr. acted on behalf of the United States Government to deprive Iran of it's right to self determination.

Iran still needs to realize that dream that we woke them up from 60 years ago. That means, we can't expect Iran to learn how to do democracy when we keep screwing with their right to self determination.

It is coming up on the 60th anniversary of Mosaddegh election. This could be an important time frame for Iran / US relations. It could be a golden opportunity for the USA to take the route of least resistance and lay off the high pressure mafia world tactics.

The cold war era containment policy, well, I don't think there any successful examples of containment. And I don't think it is possible to contain an ideology - this is the major flaw in the thinking of the anti-Communists - because ideology exists in the mind and not on a map.

I know we have fundamental disagreements on historical interpretations so I'd like to ask about your views on the next phase for Iran / USA foreign relations. What happens next? How do we avoid the violent blows and get on with good relations?

reply to post by DJW001

The Iranians lionize Mossadegh for the same reasons Americans idolize JFK: he wasn't around long enough for his effectiveness to be truly evaluated. No-one knows how successful his reforms would have proven.

Agreed on that.
Did the same dark power remove them both? And Allende, too?

Originally posted by Awen24
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

he did not say he was a muppet,
would not, could not call him puppet,
why though do you Dr. Seuss him?
Such talk will only confuse him.

...seriously though, does anyone genuinely believe that Obama can be taken at his word? The US has "gone out of its way" not to meddle in their elections? How exactly does one "go out of their way" not to meddle? Doesn't that imply that they were IN THE WAY in the first place, then diverted from that course briefly?

If the US is genuinely concerned over Iran's potential ability to obtain nuclear weapons, then they would (and probably SHOULD) be doing everything that they can, including being subversive politically, to reach a peaceful end to the conflict. If, on the other hand, that concern is a mere pretext for a more pragmatic or simply less honest desire (e.g financial concerns, perhaps a diversion from economic realities, maintenance of oil flow etc. etc.) then it stands to reason that they'd lie about their alterior methods of coercion.

Either way the US comes out of it looking like a deceptive and hostile force...
which it is. And this, coming from someone with no love for the Iranian regime (or their violent rhetoric).

i never meant to offend,
i feel like quite a hermit,
i actually had mean to meant,
that Roosevelt's parents like Kermit,
who i must say is a Muppet,
so don't get all Ziggy,
he was the one,
who had the hots for ms. piggy.

lol i couldn't help myself, you brought out the doctor Seuss in me. to the OP i never meant to offend your topic. i was merely laughing at the name that someone was called Kermit... is it a common name where your from? because i honestly have only ever heard it in the Muppets. no offense implied kind sir.

reply to post by camouflaged


very nice, very nice

look here, look there
look everywhere
look up in the sky
look beneath the stairs
the spooky cia
interfering with affairs
look here, look there
does the cia really care?

the cia lurks in the shadows
the cia aims to destroy and kill

i don't support them
i hope no one else will.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


hahaha that was good, you should of made this a poem thread, it might have helped your replies so far, you've spend a lot of time with the write up, so il be serious and stick to the topic... i think its possible Iran might still be infiltrated by the old central agency and still being run by America to this day, a good way to control a country is to start a war, and the only way a war is war is won is by force or preparedness and America is both and with spies on board provides intelligence which also wins war's.

I just stumbled upon the 1950 Iranian Mickey Mouse plot.
C. Edward Wells, the author of this document put it like this:

"The Embassy wonders if, in the light of the increasing tempo of the cold war, Mr. Disney as a patriotic duty could be interested in preparing such a film that could be used to defend democracy where the communist system is being touted loudly."

www.gwu.edu...

...in the light of the increasing tempo of the cold war...

It makes me wonder if the cold war was entirely scripted by the CIA...?

According to the Nuke Vault the Shah of Iran was looking for US assistance setting up a nuclear reactors. Presidents Ford and Carter kept stringing him along until 1979 when the revolution happened.

U.S.-Iran Nuclear Negotiations in 1970s Featured Shah's Nationalism and U.S. Weapons Worries
Newly Declassified Documents Reveal Remarkable Continuity with Today's U.S.-Iran Nuclear Controversy

www.gwu.edu...

...but the Ford administration had ample incentive to make nuclear sales to Iran. When the nuclear deal was first proposed the United States was heading toward a deep recession, so reactor sales would be a plus. Moreover, just like the Nixon administration, the Ford White House saw the Shah and Iran as a critically important ally in the volatile Middle East, and not only as a source of oil, but as a major proxy in support of U.S. interests in the region. Despite the notoriety of the Shah's police state, the importance that Ford and Kissinger attached to a stable Iran made them willing to conciliate the Shah by keeping their eyes blind to the human rights abuses associated with the dictatorship.

Same crap, different decade

Hopefully this thread was enlightening. Kermit Roosevelt Jr. was CIA but according to the Wiki Kermit Roosevelt Jr does not follow orders:

In his book All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror, The New York Times reporter Stephen Kinzer reported[6] that the CIA ordered Roosevelt to leave Iran. Roosevelt ignored the order and, instead organized a second coup, this one successful.

... most notably the head of the CIA station in Iran resigned rather than participate in the coup. Many outside the intelligence community, including some in the Truman administration, had felt that Mossadegh should be kept in power to prevent a Communist takeover.

After the 1953, KRJ set himself up as a middle east consultant/lobbyist and advisor to the Shah,

After leaving government, he represented American companies in the Middle East and worked in Washington as a lobbyist for foreign governments, including the shah's.

He wrote ''Countercoup: The Struggle for the Control of Iran,'' published in 1979. Source www.nytimes.com...

Mr. Waller (an intelligence colleague of KRJ) said that Mr. Roosevelt had been brought up in what the British called ''the great game,'' the secret rivalry between Britain and Russia in the late 19th century.

''Kim was in that Churchillian mode of a 19th-century warrior,'' Mr. Waller said. ''He was a man of the times and a good man to have around during the cold war.''