Iran: How It All Began

I see that Iran has once again made it into the conversation about foreign policy….there is the nuke deal that Congress is screwing with and then there is the Iranian interference in Syria or should I say…the Middle East?

I realize that Iran has become the “bad guy” in our foreign policy…..and since many readers are not old enough to remember the history behind the situation ….leave it to me to fill in the blanks for you….

Relations with Iran has been in the dumper since 1979 and the taking of American hostages….that is the story the media and the history book will pass along…..but actually the problem began further back than 1979…..it all began in 1953…..with the plot to overthrow a popularly elected prime minister because of his leftist leanings….

The State Department today released a long-awaited “retrospective” volume of declassified U.S. government documents on the 1953 coup in Iran, including records describing planning and implementation of the covert operation.  The publication is the culmination of decades of internal debates and public controversy after a previous official collection omitted all references to the role of American and British intelligence in the ouster of Iran’s then-prime minister, Mohammad Mosaddeq.  The volume is part of the Department’s venerable Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) series.

For decades, neither the U.S. nor the British governments would acknowledge their part in Mosaddeq’s overthrow, even though a detailed account appeared as early as 1954 in The Saturday Evening Post, and since then CIA and MI6 veterans of the coup have published memoirs detailing their activities.  Kermit Roosevelt’s Countercoup is the best known and most detailed such account, although highly controversial because of its selective rendering of events.  In 2000, The New York Times posted a 200-page classified internal CIA history of the operation.

Source: US Releases Long-Awaited Documents on 1953 Coup in Iran

Now as Paul Harvey use to say….”You know the rest of the story”.

(For those too young…Paul Harvey was a radio show commentator for decades)

Iran: ISIS Attacks

It is a busy day here on IST…..attacks, hearings, Qatar and USS Liberty…..I will try to be short and sweet…whenever possible….and thanx everyone for the visits……

I have waited a few days before posting on this situation to see how the tale shakes out…..

A couple of days ago ISIS hit the capital of Iran…..killing and injuring many…. first time Iran has tasted the likes of ISIS and its tactics……

Terror in Tehran: Several attackers stormed into Iran’s parliament and a second group of attackers including a suicide bomber targeted the shrine of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini on Wednesday. At least 12 people were killed and 42 people were wounded in the twin attacks, reports the AP. ISIS claimed responsibility, marking the first time it has taken responsibility for an assault in Iran, the AP reports. The Sunni extremist group is fighting Iran-backed forces in Syria and Iraq.

The Iranian Intelligence Ministry says security forces were able to thwart a third terrorist attack in the country’s capital. In one image in state media, a man was seen lowering a young boy from the parliament building. Authorities say a woman was arrested at the scene of the shrine attack. The attack on the tomb of Khomeini was symbolically stunning, the AP notes. As Iran’s first Supreme Leader, Khomeini is a towering figure in the country and was its revolutionary leader in the 1979 ouster of the shah.

Just like all these types of attacks the rhetoric is on-going…..out of Iran a reason for the attack is being spread…….

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) pointed the finger at Saudi Arabia for twin attacks on Iran’s parliament and the Mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini on Wednesday morning which left 12 people dead.

The attacks, which took place a few kilometres south of the capital, were the first in the country to be claimed by the Islamic State group.

“This terrorist attack happened only a week after the meeting between the US president (Donald Trump) and the (Saudi) backward leaders who support terrorists,” said the IRGC in a statement, published by Iranian media.

Source: Iranian Revolutionary Guard blames Saudi Arabia for Tehran attack | Middle East Eye

They could have a point…..

Iran: A “What If”

Iran has been in the news lately….it seems that some in the Trump power cliche is not happy with the Iranian nuke deal and the chest thumping has started…..and since I do like my history I thought I would propose a ‘what if’ scenario…..

In 1954 the US was involved in a coup in Guatemala and most people think that it was our first attempted coup….they would be wrong.  Iran was the US first successful coup lead by the CIA.  But for the same reason as the first…to protect American business profits and control.  Guatemala was to protect Standard Fruit and their monopoly…Iran it was to protect American oil interests…..

What lead up to the coup?
In 1951, Iran’s Parliament voted to nationalize the oil industry, and legislators backing the law elected its leading advocate, Dr. Mosaddeq, as prime minister. Britain responded with threats and sanctions.

Dr. Mosaddeq, a European-educated lawyer then in his early 70’s, prone to tears and outbursts, refused to back down. In meetings in November and December 1952, the secret history says, British intelligence officials startled their American counterparts with a plan for a joint operation to oust the nettlesome prime minister.

To many Iranians, Mossadegh was a national hero, not only because he had stood up to Britain, but also because he was the only Iranian politician who could challenge the authority of the ambitious young shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. When the US and Britain overthrew Mossadegh, they brought about an extended period of dictatorship under the shah that lasted until the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

That was an oversimplification of the events that leads up to the coup of 1953…..for further fleshing out the scheme there is a good summation……

Source: The 1953 Coup D’etat in Iran

So the question is…..would we be at this point in history if the US had let the events of 1953 play on there own?  Would the religious upheaval had come about if the popularly elected PM had been allowed to serve his term?

The coup of 1953 is still used today to rampant up anti-American sentiment.

In essence it was the US that set up the situation that allowed the revolution of 1979 to become active…..the “Iron Fist” of the Shah fed the idea of revolition.

We have no way of saying that if things were allowed to progress normally without interference that everything would be different today….the one thing we can say is the US was partially to blame for the revolution that led to the hostages and the rest is history, as they say…..

My students like these types of things for they like talking….and that makes teaching easier…..

Anybody got a “what if”?

Remember Operation Eagle Claw

Closing Thought–25Apr17

I apologize but this post was a draft that was suppose to be published yesterday and I somehow missed it.

Yep you got it….another history lesson……

This is an operation that cost American lives and it should not be forgotten…..

On 4 November 1979, after a popular revolution swept the Shah of Iran, a close American ally, out of power, Iranian students backing the new revolutionary Islamic government stormed the US embassy in Teheran and took the staff and USMC security contigent hostage. In all, 52 Americans were captured and it was unclear whether they were being tortured or readied for execution. After six months of failed negotiation, the US broke diplomatic relations with Iran on 8 April 1980 and the newly certified US Army Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (Airborne) was put on full alert and plans were being drawn up for a rescue.

The Americans faced a daunting task. Teheran is well inside Iran and away from friendly countries. The hostages were not held at an airport as in Israel’s four years earlier Entebbe raid. Good intelligence was hard to come by about forces inside the embassy and in Teheran. And of course, all the planning and training had to be carried out in complete secrecy.

Source: Operation Eagle Claw

The sacrifice that these people made should not be forgotten….and I will see that they are not.

Why Not Start Another F*cking War?

Apparently our cracker jack morons running the military have an answer for everything….start a f*cking war.

I see the neocons have had their day and will not go down silently.  We have had people like McCain that thought it was cute to sing…”bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” and his cronies are always thumping their chest like a gaseous primate.

These mental midgets were quiet for a couple of years….they mumbled a bit but few paid them any attention….but now we have the triumphant in power and the calls for a war with Iran have grown a bit louder……

Central Command leader Gen. Joseph Votel today called for the US to use “military means” against Iran as an effort to disrupt their “activities,” saying it was vital that the US “expose and hold them accountable for the things that they are doing.”

Votel did not specify exactly to what extent he intended the military means to be used directly against Iran, or in what context. He did however complain of Iran committing “destabilizing activities” in the Middle East.

Does this make any rational sense?

Our overworked military is pushed to the limits by the morons that want war at every turn…..and then we let idiots like Gen. Votel out of their cages and their mouths fly open……

“I believe that Iran is operating in what I call a grey zone,” Commander of the US Central Command, Army General Joseph Votel, told the House Armed Services Committee in testimony on Wednesday. “And it’s an area between normal competition between states — and it’s just short of open conflict.”

Source: Top US general suggests military action against Iran | GulfNews.com

PLease!  Will some please reign in these idiots.

This country does not need another war and our troops do not need yet another opportunity to lose their lives.

Maybe Congress should show some cajones and reassert their control over when we go to war…….

For over a decade and a half, the U.S. Congress has been missing in action on matters of war and peace. This isn’t a statement of conjecture or one devoid of fact. All one needs to do is take a look at recent history. The legislative branch hasn’t passed an authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) since 2002, when Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was in the crosshairs.

In continuing to fight the War on Terror, the U.S. government is still operating under another 2001 AUMF to fight an alphabet soup of terrorist groups around the world, including an organization, the Islamic State, that didn’t even exist when the resolution was passed. This is categorized by Congress as an unfortunate public-relations scenario rather than an alarming constitutional oversight. Indeed, if George Washington suddenly came back to life and was thrust into the year 2017, it wouldn’t be a stretch to imagine the first president of the republic turning pale when he discovered how out of whack the executive-legislative imbalance has become.

Source: Will Congress Finally Reassert Its War Powers? | The American Conservative

Any disagreement?

But Congress may be sidelined even with this attempt to roll back our wars….why?

While most of the talk about the Pentagon’s proposals for various wars to President Trump has focused on requests for more troops in more countries, a much less publicized effort has also been getting rubber stamped, one giving commanders in those wars increasing autonomy on operations.

Buried in the details of almost every proposal from Iraq and Syria to smaller operations like US troops in Yemen and Somalia, there is always a mention of commanders wanting to be able to conduct strikes at will, both airstrikes and ground raids.

This has been a change that the Pentagon has been quite eager to seek, after years of complaining about President Obama “micromanaging” the various US wars, but it appears they may be trying to get a much broader collection of grants of autonomy than they’ve ever been granted before.

This does not bode well……giving individuals the power to start a war without oversight….what is Trump smoking?

It’s Iran Again

Iran pretty much fell off the radar there for about a year but then we had an election and the winner has started saying one thing then another….and when you have leaders in DC with nicknames like “Mad Dog” then there has got to be chest thumping about Iran…..

I was taking notes to write this post and then decided I would do it another way because in the last week or so everybody has had an opinion on Iran and how to handle the situation…..

So to make it easier on me and for my readers I will give you links on this issue and you decide what you want to know……get caught up before the fall…..

The Trump administration is exploring ways to break Russia’s military and diplomatic alliance with Iran in a bid to both end the Syrian conflict and bolster the fight against Islamic State, said senior administration, European and Arab officials involved in the policy discussions. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

President Trump’s tough talk on Iran is winning him friends in the Arab world, but it also carries a significant risk of conflict with a U.S. rival that is now more powerful than at any point since the creation of the Islamic republic nearly 40 years ago. – Washington Post

New sanctions that the Trump administration imposed on Friday to punish Tehran’s latest ballistic missile test marked the beginning of what officials called the end of an era in which the United States was “too tolerant of Iran’s bad behavior.” – New York Times

Iran on Saturday began extensive military exercises in a defiant response to a week of warnings from the Trump administration, including new sanctions, with a senior Iranian military commander calling the actions “futile” and threatening to “rain” missiles down on the country’s enemies. – Washington Post

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis described Iran as the world’s greatest sponsor of terrorism on Saturday, but he emphasized that there was no pressing need for the United States to beef up its military presence in the Persian Gulf region. – New York Times

Until President Trump’s inauguration, Iran’s clerics felt comfortable leading worshipers in a chorus of “Death to America” while simultaneously signing a $16.6 billion deal with Boeing. Now, the establishment is treading carefully, with even most hard-liners concerned that the smallest provocation could lead to military conflict. – New York Times

Iran is set to boost its crude output next month and a deadline to bid for oil and gas fields has been pushed back, a top Iranian oil official was reported as saying Saturday, amid fears a recent missile test could lead to new U.S. measures that would deter foreign companies from investing in the nation’s petroleum. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Donald Trump jetted off Friday for his first weekend away from the White House after his first two weeks in office, capping off 14 days in which his administration moved aggressively to move on his campaign promises and take shots at the Obama era. Yet, as the president heads for his Mar-a-Lago retreat in South Florida, his first two weeks produced little clarity about the next four years. – Roll Call

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) says the Iran deal negotiated by the Obama administration is likely to remain in place. – The Hill

A member of the House Armed Services Committee is urging the Trump administration to build a new ballistic missile defense system in the Middle East to counter Iranian aggression and defend U.S. allies, according to communications to the White House obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. – Washington Free Beacon

Iran’s nuclear chief says it will have 60 percent more stockpiled uranium than it did prior to the landmark 2015 agreement with world powers after a shipment expected later this week. – Associated Press

Editorial: Iran’s missile launch is a deliberate effort to test the seriousness of the new U.S. Administration. Iran may now decide to test the White House again on how far it is willing to go to enforce the meaning of “on notice.” The more unequivocal the Administration’s response, the sooner Tehran will get the message that, this time, it faces a U.S. government that means what it says. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Editorial: Rolling back the gains Iran has made across the Middle East in the past decade will be, at best, a work of years. To succeed, the Trump administration will have to clarify priorities: Russia, which it regards as a potential ally in the region, has become Iran’s strategic partner. Leaving the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad in place will lock in Iranian domination where it matters most. Until it has a strategy for addressing such challenges, the administration will find it hard to impress the mullahs. – Washington Post

John Bolton writes: Time always works on the side of nuclear proliferators, and the Iran deal is providing the ayatollahs with protective camouflage. Every day Washington lets pass without ripping the deal up is a day of danger for America and its friends. We proceed slowly at our peril. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Fred Fleitz writes: Putting Iran on notice is significant because it signals the return to the global stage of a strong and decisive United States prepared to reinstate the successful national-security strategy of President Ronald Reagan: “peace through strength.” Such a jolt to the international order could convince rogue states such as Iran and North Korea to dial back their destabilizing behavior and possibly agree to talks to address regional concerns about their missile and weapons-of-mass-destruction programs. – National Review Online

As Iran tries to calibrate how to deal with President Trump, its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in caustic comments to air force commanders, thanked the new American leader for revealing “the real face” of the United States. – New York Times

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday urged Western leaders to follow U.S. President Donald Trump in imposing fresh sanctions against Iran. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Sanctions the Trump administration imposed on Iran after the country conducted another ballistic missile launch are more symbolic than punitive, a former Obama administration Treasury Department official said Monday. – The Weekly Standard

James Rubin writes: Republicans and Democrats can and should agree on the broad thrust of U.S. policy toward Iran’s nuclear program and Russia’s international aggression. For one day at least, that is possible. – Politico

Mark Dubowitz and Behnam Ben Taleblu write: The administration could also accelerate the process, both technical and diplomatic, of getting America’s Middle East partners and allies to integrate existing ballistic missile defense systems. But most important, the U.S. can respond against future missile tests by targeting sectors of the Iranian economy that underwrite, procure, produce, develop, and house those capabilities. – The Hill

See what I mean?  Anyone with a keyboard has a better idea…..

Foreign Policy Is Off With A Bang

We enter into our third week of thew Trump presidency….and the area that I was most concerned with, foreign policy, is making news….lots of news.

To begin with we have a new SecState……

The Republican-led Senate has confirmed Rex Tillerson as President Trump’s secretary of state, the AP reports. Senators voted 56-43 largely along party lines to approve Tillerson’s nomination to be the nation’s chief diplomat. Most Senate Democrats opposed Tillerson’s nomination, angering Republicans who considered the former Exxon Mobil CEO to be highly qualified for the post.

That was the only thing that could inaccurately be called “good news”…..

Then the president spent some time on the phone with PM of Australia and the president of Mexico……

For decades, Australia and the U.S. have enjoyed the coziest of relationships, collaborating on everything from military and intelligence to diplomacy and trade. Yet an irritable tweet President Donald Trump fired off about Australia and a dramatic report of an angry phone call between the nations’ leaders proves that the new U.S. commander in chief has changed the playing field for even America’s staunchest allies.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull was left scrambling to defend his country’s allegiance to the U.S. after The Washington Post published a report on Thursday detailing a tense exchange that allegedly took place during the Australian leader’s first telephone call with Trump since he became president. During the call, the Post reported, Trump ranted about an agreement struck with the Obama administration that would allow a group of mostly Muslim refugees rejected by Australia to be resettled in the United States. The newspaper said Trump dubbed it “the worst deal ever” and accused Turnbull of seeking to export the “next Boston bombers” — a reference to Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, U.S. citizens born in Kyrgyzstan who set off explosives at the 2013 Boston marathon.

Next up was a threat to the Mexican president…..

President Trump threatened in a phone call with his Mexican counterpart to send US troops to stop “bad hombres down there” unless the Mexican military does more to control them, according to an excerpt of a transcript of the conversation obtained by the AP. The excerpt of the call did not make clear who exactly Trump considered “bad hombres”—drug cartels, immigrants, or both—or the tone and context of the remark, made in a Friday morning phone call between the leaders. It also did not contain Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto’s response. Still, the excerpt offers a rare and striking look at how the new president is conducting diplomacy behind closed doors. Trump’s remark suggest he is using the same tough and blunt talk with world leaders that he used to rally crowds on the campaign trail.

“You have a bunch of bad hombres down there,” Trump told Pena Nieto. “You aren’t doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn’t, so I just might send them down to take care of it.”

And now for the chest thumping toward Iran…….

President Trump’s national security adviser said the US is “officially putting Iran on notice,” without specifying exactly what that means, Reuters reports. According to NBC News, Michael Flynn made the remark during a “surprise appearance” at a White House press briefing Wednesday. It was spurred by a recent Iranian missile test that Flynn characterized as “destabilizing activity.” While Flynn didn’t offer specifics on how the US may respond, three senior administration officials tell CNN they are “considering a whole range of options,” including everything from economic sanctions to military action.

If these situations are true then I would say that we are off to a rough 4 years internationally….