Survey: Religion not the source of tension between Arabs and West

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
CIA put Ba'ath party in power who the f*** cares who founded it

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html

The CIA provided some information to Baath party members. However, claiming they put the Baath party in power is stretching things a long, long way. Not only that, but Saddam's coup, where the CIA was involved providing some intel and little more, didn't last long. The Baath party was toppled in Iraq and Saddam was put in jail for a couple of years. It wasn't until '68 that he finally pulled off a permanent and long-lasting coup. And there's no indication the CIA was involved in that coup in any sort of significant way.

Despite your claims, Saddam and the Baath party put themselves in power. The US backed Saddam, mostly as a lesser of two evils compared to Qassim, since Saddam was anti-communist and this was the Cold War. But the US/CIA gave him nothing significant nor anything that would have changed the outcomes of those coups.
Again, climing that the CIA put Saddam in power is bunk. It's little more than a conspiracy lover's fantasy.

Taliban-ISI link vital

http://www.afsa.org/fsj/Dec01/schiff.cfm

I don't see anything vital. It basically says exactly what I told you already - there was some infiltration of the ISI by the OBL/Islamic fundy wackos. It's like claiming the Saudi Police are run by OBL because there are some Wahhabists and AQ members in their ranks. hat claim slides down a slippery slope to blow things out of proportion.

Mossadeq - I read the link, did you?

Of course I did. I read it long, long ago. That and much more.

The Americans ousted him after he instituted Socialist reforms and nationalized Iranian oil fields for Iran instead of foreigners. What part of this do you not or do you not want to understand?

Maybe it's the part about the nationalization already having been voted in before Mossadeq bercame prime minister? It wasn't Mossadeq that broiught about the nationalization, as you claimed. That movement was already in process. Oh, and let's not forget that the Shah was still in power when the nationalization of oil was implemented.

iow, your timeline is BS. Also, it was more about Mosadeq's alienation of Britian and his leanings towards the communist party that did him in. It had little to do with the nationalization of oil.

The more you argue the more you sound like a nationalist. I don't see an American nationalist adding anything of value to this.

I'm just interested in the actual facts. You, apparently, are not, unless they indict the US in typical Chomsky-ist finger-pointing fashion. Personally, I find someone who starts off with the assumption that the US is at fault and then looks for evidence to back that up rather tedious as well as hyped by stories of grand conspiracies.

Also when will you learn that in Asia - White man not welcome.

Really? I just got back last Friday from 3 weeks in Hong Kong and I felt more than welcome the entire time. I met plenty of white men over there who live there and everyone, without exception, was unanimous in loving it there. I'm looking forward to going back next month for another 3 weeks. It's a great place. My wife's even coming over for a week.

There was a story about a Indo-European civilization in China in the National Geographic. The archeologists wanted to bring back artifacts. The military looked at them and asked the man, "Will this prove that the white man was in China/Asia?". He said maybe and they confiscated the artifacts. Lop Nur is now a nuclear testing site.

And?

 

[mordantmonkey]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Maybe it's the part about the nationalization already having been voted in before Mossadeq bercame prime minister? It wasn't Mossadeq that broiught about the nationalization, as you claimed. That movement was already in process. Oh, and let's not forget that the Shah was still in power when the nationalization of oil was implemented.

iow, your timeline is BS. Also, it was more about Mosadeq's alienation of Britian and his leanings towards the communist party that did him in. It had little to do with the nationalization of oil.

Perhaps you should read some more history on this. maybe one of the many writings from people within the CIA.
Do you know about the SAVAK? you may or may not be right about the true motives for the CIA and MI6 orchestrating the coup. however, what options did Iran have? After nationalization of the oil industry, Britian blockaded iranian exports. American didn't offer to help, so where else did they have to go?
but besides all that, most resentment is toward the fact that the US installed and supported a brutal regime and ignored reports of torture for their own political and economic gain. Hell they even did the torture training. WTF!?

 

[0roo0roo]

pretending religion has nothing to do with the conflict is like pretending light doesn't come from the sun its silly.

 

[mordantmonkey]

what's silly is people pretending it is the only reason for the conflict. Actually Christianity and Islam have many things in common, ideology wise. And they are both used by corrupt leaders to justify killing.
If you study the two religions you will find more similarities than differences. I find it funny that people lump all christians or all muslims together, like they are all of one mind. They are both similiar in that they have different sects and branches with differences in opinion. Though christians may win on the number of sects count.