CaughtInThe
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2017
- Messages
- 143,131
- Reaction score
- 162,769
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Sounds like America.The only thing holding Iran back from being a great country at this point is some wacked out religious minority suppressing the rights of everyone else in the country.
Many of the incidents you mentioned happened during the Cold War, and those were matched by similar Soviet actions. Sadly, they mirrored each other, with the Soviet’s presumed feeble defense their need to control Eastern Europe due to their many millions of lives lost in WWII, and the US defense of its similar actions in our hemisphere being its Inquisition-like fear of anything heretical, i. e., leftist, which could lead to the eternal dam nation that was communism. In reality it was just two empires controlling their satellites, no different than Rome and Gaul.Wow—so much misinformation and bad history here. There's a lot to unpack.
First, let’s talk religious wars.
Catholics and Protestants have been butchering each other since the day they split—so cultural and religious conflicts are nothing new or rare.
We’ve seen it all before:
The Crusades, the Thirty Years’ War between Catholics and Protestants, the French Wars of Religion, Catholics vs. Huguenots, the Lebanese Civil War, the Partition of India, the Bosnian War… and on and on.
Then there are the oldies-but-goodies: Rwanda, Darfur, Somalia, the Yugoslav Wars, and the American Indian Wars.
All it takes is slapping one label on Group A and a different label on Group B—and suddenly they’re tearing each other apart like fleas on a dog.
Now, about "terrorizing"...
The U.S. is a masterclass case study in it.
Let’s go through just a few of the Greatest Hits:
- Operation Ajax – Overthrew Iran’s democratically elected government in 1953 and installed the Shah.
- Mujahideen support – You know them today as al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
- Nicaragua – Funded the Contras, who committed brutal atrocities.
- Libya – Armed anti-Gaddafi rebels, leaving behind a failed state and open slave markets.
- Syria – Sent weapons and money to so-called “moderate rebels,” many of whom had jihadist affiliations.
- Iran – Propped up the MEK, a cult-like group that was on the U.S. terrorist list for years.
- Angola – Backed UNITA rebels in a devastating civil war.
- Cuba – Bay of Pigs, anyone?
- Guatemala – CIA-backed coup in 1954, leading to decades of dictatorship and genocide.
- Pakistan/ISI – Turned a blind eye while our “ally” funded the Taliban.
- Yemen – Helping the Saudis bomb civilians and cause one of the worst humanitarian crises in modern history.
If we stacked the bodies of everyone who has died due to U.S.-backed or U.S-led terror campaigns, Iran would be a drop in a blood-drenched ocean.
The U.S. does not have the moral high ground here—or anywhere.
So… try harder.
Just to be clear, I don't think Iran should NOT have nuclear anything—simply because, much like this administration, they don’t seem to put competent people in charge. It’s basically another Chernobyl waiting to happen.
That said, given the regional history—where Iran’s neighbors (especially many Arab states) would be quite happy to see it wiped off the map, as Israel clearly feels the same from its Neighbors—a nuclear deterrent becomes the only real insurance policy. Just like it is for Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan.
The irony?
If Ukraine had kept its nuclear weapons, that war likely never would have happened.
So yes—there's strong historical precedent here and why Iran is trying to get...if we ever stop fracking with them, then they don't need the bomb.
Diving Mullah
That's because you can't appreciate what we have. You should get out and travel to some other countries. It opens up the eyes of Americans.Sounds like America.
I do travel, that has nothing to do with the right wing Christian fundie lunatics who are here trying to control and enslave us. They hate us for our lifestyle. Hilarious that you woild even invoke how things look internationally. Have you even been to another western democracy? We’re a joke. We just have nukes.That's because you can't appreciate what we have. You should get out and travel to some other countries. It opens up the eyes of Americans.
I do travel, that has nothing to do with the right wing Christian fundie lunatics who are here trying to control and enslave us. They hate us for our lifestyle. Hilarious that you woild even invoke how things look internationally. Have you even been to another western democracy? We’re a joke. We just have nukes.
Extremist Christian ideology did not start 3 years ago. Me and my buddies keep telling you and your buddies to stop going to war, and then when you and your buddies don’t listen we all pay for it while you and your buddies pretend it never happened like in Iraq. You and your buddies seem to love sending other people’s buddies to war for your paranoia.We only have these bozos for 3 more years. But hey, you and your buddies should try going drag in an ME country other than Israel.
Extremist Christian ideology did not start 3 years ago. Me and my buddies keep telling you and your buddies to stop going to war, and then when you and your buddies don’t listen we all pay for it while you and your buddies pretend it never happened like in Iraq. You and your buddies seem to love sending other people’s buddies to war for your paranoia.
It’s true that the Cold War was an era of mutual paranoia and imperial projection, where both the U.S. and USSR interfered in the sovereignty of other nations. But to say they simply mirrored each other is to flatten nuance, erase context, and ultimately let real perpetrators off the hook with a shrug and a sigh: “Well, Rome and Gaul all over again.” That kind of historical laziness doesn't serve truth—or justice.Many of the incidents you mentioned happened during the Cold War, and those were matched by similar Soviet actions. Sadly, they mirrored each other, with the Soviet’s presumed feeble defense their need to control Eastern Europe due to their many millions of lives lost in WWII, and the US defense of its similar actions in our hemisphere being its Inquisition-like fear of anything heretical, i. e., leftist, which could lead to the eternal dam nation that was communism. In reality it was just two empires controlling their satellites, no different than Rome and Gaul.
A lot to agree with in your post. But I still maintain that there was some symmetry in the paranoid way the two “empires,” for want of a better term, justified their intervention. It was clearly United Fruit Co’s corporate greed that caused the overthrow of Guatemala’s government in 1954. But its justification was anti-communism. The Reader’s Digest article on the event was titled something like “How the Kremlin Failed in Guatemala.”It’s true that the Cold War was an era of mutual paranoia and imperial projection, where both the U.S. and USSR interfered in the sovereignty of other nations. But to say they simply mirrored each other is to flatten nuance, erase context, and ultimately let real perpetrators off the hook with a shrug and a sigh: “Well, Rome and Gaul all over again.” That kind of historical laziness doesn't serve truth—or justice.
Let’s unpack this:
The USSR’s brutal clampdown on Eastern Europe—crushing uprisings in Hungary Czechoslovakia and Poland was about imposing totalitarian control, suppressing even modest reformist socialism, and keeping puppet regimes obedient. It wasn’t a “feeble defense” out of wartime trauma—it was imperial expansion through terror.
Meanwhile, U.S. interventions in Latin America weren’t about territorial occupation but were often triggered by corporate greed, (far sinster and political expantions!!!) white supremacist paranoia, and anti-communist hysteria. Overthrows in Iran Guatemala Chile and others had far more to do with defending corporate profits and Cold War hegemony than safeguarding democracy.
So yes, both sides intervened. But the how and the why matter—just like murder and manslaughter aren’t judged the same in court.
Tso why get upset? But that’s precisely the problem: that thinking normalizes oppression as inevitable. Humanism rejects that. It says every person—Chilean, Hungarian, Iranian, Congolese—deserves autonomy, dignity, and the right not to have their government overthrown by tanks, bombs, or covert CIA briefcases.
The moment we say “both sides did bad stuff, so who’s really to blame?” we erase the victims—the millions tortured, exiled, or disappeared in the name of geopolitical board games. That’s not moral clarity. That’s ethical laziness. That is exact American Thinking that warrent suffered nations to chant death to America
By framing Cold War interventions as symmetrical sins, we give cover to today’s apologists who still justify war crimes and coups. Worse, we lose the ability to demand reparations, truth commissions, or even a damn apology from those who orchestrated suffering under the guise of stopping communism or preserving “order.”
Both the U.S. and USSR should be held accountable—but specific accountability. Otherwise, history becomes a fog of excuses, where everyone is guilty and no one is responsible.
When we say “they both did it,” we open the door for modern-day authoritarians to say:
"See? America’s no better. Human rights are just Western propaganda. No one’s innocent."
That kind of moral relativism doesn’t challenge empire—it empowers it.
The Cold War wasn’t just two mirror-image bullies punching each other—it was a tangled, asymmetrical conflict, full of ideological hypocrisy, real victims, and avoidable tragedies. Brushing it off as just another imperial turf war might make the history cleaner—but it also makes it useless to those still living in its aftermath.
Don't shrug and excuse it...Let’s learn from it—and name the devils, even if there’s more than one and some beeing American
Diving Mullah
The obvious explanation is that he’s a pathologically stupid and narcissistic man.What I don’t get about Trump: Why make claims about the attacks before all the evidence is in? This puts you in the position of having to possibly (once again) differ with your intelligence people and, of course, once again having to attack the media. Has Trump learned nothing over the years?
Despite his flaws in that regard, he seems to have some media savvy. But I guess he can’t restrain himself from declaring victories before all the facts come in.The obvious explanation is that he’s a pathologically stupid and narcissistic man.
you need to watch this is it will answer everything you want to know why people like Trump are media savvyDespite his flaws in that regard, he seems to have some media savvy. But I guess he can’t restrain himself from declaring victories before all the facts come in.