Assad and Putin's Sick Strategy Bombing Hospitals

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

I proved you that USA puts on puptes and also removes them. Like Sadam was put there but then removed, the same with Sha and also Sissi will be romved if he starts some trouble. You proved nothing again.

All of them were secular western liberalist followers though, which means Western style Secularism is the imperialists tool

good job.

[Firdousi]

Self hate? Me?
It would be self hate if I dreamed about shariah but lived in a secular and most liberal part of the world. Dreaming abour shariah and khaliphate but still eating and ****ing in the same place that kafirs have build. But wait a min, I do not dream about shariah rule of khaliphate, it is you who want that. LOL

This is self hate, you and this yemeni donkey are the bigest self haters and confused individuals out there.

You see? You are doing it once again. Like Karachi you label all those who disagree with Western agenda as terrorist and religious fanatics. Self hater lol

You need help, brother.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Self hate? Me?
It would be self hate if I dreamed about shariah but lived in a secular and most liberal part of the world. Dreaming abour shariah and khaliphate but still eating and ****ing in the same place that kafirs have build. But wait a min, I do not dream about shariah rule of khaliphate, it is you who want that. LOL

Basically what you're saying is because you live in the West, even though the Imperialists thrived off of debackling your people, you feel obligated to cower to their value system like a House Slave because you're afraid of their dominance over you.

Sorry to tell you, but this is the meaning of self hatred, in your attempt to say you don't have self hate you showed you are wallowing in self hate. You accuse us of self hatred, but we're not the ones who feel any obligation to Appease White Europeans as if they're our masters, you do.

[Insight]

I proved you that USA puts on puptes and also removes them. Like Sadam was put there but then removed, the same with Sha and also Sissi will be romved if he starts some trouble. You proved nothing again.

US installed Shah after Mossadegh was removed via US backed coup in 1953.

Iranians began galvanizing towards Khomeini as Shah began violently cracking down on opponents. At the same time, Shah wanted to take a larger part of oil shares (he had been giving I think 49% of oil wealth to US/British oil companies). When he did this, US tried to get in touch with Khomeini thinking they could use him and remove the Shah.

Khomeini played them right until he entered Tehran, and a few days later he said Iran can never have ties with the US. He put this in stone. I believe the US unwillingness to recognize this stipulation by Khomenei has only led to further loss of credibility and self humiliation as they attempt to restore ties with Iran. IRGC would never allow it. In that sense, US hopes on the outcome of the Iranian nuclear deal have been a waste. Aside from avoiding a messy military confrontation with Iran, US has gained nothing but ridicule from allies and opponents alike.

[Insight]

Anyways, this is off topic, but I had to correct your complete misreading of history Khostai

[khushal]

US installed Shah after Mossadegh was removed via US backed coup in 1953.

Iranians began galvanizing towards Khomeini as Shah began violently cracking down on opponents. At the same time, Shah wanted to take a larger part of oil shares (he had been giving I think 49% of oil wealth to US/British oil companies). When he did this, US tried to get in touch with Khomeini thinking they could use him and remove the Shah.

Khomeini played them right until he entered Tehran, and a few days later he said Iran can never have ties with the US. He put this in stone. I believe the US unwillingness to recognize this stipulation by Khomenei has only led to further loss of credibility and self humiliation as they attempt to restore ties with Iran. IRGC would never allow it. In that sense, US hopes on the outcome of the Iranian nuclear deal have been a waste. Aside from avoiding a messy military confrontation with Iran, US has gained nothing but ridicule from allies and opponents alike.

While Irans loathing of the US goes back to the removal of democratically elected Mossadegh.

Khomeni was not installed by the US but by the people of Iran. The Shah was forced to leave by people power( a popular uprising).
Khomenei and the US relations soured after the US would not give up the Shah. Iran retaliated by holding hostages trying to force the US to give the Shah up.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Khomenei and the US relations soured after the US would not give up the Shah. Iran retaliated by holding hostages trying to force the US to give the Shah up.

[MENTION=4505]Khostai[/MENTION] ....bahaha and you said they just got rid of him when they had no use for him

[Insight]

While Irans loathing of the US goes back to the removal of democratically elected Mossadegh.

Khomeni was not installed by the US but by the people of Iran. The Shah was forced to leave by people power( a popular uprising).
Khomenei and the US relations soured after the US would not give up the Shah. Iran retaliated by holding hostages trying to force the US to give the Shah up.

Yes, I agree. I should have elaborated that US thought they could get on Khomeini's good side so they started sending out indirect messages to restore ties if Khomeini respects US/UK oil interests.

Carter was instrumental in this. Post- revolution, even Reagan thought they could restore ties with Iran.

[Insight]

@Khostai ....bahaha and you said they just got rid of him when they had no use for him

Khostai was slightly right on the fact that US/UK were also getting upset with the Shah.

Someone can fact check it, but I think Shah was getting 51% and US/UK oil company (Anglo-Persian oil company NOW known as British Petroleum -BP) was getting 49%. However, they were purposely under reporting oil revenue so he was basically getting nothing, and BP was getting A LOT more.

Khomeini led them on as he kept saying yes, I will do this, yes I will respect the oil deals, and then once he landed in Tehran (he had been in Paris so to some extent he could have been detained), he told them to get lost.

And the rest is history

[khushal]

Khostai was slightly right on the fact that US/UK were also getting upset with the Shah.

Someone can fact check it, but I think Shah was getting 51% and US/UK oil company (Anglo-Persian oil company NOW known as British Petroleum -BP) was getting 49%. However, they were purposely under reporting oil revenue so he was basically getting nothing, and BP was getting A LOT more.

Khomeini led them on as he kept saying yes, I will do this, yes I will respect the oil deals, and then once he landed in Tehran (he had been in Paris so to some extent he could have been detained), he told them to get lost.

And the rest is history

There is no evidence of any agreement between the US/French and Khomeni. The US and the French both saw that the Shah was having trouble and was on his way out. The whole revolution was similar to the Egyptian revolution. It was started by young secular democrats and the US/French were under the impression that those forces were going to come out on top after the Shah. They erred and didnt realize that the "Islamists" were more numerous, organized, and sacrificed their blood for their cause. The same thing in Egypt. They thought the secular democrats would win but instead the brotherhood took more than 70% of the votes. The French allowed Khomeni to leave because they saw him as an old preacher who couldnt possible defeat secular forces in Iran.

What these people dont realize is that people in the middle East dont want secularism which is why Western Corps support corrupt dictators with big guns to prey on their people. If Karachi and Khostia wants to drink beer and have their women wear mini skirts, they should live and do it in the West. Leave the people that don't want such a lifestyle alone.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

If Karachi and Khostia wants to drink beer and have their women wear mini skirts, they should live and do it in the West. Leave the people that don't want such a lifestyle alone.

To be fair Khostai said he doesn't advocate or think miniskirts should be approved of, but he also believes that it's an individuals choice and should not impact anyone else.

What he fails to understand is that in Western Liberalist Social Theory that Imperial forces tried to export and implant abroad, that colonizers used these trends and behavior models as a way to affront standards of public decency, The French did this to Algerians, The British did this in India and the subcontinent, and Europe at large did this by influencing Afghan royalty through soft power. These was an instrument to attack the dignity of the people at large. This is not simply a personal choice but a statement about decency. Those who partake in it have compromised decency and parade it around. This will inevitably be judged.

In short he's blind sided and fails to make the connection between people's behavior and choices and their social and existential implications. It's not the clothes themselves, but what they signify.

This is why the People of Khost rebelled against Amanullah, why most Pashtuns shunned and reviled the royal families. and so on.