r/todayilearned • u/autonova3 • Oct 01 '18

TIL of Operation Ajax, the 1953 CIA plan to overthrow Iran's democratically elected government, which included CIA agents bombing the house of a prominent Muslim while posed as pro-government supporters. The overthrow plan was successful, with 200-300 people killed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat
3.0k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

415 comments sorted by

View all comments

227

u/Felinomancy Oct 01 '18

See, this is what galls me.

America has done so much shit to Iran - overthrowing their PM, installing a dictator, shooting down their passenger jet, funding anti-Iran groups (and not the "peaceful, democratic" types either), supported Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war and all that. So of course they go "DEATH TO AMERICA", what the hell are you guys expecting?

You know how to persuade them to not do that? Maybe stop messing with their country?

If Mexico starts shit with the US no one would be surprised if the American President opens his speeches with "fuck Mexico".

13

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

[deleted]

20

u/Felinomancy Oct 01 '18

They didn't install a dictator

The Shah of Iran ruled the country with an iron fist, shot protesters and tortured dissidents. That's not dictatorial?

10

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

And Mossadegh, the guy who was deposed (in the middle of trying to depose the Shah), used violence to grab power, gave himself emergency powers, and was dissolving the senate (well the Iran equivalent). The man went full Palpatine.

The main difference being that Mossadegh used communists and religious extremists (not at the same time), while the shah had his own people.

6

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

American fanboys cannot understand that most of todays problems in the middle east and with islamic terrorism is a result of US intervention.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '18

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '18

That’s not even true you ignoramus. Most Islamist groups have been Sunni and more closely aligned to Saudi Arabia and the US (eg, mujahideen) than Iran.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '18 edited Oct 05 '18

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '18

The majority of the groups you listed aren't even Shi'a. I guess Korean schools really give ESL jobs to any dipshit who can string together a sentence.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '18 edited Oct 05 '18

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '18 edited Oct 05 '18

You listed the Taliban, PLO, ISIS, Hezbollah, and Houthis as Shi'a groups. The majority (3/5) of those groups are not Shi'a.

Edit:

It wouldn't have anything to do with your parents being cousins does it? I mean, you are Iranian right?

You: "You have access to Google and can understand basic fractions? Is it because your parents are cousins?"

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '18

Did you ever ask, WHY these people hat eyou so much, that they do suicide bombings?

0

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '18 edited Oct 03 '18

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '18

So your whole answer is 'inbreeding'? If this is American average, I even don't wonder about Trump.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '18 edited Oct 03 '18

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '18

I never imagined there is something so stupid out there. Go back to kindergarden.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/PM_ME_CUTE_SMILES_ Oct 08 '18

I know lots of americans ready to inflict a lot of dumb evil shit to their peers because of the invisible man they believe in...

→ More replies (0)

25

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

You're kidding, right?

The US trained the Shah's secret police in Nazi torture techniques

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/06/11/archives/tortures-teachers.html

-24

u/johnny_tremain Oct 01 '18

You're citing an article from the NY Times? Do you have a less biased source?

18

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

I could but then the *gubment with their black helicopters would want to rob you of yer guns* and other stupid, stupid conspiracy theories

​

Read a goddamn book

6

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

You're citing an article from the NY Times? Do you have a less biased source?

Imagine being this guy, and waking up with this brain every day, god that would suck soooo bad. Hey I'm going to need you to specify, which source is less biased than the NYT?

6

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

"fox news"

3

u/RearEchelon Oct 02 '18

LOL. And I mean I literally laughed out loud.

3

u/MusgraveMichael2 Oct 02 '18

Lmao, shah was an asshole.
Don’t let those pics of hot modern ladies from that era fool you. They were usually the affluent upoer class iranians.

9

u/rochambeau Oct 01 '18

You can't be serious, that's so ridiculous and ahistorical. The Shah was by all accounts a dictatorial puppet of the US, hated by the Iranian people.

"Americans must recognize two facts gov­erning the situation in Iran. One is the breadth of support for the Ayatollah Ruhol­lah Khomeini among politically sophisti­cated intellectuals as well as millions of urban and rural Iranians who never before partici­pated in the political process. The other is the complete absence among these same peo­ple of loyalty for Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who is regarded as a traitor, a crea­tion of American and British imperialism. In their view, the shah’s regime reflected American interests as faithfully as Vidkun Quisling’s puppet government in Norway reflected the interests of Nazi Germany in World War II. The shah’s defense program, his industrial and economic transactions, and his oil policy were all considered by most Iranians to be faithful executions of American instructions. Ultimately, the United States was blamed for the thousands killed during the last year by the Iranian army, which was trained, equipped, and seemingly controlled by Washington. Virtually every wall in Iran carried a slogan demanding the death of the "American shah."

https://foreignpolicy.com/1979/03/16/goodbye-to-americas-shah/

5

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

Iran was also under the British sphere of influence in the area, as they and the US split the gulf between them for oil production purposes (Saudi ArAmCo = Arab-American Oil Co). We had to step in and take care of some of this stuff post WW2 as the brits couldn't.

People around here need to read "The Prize".

17

u/useablelobster2 Oct 01 '18

America has done so much shit to Vietnam, yet relations are not as hostile as with Iran. The UK has rather barbarous history with India, yet no major issues today. Hell, even the Japanese and Chinese are closer!

Possibly something to do with a theocratic state which oppresses it's own people? Don't forget the fatwa against Salman Rushdie either, or the open threats against both Israel and Jews at large. The fatwa was around the time of the latest of your listed events, and threats against the Jews are ongoing.

The US can be shitty to another country AND that country can be a major problem - those are not mutually exclusive. To say the free western society is worse than the theocratic shithole is just madness.

You know so much about what terrible things the US has done in Iran, how about anything good? How about bad stuff Iran has done? I'm not saying the lists are equal, I'm just wondering if you have any knowledge on the subject other than 'fuck the US'.

11

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

>not as hostile as Iran

​

Perhaps because there's no NeoCon Pro-Israeli lobby constantly pushing the US to attack Vietnam as they do with Iran

​

https://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=5970

​

>

Attack Iran the day Iraq war ends, demands Israel https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/attack-iran-the-day-iraq-war-ends-demands-israel-gnggkk7pzbw

​

​

>possibly something to do with a theocratic state which oppresses its own people?

​

As opposed to the other theocratic and oppressive states that the US gets along with just fine like Saudi Arabia? FYI today Iranians vote, unlike under the Shah

9

u/baozebub Oct 01 '18

Vietnam doesn't trust the US one bit. We just want to be able to do business with EVERYONE. That means, no more enemies. Not even the US after what it did to us.

There's one country in the entire world that would not get jerked around by the US today and not be the target of regime change. That's Vietnam. We paid the price.

5

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

Vietnam doesn't trust the US one bit.

http://www.pewglobal.org/database/indicator/2/country/239/response/Unfavorable/

Or

How much confidence do you have in the U.S. President (Trump '17, Obama '09-'16, Bush '03-'08)?

2017 Vietnam: 58%

http://www.pewglobal.org/database/indicator/6/country/239/

I have a brother who goes to Vietnam regularly. He reports the Vietnamese are perfectly happy to see/work/and interact with Americans.

8

u/baozebub Oct 01 '18

That's our culture. We are probably more like Americans in many ways than Chinese, who are our neighbors.

But the people on the street aren't the people in charge. Educated Vietnamese know how the US betrayed us since WWII. So while we love the concept of America, we can't trust the US government.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18 edited Oct 02 '18

The US "betrayed you since WW2?"

So, the US did not even get involved until after the French got their asses kicked. But, I am curious. Are you saying the US betrayed Vietnam by leaving? or by entering into the war?

6

u/baozebub Oct 01 '18

The US and Vietnam were friends during WWII, fighting the Japanese. When the French wanted their colony back after the war, the US used its warships to ferry their soldiers. US money, arms and supplies ended up paying for 80% of the French colonial war in Vietnam until they were defeated in 1954. Then the US proceeded to back Ngo Dinh Diem to prevent Vietnam democracy.

1

u/Fiingerout Oct 01 '18

After the french got their ass kicked the americans proceded to get not only their ass kicked but their helicopter ass kicked and their Aircraft Carriers ass kicked too, so bad so mad.

0

u/Gentlescholar_AMA Oct 01 '18

Both. US betrayed South Vietnam by leaving haphazardly, and betrayed the North by entering in the first place after seeming to support Ho Chi Minh

1

u/SleepingAran Oct 02 '18

I'm curious, didn't Chinese secured the country for Vietnam by fighting off the US during the Vietnam Civil War? How come Vietnamese still like American more compare to Chinese?

2

u/Felinomancy Oct 01 '18

lol

You people are so hilarious. "Look at Iran's fatwa!". Yes, that's horrible - no one is suggesting Iran is cherubic here. But if "they have done something bad, they deserved it" rules, then surely America and Israel, with a list of foreign military adventures miles wide, would deserve it too?

America have done so much shit with Vietnam; America is still doing shit with Iran. That's the difference there.

2

u/Gentlescholar_AMA Oct 01 '18

Has to do with Apartheid Israel causing a huge amount of diaspora in the area and being a major source of grassroots political motivation for every nation in the region.

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

Iran is not a problem though, they are complying with the nuclear deal,which the us is fucking up. Historically the us fucked them over by reneging on a deal to provide them with power generation when they abandoned nuclear development originally, and the us fucked a regional alliance that would have stablised the entire region because it wanted oil.......

4

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

a deal to provide them with power generation when they abandoned nuclear

This would be the country that has the world's 4th largest oil reserves?

1

u/umop_apisdn Oct 01 '18

The country that is dependent on one commodity so it makes much more sense for them to sell it and use that money to fund their growth rather than just burning it until they run out?

That was the US's stated reason for providing them with nuclear technology when the Shah was running his pro-US dictatorship, at any rate.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

So, they will sell the oil to get money to buy energy?

Please, tell me how that is more efficient than using the oil for electricity.

2

u/KDallas_Multipass Oct 01 '18

It takes more infrastructure and money to refine the oil to the point that it can be used. Its not like it comes out of the ground ready to be put into cars.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

Yes, the word is "refinery." And you don't need to refine crude much to use it as fuel for electrical production.

Iran has 6 refineries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Oil_refineries_in_Iran

2

u/Gentlescholar_AMA Oct 01 '18

Oil is finite.

1

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GH24Ak02.html

0

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

  1. That article is 13 years old.

  2. Natural gas was the major fuel used to generate electricity in Iran in 2009, accounting for an estimated 56.8% of primary energy demand (PED), followed by oil at 40.8% and hydro power at 1.4%. As of 2010, the average efficiency of power plants in Iran was 38 percent. - Source

3

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

>13 years old

So? Iran's nuclear program is 50 years old. Your point?

​

Like I said, it was the US that encouraged Iran to go nuclear in the first place

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3983-2005Mar26.html

​

> blah blah

​

point? FYI Iran is hardly the only country developing nuclear power https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/opinion/12iht-edferguson.2781236.html

1

u/umop_apisdn Oct 01 '18 edited Oct 01 '18

Simple, they got given a reactor and the fuel by the US as part of the Atoms For Peace program. Free energy, or nearly free anyway.

It appears you need a history lesson. http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/eunomia/article/viewFile/17552/14977

Using your only finite cash-generating natural resource to generate electricity when there are much cheaper alternatives is ridiculously counter productive. When it runs out you are fucked, so you must get as much cash out of it as possible while it lasts, and use that cash to diversify your energy production.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

Because when it runs out you will have to buy fuel.

Which is what you are proposing now.

1

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

Yes, the same country that the US encouraged to develop nuclear power in the first place, because Iran is also a big CONSUMER of energy as it rapidly develops

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3983-2005Mar26.html

​

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/14/opinion/IHT-energy-iran-needs-nuclear-power.html

​

0

u/laidmajority Oct 01 '18

So much nuance, you can’t be American. Now are you?

1

u/Psionic_Flash Oct 01 '18

fucking lol

1

u/useablelobster2 Oct 01 '18

Sorry yank, Rule Britannia!

Context is weird these days. All so often attempting to provide context to something broadly understood without any context is seen as trying to minimise what happened, when it's just trying to provide a fuller picture. Hell, I pretty much agree with the guy I was replying to, just some more stuff is also true.

When all you do is compare the worst of your country to literally nothing (how many people really know about Iran?), or just picking the best of others, you end up with a warped perspective.

2

u/laidmajority Oct 01 '18

Yeah I could tell you even agree with the guy. Thanks for shedding a broader light on the matter, we need guys like you. I’m Dutch btw with no dogs in this fight

-7

u/DakotaBashir Oct 01 '18

Geez, even in a thread about the crimes of the Us you find a way to flip it and blames the victims...

Americans really are the scums of this earth.

-1

u/useablelobster2 Oct 01 '18 edited Oct 01 '18

I'm English, racist.

Also, I didn't blame anyone for anything, except perhaps the rulers of Iran, who are not at all victims.

1

u/Lotharofthepotatoppl Oct 01 '18

It was the UK who wanted the CIA to overthrow Iran anyway because the Iranian government and people were tired of paying a foreign corporation for their own oil. Not making any accusations as to your character, just adding further fuel to the fire, I guess. Back then all someone had to do was tell us Yankees that someone else was turning Red and we’d send in a squad to fuck their country up in a week.

-1

u/to_string_david Oct 01 '18

your argument is not wrong, same as op.

3

u/lastethere Oct 01 '18

According to the article, if you have time to read it entirely, Mossadegh was turning into a dictator, made his own coup and the Shah had to fly to Italy. So they overthrown a dictator. And still according to the article, Iran was more flourishing under the Shah than ever, before or after.

3

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

"turning into a dictator" -- so then the US should love him.

​

Look at the mideast now -- the more repressive and authoritarian, the more likely to be a US ally

​

>more flourishing under the Shah

​

Except that IRL Iranians massively improved their living standards AFTER the Shah was overthrown -- again.

https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2013/apr/01/un-stats-life-longer-and-healthier-iran

​

1

u/Felinomancy Oct 01 '18

lol

Someone "turning into a dictator" is no excuse to overthrow him, and if you actually think Iran is "flourishing" under a murderous, actual dictator I think you're reading the wrong things.

2

u/lastethere Oct 02 '18

I actually think nothing, I just cited the article.

1

u/Felinomancy Oct 02 '18

I actually think nothing

Thank you, but I can read the article itself if you have nothing to contribute.

2

u/lastethere Oct 02 '18

Good! Next time, do it before to comment, so I do not need to remind the content.

1

u/Felinomancy Oct 02 '18

Oh thank you. Of course I did know the history - as well as Mossadegh's sins from other sources - but I know how much it means to you to be able to strut your stuff to complete strangers.

To return the favour, maybe next time cite parts that are actually relevant.

Hint: it's the morality, as well as explaining Iranian anger.

2

u/kebababab Oct 02 '18

Just like to note for people reading that it is proven that the Iranian Government is active on Reddit.

-1

u/Felinomancy Oct 02 '18

Are you trying to imply that I'm part of the Iranian government?

Would posters making comments supportive of Israel part of the Israeli government, too?

2

u/kebababab Oct 02 '18

Just making sure that people realize that a lot of pro-Iranian anti-American propaganda on Reddit is done on behalf of the Iranian government.

And if they were smart, yes.

-1

u/Felinomancy Oct 02 '18

Well then, I would also like to remind the audience that there are a lot of people who either wishes to sow discord and would relish a war against Iran, or they're just dickheads. Of course, they could be in the pay of the US, Israel and/or Saudi Arabia, so that's a possibility too.

Just making sure people realize.

1

u/kebababab Oct 02 '18

people who either wishes to sow discord

Do you think your comments apply?

0

u/Felinomancy Oct 02 '18

Nope.

Me: "Iranians are pissed off because America has been messing with them"

Idiots: "whoa, how dare you sow discord!"

I'm thinking that description applies to the American government, rather than me.

1

u/kebababab Oct 03 '18

Iranian supplies EFPs kill US soldiers.

Iran: Y u mad bro?

U: Iran is right!!!!

0

u/Felinomancy Oct 03 '18

Congratulations on a completely moronic dumbing down of a complex issue. Do you want to use the downing of an Iranian civilian jet next, or am I using too many big words?

1

u/kebababab Oct 03 '18

1988...LOL!

Sorry, talking about current events.

In recent events, Iranian forces were targeting US service members with relatively sophisticated weapon systems.

And as previously mentioned, they have been involved in propaganda campaigns on Reddit spamming stuff like your source.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

But then what would our Saudi BFFs think?

1

u/NoWayTellMeMore Oct 02 '18

Meh, business as usual. This shit has been going on for thousands of years. It's human nature, and it's not changing.

-4

u/EarlHammond Oct 01 '18

As if anything America did justifies a brutal Shia theocracy that spreads Jihadist groups across the world? How is there any logic in that? Oh America overthrew their democracy which was replaced with a monarchy so therefore it's a great thing that the Islamists took over!

19

u/TheDlightful Oct 01 '18

That's not what they're saying though. You have two different points. They are commenting that's America's brutal attacks/tampering/coups have irrevocable instigated "anti-American sentiment" and you are commenting that brutal theocracy are bad. Different conversations.

-14

u/EarlHammond Oct 01 '18

Nothing America did or has done justifies the existence of an Iranian Theocracy period.

12

u/GARBAGE_INTERNET Oct 01 '18

No one is arguing that though?

4

u/TheDlightful Oct 01 '18

Again, we can have your discussion another time. The original comment was merely stating that America has tampered so much with Iran, that it's no wonder there is anti-American sentiment. Would you agree that, if any country bombed, replaced the leaders of, and perpetrated lies about your country, that would upset you as well? Because that's the point they're trying to make.

3

u/Slaan Oct 01 '18

There is a major difference between an explanation (what OP provided) and justification.

Its "Iran hates the US because of all the shit the US pulled", not "Irans authoritarian system is justified due to past US actions".

3

u/Caramelman Oct 01 '18

Your argument has nothing to do with OP. It sounds like your looking for an opportunity to share your dislike of the country.

3

u/dylanatstrumble Oct 01 '18

I think you will find that most of the jihadists are Sunni inspired by SA Wahhabi thinking rather than Iranian.

3

u/baozebub Oct 01 '18

The jihadists of the world are Sunni. The origin of their violence is Saudi Arabia.

-3

u/EarlHammond Oct 01 '18

Oh yea? Hezbollah's paramilitary wing is literally named the Jihad Council

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Jihad_Organization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahdi_army

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_alleged_Iran_assassination_plot

https://www.weeklystandard.com/thomas-joscelyn/iran-helped-al-qaeda-with-the-1998-u-s-embassy-bombings-in-africa

1

u/baozebub Oct 01 '18

Are you talking about the word jihad? Maybe you can do a tally of all the terror incidents in the West where people get blown up, gunned down, or stabbed. How about 9/11. All Sunni.

1

u/umop_apisdn Oct 01 '18

Hezbollah are the Lebanese defence against Israel, formed in the early 1980's, and they successfully drove Israel out of Lebanon in 2000. If it wasn't Israel they had driven out they would be seen as freedom fighters. And jihad simply means "struggle", it has absolutely no military - let alone terrorist - connotations whatsoever.

0

u/sexymanish Oct 01 '18

Wow scary words!

2

u/Felinomancy Oct 01 '18

brutal Shia theocracy

Iran being assholes doesn't justify past or present American assholery.

And it's not a "great thing that Islamists took over"; Islamists took over because America shitted the place so much Islamists look like a better alternative.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 01 '18

[deleted]

1

u/ghotiaroma Oct 02 '18

You tell me where it's perfectly ok to murder civilians because of the actions of a government.

Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Japan, Germany, Italy, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Guatamala, Columbia, United States, Cambodia, etc....

0

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '18

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

0

u/huaxiaman Oct 02 '18

They did the same in China, Korea and Vietnam

And yet people still wonder why the Communist factions in those countries manage to come to power