US-Israel Attacks Iran

[snow66!]

Hello Snow. Thanks I see you have checked this all out. Good question - what went wrong between Iran and Israel, and from when?

We shall have to dig deeper, Roch!

[David1819]

Hello Snow. Thanks I see you have checked this all out. Good question - what went wrong between Iran and Israel, and from when?

It all depends on the political landscape.

Although the Iranians publicly deny it. When Saddam Hussein was around, Israel and Iran were clandestine allies with Israel being a major supplier of military equipment to Iran.

Remember when the whole region was united against ISIS? Russia, Assad, The US and Iran all allies with a common enemy?

Iranian and Israeli relations depend largely if their is some kind of boogeyman standing between them.

Needless to say its a very volatile region.

[snow66!]

We shall have to dig deeper, Roch!

OK, this is what it says, Roch....
Israel and Iran first fell out in 1979 following the Islamic[Iranian] revolution.
Before that the two countries had been close allies for decades, Iran was even among the first middle east countries to recognize Israel as a state in 1950.
The two countries maintained strong ties in the likes of trade, oil, intelligence, military cooperation, and technology, they had shared interests and were aligned with western powers during the cold war.
Israel even had an embassy in Tehran and there was direct flights between the two countries.
After the 1979 revolution in Iran all official diplomatic, economic and other ties with Israel were broken almost immediately. The Israeli embassy was closed in Tehran and handed over to the PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organization].
Iran immediately became anti-Israel and anti Zionist, describing Israel as an outpost of western imperialism.
And then in the mid 80's Iran started supporting Hezbollah in the Lebanon, etc,.
So, thats what it says, Roch!
Why the absolute turn around after the 1979 revolution???
Is the clue in the official description, 'ISLAMIC REVOLUTION'??
Anyway, as far as I can see nothing changed in Israel in 1979???
Seems to me the radical Theocratic regime which were voted in have certainly been to blame for most of the trouble since?
Seems clear to me, Iran waged war[for mainly religious reasons??? Partly so??] on Israel with terrorist groups within Israels neighbouring countries.
What do you think, Roch? Am I wrong?

[snow66!]

Lets look at it this way, if Israel and Iran had generally the same interests and outlook regarding technology., etc, why was there such a monumental shift after the change of regime in 1979?
Something that caused Iran to call for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth basically!
Surely the shift must have been down to religion, with the new regime being a radical Theocracy which took its guidance from the Koran, which obviously calls for the 'eradication' of every other religion bar Islam??
Again, the 1979 regime change is known as the 'ISLAMIC REVOLUTION'!!!
You certainly cant put the troubles between Israel and Iran down to oil anyway, can you?

[David1819]

Looks like the director of the FBI is under serious pressure

"Kash Patel’s colleagues are alarmed by what they describe as erratic behavior and excessive drinking—conduct that could cost him his job, Sarah Fitzpatrick reports.

She spoke with more than two dozen people who described Patel’s tenure as a management failure and his personal behavior as a national-security vulnerability. “They said the problems with his conduct go well beyond what has been previously known, and include both conspicuous inebriation and unexplained absences,” Fitzpatrick writes. “His behavior has often alarmed officials at the FBI and Department of Justice, even as he won support from the White House for his eager participation in Trump’s effort to turn federal law enforcement against the president’s perceived political enemies.”

Several officials said that Patel’s drinking has been a recurring source of concern across the government. They said he is known to drink to the point of obvious intoxication while in the presence of White House and other administration staff. Early in his tenure, meetings and briefings had to be rescheduled for later in the day as a result of his alcohol-fueled nights, six current and former officials and others familiar with Patel’s schedule said.

On multiple occasions in the past year, members of his security detail had difficulty waking Patel because he was seemingly intoxicated, according to information supplied to Justice Department and White House officials. A request for “breaching equipment”—normally used by SWAT and hostage-rescue teams to quickly gain entry into buildings—was made last year because Patel had been unreachable behind locked doors, according to multiple people familiar with the request.

The FBI responded with a statement, attributed to Patel: “Print it, all false, I’ll see you in court - bring your checkbook.”

“Some of Patel’s colleagues at the FBI worry that his personal behavior has become a threat to public safety,” Fitzpatrick continues. “Current and former officials told me that they have long worried about what would happen in the event of a domestic terrorist attack while Patel is in office, and they said that their apprehension has increased significantly in the weeks since Trump launched his military campaign against Iran. ‘That’s what keeps me up at night,’ one official told me.”"

[Roch]

The latest Iran Hegseth video is very amusing.

[gringo]

Lets look at it this way, if Israel and Iran had generally the same interests and outlook regarding technology., etc, why was there such a monumental shift after the change of regime in 1979?
Something that caused Iran to call for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth basically!
Surely the shift must have been down to religion, with the new regime being a radical Theocracy which took its guidance from the Koran, which obviously calls for the 'eradication' of every other religion bar Islam??
Again, the 1979 regime change is known as the 'ISLAMIC REVOLUTION'!!!
You certainly cant put the troubles between Israel and Iran down to oil anyway, can you?

    You should look at it this way to be more accurate, snow. The regime change in Iran was in 1953. In 1979 that regime was overthrown in a popular revolution. Iranians changed the regime in 1979 whereas UK/US did so in 1953. There is a huge difference between foreign interests overthrowing your government and the people overthrowing a dictatorial regime installed and acting in the interests of foreign powers. The Iranian regime under Shah Reza Pahlavi acted contrary to the interests of Iranian people. As previously pointed out, it was the Shah's secret police (Savak)who brutally repressed any opposition that ironically led to Islamists rather than Socialists leading the revolution. The main opposition were Socialists, not Islamists, so the Savak concentrated on destroying any remnant of organisation of the left.
     It is also something of an illogical leap of faith to claim that the fact that the Iranian revolution is called an "Islamic Revolution" somehow leads to the conclusion that the troubles aren't about oil. Earlier I gave you a brief history of the discovery of oil in Iran and the subsequent interference by the UK/US ever since. You have also recounted this yourself since on this thread. Does the fact that it was a "Socialist Government" that took over in 1951 means that the 1953 coup wasn't about oil also. Both governments (Mossadegh's socialist govt 1951, Khomenei's Islamic govt 1979) nationalised the entire oil and gas industry.
     The collective West is losing, snow. The mask is ripped off for the entire world to see now, and they do. Diplomatically, strategically and militarily. The propaganda war has been a disaster for the West. The majority of the world see Iran as standing up to the "Epstein Coalition". Terms such as the "Paedophile Army", "Baby killers" etc are commonplace. There is zero doubt that Iran, in world opinion, are seen as the "Righteous" standing up to the "Evil West". Even populations of those western countries involved in this criminal aggression against a sovereign state aren't supportive. The soft power of western propaganda was once their greatest tool, it is now a parody of itself and widely mocked.
     
     

[snow66!]

    You should look at it this way to be more accurate, snow. The regime change in Iran was in 1953. In 1979 that regime was overthrown in a popular revolution. Iranians changed the regime in 1979 whereas UK/US did so in 1953. There is a huge difference between foreign interests overthrowing your government and the people overthrowing a dictatorial regime installed and acting in the interests of foreign powers. The Iranian regime under Shah Reza Pahlavi acted contrary to the interests of Iranian people. As previously pointed out, it was the Shah's secret police (Savak)who brutally repressed any opposition that ironically led to Islamists rather than Socialists leading the revolution. The main opposition were Socialists, not Islamists, so the Savak concentrated on destroying any remnant of organisation of the left.
     It is also something of an illogical leap of faith to claim that the fact that the Iranian revolution is called an "Islamic Revolution" somehow leads to the conclusion that the troubles aren't about oil. Earlier I gave you a brief history of the discovery of oil in Iran and the subsequent interference by the UK/US ever since. You have also recounted this yourself since on this thread. Does the fact that it was a "Socialist Government" that took over in 1951 means that the 1953 coup wasn't about oil also. Both governments (Mossadegh's socialist govt 1951, Khomenei's Islamic govt 1979) nationalised the entire oil and gas industry.
     The collective West is losing, snow. The mask is ripped off for the entire world to see now, and they do. Diplomatically, strategically and militarily. The propaganda war has been a disaster for the West. The majority of the world see Iran as standing up to the "Epstein Coalition". Terms such as the "Paedophile Army", "Baby killers" etc are commonplace. There is zero doubt that Iran, in world opinion, are seen as the "Righteous" standing up to the "Evil West". Even populations of those western countries involved in this criminal aggression against a sovereign state aren't supportive. The soft power of western propaganda was once their greatest tool, it is now a parody of itself and widely mocked.
     
     

OK, thanks,gringo! I will digest all that you have said here and you're reply about Resolution181.

[gringo]

OK, this is what it says, Roch....
Israel and Iran first fell out in 1979 following the Islamic[Iranian] revolution.
Before that the two countries had been close allies for decades, Iran was even among the first middle east countries to recognize Israel as a state in 1950.
The two countries maintained strong ties in the likes of trade, oil, intelligence, military cooperation, and technology, they had shared interests and were aligned with western powers during the cold war.
Israel even had an embassy in Tehran and there was direct flights between the two countries.
After the 1979 revolution in Iran all official diplomatic, economic and other ties with Israel were broken almost immediately. The Israeli embassy was closed in Tehran and handed over to the PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organization].
Iran immediately became anti-Israel and anti Zionist, describing Israel as an outpost of western imperialism.
And then in the mid 80's Iran started supporting Hezbollah in the Lebanon, etc,.
So, thats what it says, Roch!
Why the absolute turn around after the 1979 revolution???
Is the clue in the official description, 'ISLAMIC REVOLUTION'??
Anyway, as far as I can see nothing changed in Israel in 1979???
Seems to me the radical Theocratic regime which were voted in have certainly been to blame for most of the trouble since?
Seems clear to me, Iran waged war[for mainly religious reasons??? Partly so??] on Israel with terrorist groups within Israels neighbouring countries.
What do you think, Roch? Am I wrong?

    You couldn't be more wrong, snow.

[David1819]

     Both governments (Mossadegh's socialist govt 1951, Khomenei's Islamic govt 1979) nationalised the entire oil and gas industry.
     

Iran's oil industry was nationalised in 1973 by the Shah (Six years before Khomenei's government)

https://www.nytimes.com/1973/03/21/archives/iran-formally-nationalizes-her-oil-industry-shah-says.html

https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/politics-and-government/iran-announces-nationalization-foreign-oil-interests

Its difficult to take you seriously when you get such basic historic info wrong.

[gringo]

Lets look at it this way, if Israel and Iran had generally the same interests and outlook regarding technology., etc, why was there such a monumental shift after the change of regime in 1979?
Something that caused Iran to call for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth basically!
Surely the shift must have been down to religion, with the new regime being a radical Theocracy which took its guidance from the Koran, which obviously calls for the 'eradication' of every other religion bar Islam??
Again, the 1979 regime change is known as the 'ISLAMIC REVOLUTION'!!!
You certainly cant put the troubles between Israel and Iran down to oil anyway, can you?

   So far in this wholly unprovoked war against Iran, the US and Israel have deliberately triple tapped a girl's school killing 168+, assassinated the Ayatollah, assassinated negotiators during negotiations, deliberately targeted schools and hospitals and today the US navy fired on a merchant ship in international water and pirated it.
     What makes you believe the duplicitous, baby murdering pirate coalition are on the side of righteousness here, snow? Before Trump was first elected he famously said, "I could shoot someone and I wouldn't lose any voters". That sentiment perfectly describes those still defending the crimes of Empire. Deliberate murder of schoolgirls and still there are those who defend these crimes or, even worse, blame the victims.
     
     

[gringo]

   
     The timeline clearly shows that western intent has always been to control Iran for its natural wealth and strategic location controlling Hormuz. Why else did the US/UK coup Mossadegh? It was because he nationalised Iran's gas and oil industry. This isn't disputed by anybody. What makes you think the motive is any different this time? Why do you think the US and allies encouraged and armed Saddam Hussein's Iraq, including with chemical weapons,

Iran's oil industry was nationalised in 1973 by the Shah (Six years before Khomenei's government)

https://www.nytimes.com/1973/03/21/archives/iran-formally-nationalizes-her-oil-industry-shah-says.html

https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/politics-and-government/iran-announces-nationalization-foreign-oil-interests

Its difficult to take you seriously when you get such basic historic info wrong.

? Do none of these facts come up in your analysis? They just don't mention it in the rags and bullshit that you read, do they Steve? So you consider it propaganda because it wasn't on the BBC or in the Express.
   
   

    "Why do you think the US and allies encouraged and armed Saddam Hussein's Iraq, including with chemical weapons, in 1980 immediately after the overthrowing of the Shah and full re-nationalision, again, of the oil and gas industry? Do none of these facts come up in your analysis? They just don't mention it in the rags and bullshit that you read, do they Steve?"
   Are you claiming that the Shah "fully" re-nationalised the Oil and Gas industry? The arrangement that the Shah made was to simply make more of a cut and was in no way a full re-nationalisation. It is not disputed by anyone serious that the Ayatollah "fully re-nationalised" Iran's oil and gas industry.

"In 1954, the AIOC became British Petroleum. The return of the shah had not meant that British Petroleum was able to monopolise Iranian oil as before. Under pressure from United States, British Petroleum reluctantly accepted membership in a consortium of companies, founded in October 1954, to bring back Iranian oil to the international market. It was incorporated in London as a holding company called Iranian Oil Participants (IOP).[16][17] The founding members of IOP included British Petroleum (40%), Gulf (later Chevron, 8%), Royal Dutch Shell (14%), and Compagnie Française des Pétroles (later Total, 6%). The four Aramco partners – Standard Oil of California (SoCal, later Chevron) – Standard Oil of New Jersey (later Exxon, then ExxonMobil) – Standard Oil Co. of New York (later Mobil, then ExxonMobil) – Texaco (later Chevron) – each held an 8% stake in the holding company.[8][16]

All IOP members acknowledged that NIOC owned the oil and facilities in Iran, and IOP's role was to operate and manage them on behalf of NIOC. To facilitate that, IOP established two operating entities incorporated in the Netherlands, and both were delegated to NIOC.[16][17] Similar to the Saudi-Aramco "50/50" agreement of 1950,[18] the IOP consortium agreed to share profits on a 50–50 basis with Iran, "but not to open its books to Iranian auditors or to allow Iranians onto its board of directors".[19] The negotiations leading to the creation of the consortium, during 1954–55, were considered a feat of skillful diplomacy.[8]

In Iran, IOP continued to operate until the Islamic Revolution in 1979. The new regime of Ayatollah Khomeini confiscated all of the company's assets in Iran. According to the IOP's Web site: The victory of the Islamic revolution annulled the Consortium Agreement of 1954 and all regulations pertaining to it. The revolution led to the withdrawal or expulsion of virtually all foreign employees from the oil industry with the new Iranian government assuming full control of its affairs.[20]
"
     

[snow66!]

? Do none of these facts come up in your analysis? They just don't mention it in the rags and bullshit that you read, do they Steve? So you consider it propaganda because it wasn't on the BBC or in the Express.
   
   
    "Why do you think the US and allies encouraged and armed Saddam Hussein's Iraq, including with chemical weapons, in 1980 immediately after the overthrowing of the Shah and full re-nationalision, again, of the oil and gas industry? Do none of these facts come up in your analysis? They just don't mention it in the rags and bullshit that you read, do they Steve?"
   Are you claiming that the Shah "fully" re-nationalised the Oil and Gas industry? The arrangement that the Shah made was to simply make more of a cut and was in no way a full re-nationalisation. It is not disputed by anyone serious that the Ayatollah "fully re-nationalised" Iran's oil and gas industry.

"In 1954, the AIOC became British Petroleum. The return of the shah had not meant that British Petroleum was able to monopolise Iranian oil as before. Under pressure from United States, British Petroleum reluctantly accepted membership in a consortium of companies, founded in October 1954, to bring back Iranian oil to the international market. It was incorporated in London as a holding company called Iranian Oil Participants (IOP).[16][17] The founding members of IOP included British Petroleum (40%), Gulf (later Chevron, 8%), Royal Dutch Shell (14%), and Compagnie Française des Pétroles (later Total, 6%). The four Aramco partners – Standard Oil of California (SoCal, later Chevron) – Standard Oil of New Jersey (later Exxon, then ExxonMobil) – Standard Oil Co. of New York (later Mobil, then ExxonMobil) – Texaco (later Chevron) – each held an 8% stake in the holding company.[8][16]

All IOP members acknowledged that NIOC owned the oil and facilities in Iran, and IOP's role was to operate and manage them on behalf of NIOC. To facilitate that, IOP established two operating entities incorporated in the Netherlands, and both were delegated to NIOC.[16][17] Similar to the Saudi-Aramco "50/50" agreement of 1950,[18] the IOP consortium agreed to share profits on a 50–50 basis with Iran, "but not to open its books to Iranian auditors or to allow Iranians onto its board of directors".[19] The negotiations leading to the creation of the consortium, during 1954–55, were considered a feat of skillful diplomacy.[8]

In Iran, IOP continued to operate until the Islamic Revolution in 1979. The new regime of Ayatollah Khomeini confiscated all of the company's assets in Iran. According to the IOP's Web site: The victory of the Islamic revolution annulled the Consortium Agreement of 1954 and all regulations pertaining to it. The revolution led to the withdrawal or expulsion of virtually all foreign employees from the oil industry with the new Iranian government assuming full control of its affairs.[20]
"
   

Thanks, gringo!
So what do you think Trump actually wants out of the war?

[David1819]

   
    "Why do you think the US and allies encouraged and armed Saddam Hussein's Iraq, including with chemical weapons, in 1980 immediately after the overthrowing of the Shah and full re-nationalision, again, of the oil and gas industry? Do none of these facts come up in your analysis?
   

Those "facts" don't come up in my analysis simply because they are not facts.

The vast majority of weapons supplied to Iraq during the Iraq/Iran war came from the Soviet Union - Fact.

Moreover

"The Iraq Petroleum Company (IPC) was a Western-dominated consortium (involving British, French, Dutch, and American interests) that had controlled Iraqi oil since the 1920s. On 1 June 1972, the Iraqi government — under President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, with Saddam Hussein as the powerful Vice-Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council — nationalised the IPC. Saddam was the driving force behind the decision and is widely credited as its architect. Iraq signed a Soviet-Iraqi Treaty of Friendship in 1972, cementing the relationship."

So according to you, the US thought they would privatise Iranian oil by letting an Arab Ba'athist Socialist (armed by the USSR) control the Iranian oil fields?

🤡

[gringo]

Thanks, gringo!
So what do you think Trump actually wants out of the war?

   The goal of Empire is to maintain control of oil trade as it has been since the tying of the dollar to oil sales in 1974 after the "oil shock" and the break down of the post war "Bretton Woods Gold Standard". Controlling reserve currency status and maintaining control of maritime trade routes has been the raison d'etre of all US and Empire governments always. Whether Trump or any other President, retaking control of Iran has been a long term US/Empire policy throughout. There are countless think tank papers and statements by US politicians over the years that makes this perfectly clear. Protection of Israel is also part of this same reasoning. Israel is Empire's "pit bull" in the Middle East.
      NATO and the US military are the "Enforcer" of this system. It is why Libya and Iraq were invaded which everyone now understands. Likewise Syria. Only the wilfully blind still believe the fairy tales of US/NATO spreading democracy and protecting human rights. The goals of Empire are in front of us all, snow, and don't really require explaining. Follow their actions, not the lying words they use to justify their latest crime against humanity. When you follow just the actions of Empire, the goals are crystal clear, snow.
      The day will come very soon when everyone will claim to have always opposed Empire and its crimes.