Why wasn't Iraq's regime overthrown earlier, before the eight years war of Iran and Iraq ? or even earlier ...
Why wasn't the king of Iran supported before the revolution of the current regime which lead to his fall and is a threat to the world.
2007-05-25 00:12:35 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
now is the outcome of the past.
2007-05-25 00:24:45 · update #1
Lot good answers here which I agree with, well not all the parts but most of it. Thanks.
2007-05-25 04:43:07 · update #2
These things exist or don't exist because at one time the economics of these governments favored the west. That is to say they existed as long as it made the west money when the third world rises up the west decides its time to put them back down again. Thats why we have a war right now. Thats what war is really about economic manipulation .....not just this war but all wars
2007-05-25 05:24:50 · answer #1 · answered by snoopy22564 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your question is a bit confusing. Every little incident in the past is responsible for current global events. Foresight sucks, and hindsight is 20/20.
The troubles with Iran and Vietnam were both the result of decisions made by the Eisenhower administration. But, the world was a much simpler place at that time. That was a time when 99% of the world still used horses and camels as the major transportation. The USA was the only high tech country in the world.
2007-05-25 07:40:41 · answer #2 · answered by Perplexed Bob 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
According to the history, we did support the Shah of Iran along with our two allies then, UK and West Germany. The Ayatollah Khomeini was in exile in France. And if you read the article from my source, it may answer your questions regarding how the current political administration in Iran came about....funny to see that they are labeled as 'conservatives'.
2007-05-31 12:32:04 · answer #3 · answered by Becca 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Shah of Iran was toppled because Carter chose not to support him. As a result, radical Islamists overthrew the Shah. Remember the name Ayatollah Khomeini? That was when the radical students took our embassy staff hostage.
Soon after that Iran and Iraq went to war with each other. A decision was made to support Iraq's effort to destroy the Ayatollah's regime since it would be in our interest.
One could make a very good argument that by not standing up to the radical Islamists, Carter set in motion the events that led to the situation as we see it today. You cannot just ignore terrorists. It enables them.
.
2007-05-25 07:42:22 · answer #4 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You can thank the Republicans for providing assistance to Saddam Hussein of Iraq in his wars against Iran. They provided the poisonous gas and weapons for it in an attempt to steal Iran's oil!
And you can blame the Republicans for installing the "Shah" of Iran - which all Iranians hated and finally deposed in their Islamic Revolution of Iran - which lead them to start calling America "The Great Satan"!
Bottom line is we can blame the Republicans for all of our problems in the Mid East!
2007-05-25 07:38:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because it suited the west to leave him in power to fight Iran. I agree it seems a bit late to grow a conscience by 2003. Or maybe there was another reason like securing the last remaining oil reserves.
2007-05-25 07:24:53 · answer #6 · answered by Wayne B Australia 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't understand your question. What was our involvement with that war and with Iran's king? What does that have to do with now?
2007-05-25 07:17:22 · answer #7 · answered by lvillejj 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋