Now you're just giving me hope, ya big meany.

Where did you get that notion. Not from me.

Maybe we should have United Fruit dictate out policy in the middle east, since they did such a good job of winning friends in South America.

But once you get past dates and dried figs, the fruit orchards of the middle east are what...? Satire that's wide of the mark isn't much of a giggle.

I really like Middle Eastern food though. One of my favorite restaurants in St. Louis is Cafe Natasha, which serves Persian cuisine.

Back in the 70s the Shah of Iran asked the US for help making Iran nuclear capable. The US - or should I say Israel - said no. So Iran went to Russia. So the CIA had the Shah tossed out leading to the return of Islamic theocracy. Oops.

Today, less than 30 years later, Iran is both nuclear capable AND an Islamic theocracy. Double oops.

All that right on the heels of the miserable failure of our domino theory experiment in Vietnam.

And now, our experiment in Iraq.

I'm beginning to think that we need a constitutional amendment to put control of the military under the Senate. The office of the president apparently can't handle the power and has a child's understanding of world affairs.

And just to complete the thought, I don't doubt for an instant that Iran needs a regime change any more than I doubt that Sheryl Crowe needs an underwear change. The problem is a change to what? Or to whom? Its like everyone just pats themselves on the back for coming to the painfully obvious point that the wrong guy/people are in charge of Iran. Well any moron can see that. Who wants to take responsibility for the choice of the new regime when it goes horribly wrong. Again. And again.

Its almost sad to see Bush standing around with his thumb in his mouth trying to figure out exactly that question about Iraq.

How about the natives for a change?

Oh really? Where did you dig up this bit of conspiracy theory? The US, CIA, had the Shah tossed out? What so we could send a bunch of troops over to get the hostages we let them hold on to for 444 days? Hmmmmmm.....:cool:

Did the CIA plan to have those guys die in Desert One as well? Maybe Bush did it.

It was just bananas and a few pineapples we fucked over whole countries for. Your right, satire (it wasn't satire it was sarcasm) that's over your head, isn't much of a giggle for you.

And by whom? and to what purpose?

Regime change from below is hardly a new phenomenon on Iran. Just because the West didn't like the regime they chose for themselves, does not mean they didn't change their regime.

But Dana, you know if we don't ratify their choice it doesn't count.

Ach sorry, I had forgotten that.

Yes. In 1953 and again in 1978/9.

Do you think they boys over at Langley just sit on their ass eating jelly donuts all day? No, they are out there stirring up shit wherever they can.

Who was the National Security Adviser under Carter? Hint: A Soviet defector. When did British Petroleum's 1953 agreement to the rights to Iranian oil expire? Hint: It was a 25 year agreement.

I can't believe you even asked me that - its practically common knowledge at this point. Even the CIA won't deny its now well documented role in the 1953 coup that put the Shah in power in the first place.

And of course the CIA didn't anticipate the hostage crisis. As usual, they don't anticipate anything - they just "do." The consequences were left to the peanut brain in the White House at the time who, by admitting the Shah into the US, committed one of the biggest foreign policy blunders of the 20th Century - that probably more than anything led to the hostage crisis.

Here's a couple links that you might find interesting since you apparently think all the CIA does all day is go around the world sticking daisys in gun barrels.

The CIA in Iran
The CIA Manual for the 1953 overthrow
Excerpts from A Century of War - written by a German historian

An interesting ASS-You-Muption.... well stated... Bravo.

I will digest your "proof". Thanks.