7 votes

On Ron Paul, and the fallacy of isolationism...

This has been a work in progress but I think it now contains enough tidbits of historical information to paint a picture that few Americans know about or consider in their understanding of the Middle East and specifically our relationship with Iran.

As you will see, simply tossing off the troubles in Israel, and the rest of the Middle East, is hardly furthering of any real understanding about the paradigm now in evidence. Elementary statements and pseudo-informed world views like the old, "They've been fighting each other for thousands of years" meme does little to explain the current paradigm in the middle east nor address how it came to be. Most assuredly it does nothing to blaze a path out of the wilderness. Certainly, and as you will see, the blather over World Caliphates and the Islamo-facism takes on a rather different hue when, as Paul Harvey would say, "The rest of the Story" comes to light.

So, in an effort to provide a cut and paste resource, or now a link...I give you this latest edition of the 5 minute History rant of FedupExpression. Any additions, subtractions, corrections or grammatical edits are welcome.

1900 ...The age of coal ends, and the age of oil begins. England has been a major supplier of European Coal. Standard Oil and Royal Dutch Shell gain early control on the available reserves. Oil is discovered in Mid East and subsequent advancements in refinement and petro-chemistry make oil economically attractive as a cheap source of energy and a base for other products. England, wanting “in” begins searching for oil in Iran and discovers it in 1906. It enters into agreements to develop the Iranian fields and a joint company, the APOC Anglo-Persian Oil Company is formed.

1911...Germany, needing oil for its competitively evolving industrial production, and given its lack of previous century Imperial conquests with known oil reserves, enters into an agreement with Turkey (Otherwise known as the Ottomon Empire which had pretty much governed the Middle East) to extend the Orient Express (Berlin to Istanbul) to Bahgdad and the newly discovered oil of Iraq.

1913-14 Fearing further loss of economic competitiveness, England begins to stir turds with Russia over the circumstances and in order to engage existing treaties to help in their efforts to stymie German production and bring them into the fold. They then stir the turds with Serbian separatists in the Balkans and low and behold, Ferdinand is assassinated by a Serb Nationalist and Austria Hungary declares war on England’s ally Serbia. Fingers point at England as being culprits in the whole assassination thing. England in turn says “nuh huh” and points fingers back at the nasty Huns as liars and the “true instigators” of war. England then calls in all chits.

1914-1940...England deploys its first divisions...not in France...but to Basra, Iraq. It nabs hold of the oil fields and ensures its control over Iraqi oil thereby keeping it from the reach of the Ottoman's and Germans, while sitting in guard of their Iranian fields.

England, with a firm grip of the oil fields established, then proceeds to attempt to dismantle its competition in the vineyards of France thereby ensuring its perpetual control over the mid-eastern oil. Problem is, she and her allies aren't up to the effort and need help.

To believe in any way that the financial powers here, are any different then the financial powers of England, is ludicrous given the nature of capital and its magnetic pull back to its owners. Therefore our “owned” government can always be relied upon to manipulate the public into war when needed to enforce control. The Lusitania we now know was that false flag event...a sharing of Mid-East oil concessions the seemed compensation.

So the Red, White and Blue Klan jump into the fray to "save their freedom", Germany's government is slain and its people devastated to the point of starvation. The nation is impoverished and great demands are made against it, in reparations for their “War of Aggression”. The "Isolationists" (eyes roll) having the upper hand amidst such economic suffering, come in to finance its rebuilding, albeit with many concessions required. So the "isolationist" Brit capital and the "isolationist" American capital was used to re-build the industrial machine under new ownership/partnerships...much money was made...the financial elite smiled.

Poverty amongst the rank and file German is awful and the people clamor for succor. Hitler rises to power with "isolationist" financing arraigned through Brown Brothers Harriman and Prescott Bush (among other
American luminaries) and now, with funds, social programs are initiated and factories retooled for armament production. Somehow the financing and green lights are all there…provided by the “isolationists”. Now, with the new-fangled mechanisms of war existing in their midst, the financiers see (as if they hadn’t before) that much more money could be made if a good deal of the existing personal property of Europe could be systematically destroyed thereby providing a new playing field for the deployment of a coming debt-based fiat currency attached at the hip to oil...which the "isolationists" control.

In 1925, The Majlis appoints Reza Khan Pahlavi as "Shah" and as the parliamentary leader, he continues all oil agreements with England as it operates the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. However, Iran begins to see that they are being cheated for their oil and they begin to complain about the terms of the agreement which sees England enriched by Iranian oil at a 20 to 1 ratio in comparison to the Iranians.

As WWII begins, and given England’s usury, the Shah is increasingly non-compliant with England and will not allow for the deployment of troops in his country nor will he take sides in the war. England, unhappy with the Shah of Iran's "isolationist" tendencies to stay neutral during WWII, and given that he was less and less pliable to Anglo demands and wanting more for Iranian oil, then invades Iran...deposes the Shah and installs his more "friendly" son Mohammed Reza Pahlavi as leader. WWII ends with this paradigm intact.

Now Britain (and by extension Standard Oil/The United Sates) has complete military control over Iraqi and Iranian and Saudi oil (otherwise and popularly known as" The Mid-East"). And for as long as stability of the indigenous population can be kept from reaching fruition, this paradigm would remain. Balfour gave his declaration regarding support for a Jewish state in Palestine, and permanent instability was reached...or so they thought...

Lurking in the Majlis was a populist politician named Mohammed Mosedeq, a man of the people. Mossedeq, became hugely popular with the electorate, and in 1951 he was elected by the Majlis to the post of Prime Minister, effectively stepping on the shoulders of the Shah. Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, understanding his tenuous hold on office makes the appointment.

The new administration introduced a wide range of social reforms: Unemployment compensation was introduced, factory owners were ordered to pay benefits to sick and injured workers, and peasants were freed from forced labor in their landlords' estates. Twenty percent of the money landlords received in rent was placed in a fund to pay for development projects such as public baths, rural housing, and pest control.

On 1 May 1951, Mosaddeq nationalized the renamed AIOC Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, cancelling its oil concession due to expire in 1993 and expropriating its assets. They had had enough of Western robbery of their natural resources.

This angers "England" and they make a phone call to Washington. By 1953, the phone call ends in a CIA led coup, run out of the basement of the American Embassy in Tehran. (a little factoid that becomes known to every Iranian that must exist under the Iron Fist of Pahlavi for the next 25 years...just like the story of the Alamo is in the DNA of every Texan). Mossedeq is imprisoned, the Shah reinstated...but this time as total dictator. The oil assets are returned to Anglo control.

Over the the next 25 years, both England and the US provide training and "other support" to the Shah's brutal secret police force SAVAK, while pumping oil at vastly reduced costs and making vast friendships with the people of IRAN. Fast forward to 1979 and years of oppression by the Western-backed Shah and given a forced platform of "Westernization" we find a populous in flux who rise up in a cultural backlash and "just say no" to their daughter's dressing like Brittany Spears and all of the rest of the western influences that were invading their way of life, as well as saying no the murderous regime of Shah Reza Pahlavi.

They revolt and the Shah creeps away to be protected for his murderous crimes by his his benefactors in America. "Remembering their Alamo", and seeing that America was once again inserting itself in Iranian affairs, the "revolution" take steps to see that their new action won't be destroyed from the basement of the American Embassy while acting to get the black-heart culprit back in their clutches.

They take the embassy employees hostage and make three demands of the US. Return the Shah for Trial, admit and apologize for past meddling, and promise not to do it again. Neither was forth-coming. The hostages were released more than a year later, just in time to affect the American political environment while establishing a conduit for need arms to fight Iraq...another American puppet who...at someone's prodding...had invaded Iran...killing more than 1,000,000 of her sons and in the process, even using American supplied poison gas in combat before it was all over.

Ask yourself why you didn't know some of these tidbits of history. After all, you went to school right? You learned all about the first world war and Archduke Ferdinand...you may even remember the assassin's name...Gavrilo Princip. And you are SURE that "isolationism" is the world's greatest evil. All reasons for these conflicts are "Known" to you and they are always the conflict of good and evil...those who would come to destroy your way of life, or hate you for your freedoms.

While the above is a rambling contraction of a myriad of circumstances that doesn't even touch on the financing and arming of Lenin, understand...There has NEVER been anything in written history that remotely approaches a paradigm of "isolationism"...especially as it has been puked into your lap by the "winners" presenting their own seemingly more palatable version of history through their establishment and control of the American Historical Society. (See John Taylor Gatto and Norman Dodd). Please think about that when voting.

I recommend that everyone view Robert Pape's presentation of his Pentagon funded study on suicide terrorism. It is quite revealing if not down right surprising...although the past head of the CIA's Bin Laden Unit, Michael Scheuer, probably wouldn't be surprised.

Then, just to hammer the information home, rent Swayze and Sheen's "Red Dawn" for a proper perspective on the values of our current activities on behalf of "Interests".

Most importantly, if are an American, in support of our cerrent foreign policy, and you want my support for the continued meddling in the affairs of others, and if you truly believe that it is good and right to play the belligerent around the wotld, please answer this:

What "interests" do you currently have in the Middle East that would require that I sacrifice the life-blood of my son to protect them? Understanding that I love my son more than life itself, please understand that you will need your "A" game on this one as I will need to understand that the importance that you see, truly "is" worth more to me and others, than his life. Let's start with your top 4 reason's (interests) that would have you lay claim on my son's life...

Begin...

A.
B.
C.
D.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
sharkhearted's picture

This is brilliant. Thank you.

I am printing out and saving to read to my parents...who are "warming" to Dr. Paul. They like history and you have said it so well here. Thank you.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

You are welcome...

Interesting stuff when held up against your previous understandings as handed to you like garnishments on a poop platter by your American Historical Society Revisionists.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

Not bad.

I simply respond, "Contrary to popular opinion, the United States has been intervening in the affairs of other nations since the 19th Century. Admiral Perry opened Feudal Japan and US Marines were stationed in China. US gunboats patrolled waters in China and Latin America at least from the era of Teddy Roosevelt. Neville Chamberlain, an interventionist, appeased Hitler at Munich, which led to World War II. Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, two more interventionists, appeased Stalin, which led to the "Iron Curtain" and fall of Nationalist China. Interventionism led us into the United Nations and NATO and America has been fighting undeclared wars ever since. Interventionism led to the bloodiest Century in history and interventionism in the Middle East during the 21st Century could lead to World War III. So, what is so great about interventionism? Actually, interventionism is simply the mirror of isolationism, as both are the result of extreme nationalism. Non-interventionism, on the other hand, respects the sovereignty of other nations and the rule of law in dealing with other nations.

its its its its its

Please use the correct possessive form of "it": "its".

Also, "myriad" means 10,000, although that's been so broadly forgotten that it may not be worth caring about any more.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
What is begun in anger, ends in shame.

Done....

Eye fixed most of them rite their wear aye saw them. Sorry, I wrote that on a Sundae after saleing, so I mite have had two many biers. I usually come in two get a byte to eat, but the wind blue and eye was halfing sew much fun that I decided to keep saleing. I probably should of eight.

Didn't know about the 10,000!

myr·i·ad
   [mir-ee-uhd] Show IPA
noun
1.
a very great or indefinitely great number of persons or things.
2.
ten thousand.
adjective
3.
of an indefinitely great number; innumerable: the myriad stars of a summer night.
4.
having innumerable phases, aspects, variations, etc.: the myriad mind of Shakespeare.
5.
ten thousand.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

Very Helpful

Thanks...well done...