The “Mosaddeq case” is far from discredited, as a recent BBC documentary which interviewed many of the the politicians who were active at the time has shown.

Look, when I mentioned the US, it wasn’t to try and remove blame from the current Iranian regime. Perhaps you (and dawood) are so used to Islamist commentators coming here and trying to do just that that you paint me with the same brush.

I mentioned the US because I saw things from the perspective of human rights abuses in Iran (perhaps because of my love of Iran and Iranian culture as it was before the Islamic revolution). It’s not that my brain is wired to think “America bad, all Islamic regimes good” (as some people who you meet here might think). But I think both America and the revolutionary guard have *independently* been the cause of much evil in Iran.

However, I now realise that the overriding perspective of Spittoon writers (and therefore of this particular article) is about crimes perpetrated specifically by Islamic regimes.

So, yes, I admit that my comment was out of place. More power to spittoon.

Whenever anyone disagrees with you, you claim that you have been misunderstood. If pressed, you then claim that X is somehow out to get you.

In the Arab world, there is a well-known proverb. To paraphrase: “I hit him, he hits me back and then I run crying to mum.” This is exactly your tactic whenever you are confronted with disagreement.

You raised the issue of it being all about oil, you raised the discredited views about Mossadeq and his regime. You were then taken to task on these, your views. This is called debate. You do not like people disagreeing with you, so you start your usual, and deeply tiresome round of “not being understood’ and then deliberately not understanding others yourself. This is dishonest and not debate. Hence my complete lack of interest in your attempts to falsely moderate this discussion because you do not feel you are getting the better of it.

In the past you attempted to smuggle in some less than useful pseudo-philosophical clap-trap to back up your claims. I did not agree with you. I take some interest in philosophy and I object to its abuse for polemical ends (it was once known as sophisty, that kind of thing) – rather as medics object to snake-oil salesmen on the pitch.

There’s an end to it, Abu Yusuf. My advice is don’t talk with people. After all, they might disagree with you.

Now – in the words of my less than saintly grandma – do one, chum.

Man dar farkash nest, dustani jani man.

I would put it to you that you are putting words into my mouth to prove me wrong either because of a previous disagreement (I would prefer to call it misunderstanding), or because you believe that everything I say must a priori be wrong, or for reasons known to yourself.

No. I think you have been wrong in almost everything you have written here. I do not think you have any especial agenda (other than a predilection for time-wasting and thinking yourself vastly important) and I am not personally aggreived by you – irritated, yes; aggrieved no.

I would get that paranoia under control, sunbeam. It makes you look silly.

You are still not getting my email address.

I would put it to you that you are putting words into my mouth to prove me wrong either because of a previous disagreement (I would prefer to call it misunderstanding), or because you believe that everything I say must a priori be wrong, or for reasons known to yourself. In any case, putting words into my mouth hardly leads to a useful discussion.

Perish the thought.

Stop playing games, it’s tiresome and makes you seem less than serious in your convictions.

the point here is the Azarmehr and Khorsandi’s brilliant protest against Galloway. I don’t want to divert the discussion away from that.

For the sake of (no) argument, yes you are right.

In the case of Iran (and Iraq – and for much of the very long history of these places they are more or less to be considered as hand-in-hand), there is clear evidence that oil did not motivate prior foreign interventions which were, if anything, still more frenzied and certainly as self-interested as any American involvement may be.

It is clearly not about oil, in part or whole. Iran and Iraq, even at peak production, are not the main sources of supply. One might wonder why the tanks are not presently rolling through Caracas were America so retentive about oil anywhere, of whatever quality and quantity.

Oil is a useful meme for people who either do not grasp the complexities of the situation in Western/Central Asia, or have anti-American axes to grind that are best sharpened by jumping on the latest political band-waggon.

dawood, no dilution was intended.

abu faris, yes you are free to think i am wrong. But what is it that I am wrong about?

friends, okay I think I’m beginning to get it. Sorry I mentioned America. Please resume normal services.

I said no such thing nor did I attack you. My point is, to ask why we have to dilute the criticism of the Islamic Republic’s repression of it’s own people by attributing part of the blame, if not all, to the USA. Is it because they are babes in the wood who can’t be held responsible because they they know not what they are doing?

We are allowed to think that you are wrong, you know.

yes the current iranian regime has a long list of abuses, which i deplore. They have laid waste to what little remained of iranian culture.

the original poster of this article is absolutely right to protest against this regime and I support him. I would love it for someone to ask Galloway, ‘How can you go on about police brutality in this country when you work for a regime whose police beat up, kill and rape peaceful protesters?’.

I don’t get it. Why do you think I support the current iranian regime?

Is it not possible any more to post here without being misunderstood and attacked?

Of course, it has absolutely nothing to do with Iran’s vital geopolitical position (nor any less that of neighbouring Iraq – the “Gate to the West” as she was once known) which has so detained foreign powers, local and distant since at least the time of Alexander.

No, not geopolitical realities! It was all about oil – which as any fool knows was vital to the smooth running of all ancient and more generally pre-industrial economies. {sarcasm OFF}

i didn’t say that US supports Ahmadinejad as clearly they don’t. I just said that the US destroyed democracy in Iran in 1953, and subsequently supported the dictatorial regime of the shah (for a while).

no offence taken.

Yes because the US are patrons of the Ahmadinejad regime now. Who knew?

abu faris, i’m not reducing to central and western asia or talking about afghanistan, but stating historical facts about iran and iraq

apologies for perceived snideness.