The Barbary wars were started by the acts of unjustified aggression perpetrated by followers of Islam who used Islam to justify their actions, that is exactly the same as the current situation in which the U.S. was hit in an unprovoked act of war perpetrated by Islamic supremacists who used Islam to justify their actions.
Except that 9/11 wasn't "unprovoked."
Agent Ferris said:
The Barbary Pirates were the AQ of their time, you asserted that we have never had a problem with Islam, that it is we who have provoked them, this is a lie not only because we did nothing to bring this on ourselves but because they have been unjustifiably attacking the U.S. nearly since our founding.
Islam has been violent and expansionist since Mohammad perpetrated genocide and ethnic cleansing against the Jewish Banu tribes of the Arabian penninsula. Are you saying that after Mohammad that Islam suddenly became peaceful? When exactly did this peaceful Islam exist only for the evil west to bring the violence out of them? Why exactly do you blame the victim for the actions of the attacker?
I said we'd never been at war with Islam. We have had problems with Muslims in our history, as well as with Christians, Buddhists, atheists, etc.
Agent Ferris said:
Ya you are a historical newbie here aren't you? No matter how many times I have to smash down you revisionist historians it never gets old. Mossadeq was not elected, he was appointed by the Shah, upon being appointed by the Shah and ratified by the Majiles he proceeded to dissolve the Iranian Parliament through a fraudulent referendum and extend his emergency powers indefinately, it wasn't a coup against Mossadeq it was a counter coup by the Iranian Constitutional Monarchy.
Let's talk about the history of the democratic movement in Iran, a movement you say is incompatible with Islam. It started over 100 years ago with the Constitutional Revolution, which instituted democratic reforms based on Western governments. Mossadegh was a veteran of this revolution, the first of its kind in the Middle East. The next half-century was an ongoing struggle between the constitutionalists, who wanted to limit the power of the monarch, and the shahs, who wanted to turn the parliament into a rubber stamp. With the help of Britain and other outside forces, the shahs mostly kept the upper hand until the Majlis elected Mossadegh prime minister based on his broad popular support.
The US and Britain soon began working to undermine Mossadegh through bribery, incitement of violence, and false accusations that he was a communist. As a committed liberal, Mossadegh never curtailed freedom of the press even when it was spreading CIA propaganda. The Shah then tried to dismiss him without the consent of parliament, an action that was not only legally questionable but so contrary to popular opinion that he had to flee the country when it was discovered. It was only with the support of the American and British conspirators that he was able to return and establish a dictatorship, which became notorious for its human rights abuses and suppression of civil liberties.
Mossadegh, for his part, remains a hero of the Green Movement and a symbol of the Iranians' century-old struggle for democracy. To deny his role in the democratic movement is the real historical "revisionism." What's even worse is to deny Muslims' capacity for self-governance when a majority of Iranians are clearly working for exactly that. The mullahs don't represent their views, contrary to what you seem to believe.
Agent Ferris said:
I don't know that there is proof, but it seems
likely based on CIA communications, communications from the Turkish military to the State Department, and American troop movements preceeding the coup, among other things.
