What is Reddit's opinion of
Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
By popularity on Reddit, this product is:
21 reviews of this product found across Reddit:
You're full of opinions with no basis and I have better things to do that teach you
You didn't read the book -- it discusses why the Israelis (and Saudis) fear Iran: it has nothing to do with Persian v Arab, Sunni v Shia, Muslim v Jew, it is because the Israeli and Saudis see the chance of US-Iran detente as coming at their expense
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
Now don't bother me if you cna't be bothered Therefore we have nothing to discuss
He's hardly the only one that says that the prospect of the US and Iran getting along threatens the Israelis and the Saudis which is why they're pushing for a US war on Iran -- this award-winning book is all about that
Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
And everybody is entitled to their opinion. Just because you didn't know something or don't agree with it, doesn't make it a "conspiracy"
>Fuck Iraq.
Fuck you lol
> And isn't Israel an extension of the west, at least to some extent? They rely heavily on its support.
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
The US and Israel were on opposite sides during the Iran-Iraq War. Secondly people conflate the "Israel Lobby" like AIPAC or Israelis in the former PNAC with the literal Israel lobby that is the Israeli government pressuring America. Both have the same agenda but they're not one and the same.
The idea that the US and Israel shares the same FP is over-exaggerated. They collaborate with equal say.
For example the CIA backed Nasser against the tripartate (France, UK and Israel)
>composed ISIS is anything more than the endless cycle spun from decades of occidental imperialist violence.
Ah yes, blame the victim. Those civilians had it coming.
>against the group that primarily composed ISIS
Now you're being outright racist. Targeting Sunni Arabs is okay because ISIS is Sunni. Also convenient how you ignore 3 of ISIS's head command are Turkmen and Chechen. But all Sunnis are the same to you so it's okay to generalize and racial a pan-Islamic group.
Actually you're wrong -- it was specifically Shimon Peres, and the reason was that Israel was feeling threatened by the idea of the US and Iran ever getting along. I suggest you read:
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
>radical religious conservatives at home.
The same could be said about Israel - lets remember it wasn't a Palestinian who assassinated Rabin but an Israeli opposed to peace talks with the Palestinians (the assassin is treated as a hero in some corners of Israel https://www.haaretz.com/1.4995281 )
Also, in 2003 Iran sought to use the Iraq invasion as an opportunity to improve US-Iran relations. Iran's offer to make peace with Israel was spurned, in favor of imposing regime-change in Iran instead as Iran was labeled a member of the "Axis of Evil"
>The document lists a series of Iranian aims for the talks, such as ending sanctions, full access to peaceful nuclear technology and a recognition of its "legitimate security interests." Iran agreed to put a series of U.S. aims on the agenda, including full cooperation on nuclear safeguards, "decisive action" against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, ending "material support" for Palestinian militias and accepting the Saudi initiative for a two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The document also laid out an agenda for negotiations, with possible steps to be achieved at a first meeting and the development of negotiating road maps on disarmament, terrorism and economic cooperation.
ttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700727.html
The idea that Iran was implacably opposed to Israel is a myth https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117/
>Israel's support
Actually during the Iran-Iraq War, any support Israel provided to Iran (as part of the Iran Contra deal really) was intended only to further drag out the war and Israel offered support to Iraq too -- however Tariq Aziz absolutely refused to communicate the offer to Saddam. This was confirmed by the Teicher Affidavit
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq61.pdf
The idea that Iran is implacably opposed to Israel is not supported by the actual evidence and scholarship.
Iran offered to sign onto the Arab Peace Initiative of 2003 and was spurned.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700727.html
It was actually the Likud in Israel that turned Iran into an enemy, because they considered the chance of improved US-Iran relations as a strategic threat to them in a post-Cold War world https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117/
>Israel's main focus is security, not regional dominance.
This is an assertion without support. And highly debatable.
> As recent events shown, Israel is perfectly capable of putting aside long standing animosities
Actualy as the Israeli "New Historians" have documented, since its inception, Israel has repeatedly disregarded Arab peace offers in favor of the status-quo of continual settlement expansion
>In another pioneering book, Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, published in 2001, Morris challenged Israel’s deeply embedded and idealized patriotic narrative on a broader scale. This big book challenged the mainstream Zionist view that Israel has always been a peace-loving victim of the Arabs. It made a persuasive case that Israel must share blame with the Arabs for the failure to make peace, having rejected various opportunities for compromise over the years. https://www.mepc.org/birth-palestinian-refugee-problem-revisited
And...
> if a country recognizes its right for existence.
Which is code for not recognising the right of the Palestinians to exist. After all, who is living in refugee camps and who in settlements?
Lets also remember it wasnt a Palestinain who murdered Rabin but an Israeli.
Oh and Iran's expansion of influence is not attributable to the Arab Spring but to the mess created in Iraq; this talking point that it has something to do with the Arab Spring is widely asserted by people trying to distract from the mess they created by cheerleading the Iraq invasion. In fact the US supported the Arab spring and at the time the belief was that it would lead to toppling the regime in Iran too. But this scared the be-jesus out of the very same regimes you're citing having made peace with Israel, most of which are also oppressive dictatorships ruled by illegitimate nonegenarian kleptocrats and "Presidents for Life".
This is what US Sec of State Rice said in Egypt:
> For 60 years, my country, the United States, pursued stability at the expense of democracy in this region here in the Middle East -- and we achieved neither. Now, we are taking a different course. We are supporting the democratic aspirations of all people. https://2001-2009.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/48328.htm
Later, the US backed Sisi in Egypt as be committed the biggest mass killing of peaceful demonstrators in a single day: The Rabaa Massacre
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/08/arab-spring-rabaa-massacre/536847/
​
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jun/21/iraq.syria
​
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
​
This book also goes in to more detail
​
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fateful_Triangle
This one (updated version)
​
https://chomsky.info/fateful02/
​
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/israel-turkey-and-the-kurds
​
​
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/turkey-between-paranoia-and-prosperity
​
https://www.meforum.org/394/the-remarkable-turkish-israeli-tie
​
It really doesn't matter what their personal opinions are, the fact is that the fundamental legitimacy of the House of Saud rests on religious grounds and the acquiescence of Wahhabist clerics
>Anti Americanism is basically their state ideology.
Nope. Actually the Iranians repeatedly tried to reach a peace with the US that the NeoCons Israelis opposed and undermined, which only hurt US interests in the end. This was the case for example over the nuclear issue:
>In 2005, Iran offered a deal. We rejected it, refused to talk to Iran directly, and doubled down on sanctions. Ten years later, we settled for much less than what was originally offered.
https://chasfreeman.net/lessons-from-americas-continuing-misadventures-in-the-middle-east/
>While Iran is extremely dogmatic
No, sorry, actually Iran is far more flexible and it was Israel that decided to turn up the conflict with Iran because after the Cold War, Israel was threatened by the liklihood of improved US-Iran ties.
This book is all about that : https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
Anyway why is accepting Israel a sign of "pragmatism"? Iran also backed Nelson Mandela while the US had labeled him a "terrorist" and while Israel was trying to sell nukes to the racists apartheid pariah regime in S Africa https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons
>non-rational
Lets see, that "non-rational" country of Iran was attacked by US-backed chemical weapons provided to Saddam Hussein, that resulted in 100,000 casualties -- how many 9/11s is that
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/17/opinion/IHT-halabja-america-didnt-seem-to-mind-poison-gas.html
And that "non-rational" government had every legal right to resort to chemical weapons of its own in self-defense...but refused to do so on moral grounds and accepted the casualties https://web.archive.org/web/20030102224708/http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/programs/dc/briefs/030701.htm
That "non rational" government also warned Bush that invading Iraq was a bad idea https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jul/24/iraq.iran
But Bush decided to listen to the Israelis instead https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/1404673/Sharon-urges-America-to-bring-down-Saddam.html
So who is "non-rational" and "dogmatic"?
this is the dumbest shit I've ever seen. The US is hostile to Syria because of joint GCC-Israeli lobbying to counter the "Shi'a Crescent".
It's not Assad, it's Iran and Hezbollah they're after.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clean_Break:_A_New_Strategy_for_Securing_the_Realm
All of this monsanto, central banking crap is fiction. The US's policy since the 80s was for to remove Syria from Iran's sphere of influence and to bring stability to lebanon. The US had on and off relation with Hafez and Bashar.
Then Bush added Iran to the Axis of Evil, after collaborating with Iran in Herat, and Syria went into the defensive which only stoked hostility .
TL:DR: It was the Israel lobby
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374531501
Israel openly armed Iran against Saddam.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%27s_role_in_the_Iran–Iraq_war
The CIA broke relations with Iran, Mossad did not.
According to David Menashri of Tel Aviv University, a leading expert on Iran:
>"Throughout the 1980s, no one in Israel said anything about an Iranian threat - the word wasn't even uttered."
and
>“Iran is Israel's best friend and we do not intend to change our position in relation to Tehran, because Khomeini's regime will not last forever.”
-Yitzach Shamir, 1987
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
Trita Parsi is reviled by neocons, just so you know.
>You've done the same thing here as you did on the Iranian sub; 'Israel took a side'. No, my smart friend, far-right government in Israel taking inspiration from the Yinon Plan did not take a side. They wished to ensure that both countries bled each other out seeing as they were both a target for regime change.
The Yinon Plan was created because of the threat Saddam posed. Sharon viewed Saddam as enemy #1. Israel tried to kill him three times. They tried it in the 70s while they were aiding the PUK and KDP against him, during Bramble Bush in 1992 and Bramble Bush II in 1999
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bramble_Bush
https://www.afio.com/sections/wins/1999/notes0599.html
https://www.timesofisrael.com/mossad-tried-to-kill-saddam-in-the-1970s-new-documentary-reveals/
The Northern Alliance (Islamic State of Afghanistan) and Hezbi Islami Gulbuddin were both Iran and Russia backed to fight the Taliban.
The NA contained the former Shi'a mujahideen Iran aided to fight the Soviets and Iran also gravitated to Hekmatyar in an effort to have cross-sectarian foothold in the area.
The rest of the NA were warlords who fought alongside the Soviets and some Peshawar 7 elements like Ahmad Shah Massoud, Abdul Rasul Sayyaf and Rabbani. These two were supported by the US, KSA and Pakistan during the Soviet War.
The other half of the groups the US, Pakistan and KSA backed were Hezbi Islami Khalis and Jalaluddin Haqqani Sr. These guys ended up becoming the Taliban. The US also had a brief stint with Hekmatyar but dumped him since he spent most of his efforts targeting Massoud instead of the Soviets.
So when the Soviets pulled out and Najibullah was later hung, Pakistan and KSA aided Hekmatyar and Sayyaf. They gravitated to them for their pro-Kashmir stance and anti-shi'ism to keep Iranian influence at bay. As the Taliban gained steam, KSA and Pakistan both switched sides and backed the Taliban. This switch pushed Hekmatayr into Iran until 9/11 when they kicked him out. Tajikistan was the other country to recognize the Taliban government, not out of ideology but because they were having a civil war and thought if they made peace with the Taliban, the Taliban would not aid the jihadists in Tajikistan. The Pakistani aid to the Taliban then brought India into the mix who worked with Iran and Russia to fight the Northern Alliance.
All the while, AQ was forced out of Sudan after Clinton bombed them and OBL took root in the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, Taliban's "government". Around this time the Taliban were not yet considered a terrorist group. They were reviled but Clinton like how they cut down on opium and kept Iran at bay.
Anyway, 9/11 happened, the US invaded and Iran who was already in Afghanistan and had been worked with NATO to kick the Taliban out of Herat. This was 50% enemy of my enemy, 50% Khatami trying to make peace with Bush.
Then in 2002, Bush made his famous Axis of Evil speech and things went sour. Still, Iran was not an enemy. The Iranians would covertly via Islamic Dawa, SCIRI, and Chalabi help bush overthrow Saddam.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9809/15/iran.afghan.tensions.02/index.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_Civil_War_(1992–96)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Emirate_of_Afghanistan
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
Actually Iran and Israel quietly cooperated when it suited them, it was only later that Israel and Sharon saw a threat in the US and Iran starting to get along (because it would make Israel a third wheel - what use is Israel especially in a post-Cold War era?) so started pushing for regime change instead. This book is all about that:
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117/
Israel has been pushing for a US war on Iran just as it pushed for the war on Iraq
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-prodding-us-to-attack-iran/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-to-us-dont-delay-iraq-attack/
http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=5970
According to some the Israelis even blackmailed the US into invading Iraq https://www.juancole.com/2012/06/campbell-israeli-pm-sharon-threatened-bush-with-nuking-iraq-mearsheimber-walt-vindicated.html
They demanded that the US attack Iran "the day after Iraq" https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/attack-iran-the-day-iraq-war-ends-demands-israel-gnggkk7pzbw
Of course later on the Israelis claimed not to have pushed for the war https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3444393,00.html
And Rumsfeld denied that he had ever claimed Iraq had WMDs http://www.seattlepi.com/national/article/Rumsfeld-denies-making-claims-Iraq-had-WMDs-1202942.php
And Cheney denied connecting 9/11 to Saddam http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/01/cheney.speech/
Of course, we all know better. LOL
It was the Israelis who sought to portray Iran is an implacable threat because they wanted to prevent the US and Iran from getting along
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
Netanyahu exaggerates the "Iranian threat" because it distracts from his political problems at home
Because if the US and Iran get along, then who needs Israel?
This book is all about that: https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
This book is also great reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Israel_Lobby_and_U.S._Foreign_Policy
See, back when Nixon decided to "Go to China" and recognize the Communist Chinese regime, the US dumped Taiwan (the non-Communist Chinese had established a govt there after the Communist revolution in mainland China, and until the 1970s the US officially only recognized them as "China")
Israel doesn't want to be another Taiwan. That's why the pro-Israeli lobby has been pushing hard to start another US war in the Mideast, as they did with Iraq, using the "Iranian nukes" pretext just like how they pushed the "Iraqi WMDs" pretext as a justification for imposng regime-change there
>CBS News - Israel to US: Don't delay Iraq attack http://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-to-us-dont-delay-iraq-attack/
>CBS News - Israel prodding US to attack Iran http://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-prodding-us-to-attack-iran/
>A shockingly awful public relations campaign is underway for yet another war. http://www.uscatholic.org/culture/war-and-peace/2008/06/iran-spam
Iranian nukes" are just a pretext, just as "WMDsin Iraq" was just a lie and pretext. Paul Pillar explains why Israel sees Iran as a competitor http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/the-real-subject-netanyahus-congressional-spectacle-it-isnt-12337
Israel wants the US to go to war against Iran for it, or at least to make sure the two don't get along, because then Israel would not be as important if they do get along.
Here is an award-winning book explaining precisely that: http://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
So, pro-Israeli lobbyists have been active for quite a while in the US to push their agenda to start a US-Iran war, :
http://www.uscatholic.org/culture/war-and-peace/2008/06/iran-spam
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-prodding-us-to-attack-iran/
just as they pushed for the US invasion of Iraq
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-to-us-dont-delay-iraq-attack/
Remember, when the US decided to recognize Communist China, the non-Communist Taiwanese -- who until then were considered the legal govt of China by some -- were kicked to the curb. Many American foreign policy experts believe that in dealing with Iran, the US should "go to China" as President Nixon did by recognising and accepting Iran as a reality http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/if-nixon-can-go-to-china-20130303
But Israel doesn't want to be a third wheel. Iran has 80 million potential consumers of US goods and services as well as a growing well-educated middle class -- while Israel keeps getting the US into trouble and drags her down like ball and chain into a quagmire of war and ethnic cleansing. If the US and Iran get along, who needs Israel?
The Saudis are similarly concerned. They don't want to return to the days of the Shah when Iran was the "policeman of the Persian Gulf"
Also, the "Iran threat" is very useful for Israeli politicians who want to pretend to be the great defenders of Israel though in private they don't feel all that threatened. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/livni-behind-closed-doors-iranian-nuclear-arms-pose-little-threat-to-israel-1.231859
Nuclear weapons "capability" is a bullshit scaremongering term, which they're using because they don't have any actual evidence of any actual weapons so they frame it as "capabilities".
In fact 40 nations already have a nuclear weapons capability, and this is simply because civilian and military nuclear technology is the same not because 1 out of 4 nations on the planet plan on making nukes. Beware of this "capability" weasel language. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8V0ezWHGCYAJ:www.seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2002041473_nukes21.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
People just assume that Iran must want the bomb but that's just an assumption
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/ten-reasons-iran-doesnt-want-the-bomb-7802
And note who these authors are who say that Iran's nuclear program is not in breach of international law http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jun/09/iran-nuclear-power-un-threat-peace
But the US wants to keep the "Iranian nuclear threat" alive, since it is a convenient pretext to try to topple their government, just as "WMDs in Iraq" was just as a lie and a pretext to invade Iraq.
Read more about Iran's nuclear program here http://www.amazon.com/Manufactured-Crisis-Untold-Story-Nuclear/dp/1935982338/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425173705
It isn't Iran's weapons that threatens Israel; it is the idea that the US and Iran will get along, in which case, who needs Israel? This book is all about this: http://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
See, remember when Nixon decided to "go to China", the US kicked Taiwan to the curb (Until then the US recognized the Natinalist govt in Taiwan as officially representing China, not the govt of the Communist mainland)
Israel does not want to become Taiwan, in a post-cold War era where Israel's value as an ally is becoming highly questionable.
And neither Iran nor Israel are "surrounded by people who want them destroyed" This is old and worn-out Zionist hasbara intended to actually justify Israeli aggression and ethnic cleansing, and has been thoroughly debunked by Israeli historians themselves ie Ilan Pappe's book on the 1948 War https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIWvcBzbqVc
In the case of Iran, they have good relations with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey and now even Iraq. The Saudis and their pet sheikhs of the Persian Gulf may also hate the idea of the return of Iran as the "Policeman of the Persian Gulf" like the petulant children they are (after all they benefitted from Iran providing security for the Persian Gulf) however the reality is that Iran is the natural hegemon of the region -- the longest coastline, the most strategic depth, 80 million well-educated population etc etc -- whether the Saudis like it or not. It will be the dominant force simply by existing, and it has existed for 2500 years. This is just geography and reality.
> Israel is concerned that Iran will attack them with nuclear weapons
Rubbish
The Mossad agrees with US intelligence that there's no nuclear weapons program in Iran http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/mossad-cia-agree-iran-has-yet-to-decide-to-build-nuclear-weapon-1.419300
This is just political
What Israel is really concerned about is that the US and Iran may start to get along, in which case Israel be one more of a liability than ever. http://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
Let me clear things up a little for you:
1- Mossadegh wasn't "democratically elected." Prime Ministers at the time were not elected.
2- Israel is not an issue "because Iran has made threats to them". This bullshit logic always assumes that Israel is the victim and merely reacting to 'threats' when in fact it was Israel that threatened Iran. It was the Israelis who decided that a stable, secure Iran that gets along with the US is a threat to their strategic partnership with the US so they started pushing for a US war on Iran. You should read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117/ref=la_B001JRTKQI_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408769915&sr=1-1 as well as for example this: http://www.uscatholic.org/culture/war-and-peace/2008/06/iran-spam
3- The 1953 coup was actually the second time in Iranian history that Western powers foiled the Iranian people's attempts at establishing a democracy. In fact Iran established the FIRST democracy in the Mideast in 1905 when they had the Constitutional Revolution, which established a European-style Constutional Monarchy in Iran where the king reigned but an elected parliament ruled. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Revolution_of_Iran That was ended when the Russians and British conspired to re-instate the fallen Qajar shah into power. Iran was divided between those two superpowers, and Russians even shelled Iran's parliament. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1908_bombardment_of_the_Majlis
Incidentally, two Americans were heros in that time -- one was Morgan Shuster, who had been hired to try to free Iran's economy from French/British/Russian control, and the other was Howard Baskerville who was a teacher who was killed fighting on the side of the Constitutionalists against the foreign-backed Monarchists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Baskerville
How is that relevant to the US? If anyting that makes Israel a competitor for US high tech.
Until the revolution, Iran was a backward dictatorship run by a corrupt tin pot tyrant installed by the US and average literacy rates were below 50%. No longer.
As for relations with israel, it was the Israelis that decided that a stable and prosperous Iran with good relations with the US threatened their privileged relations and decided to try to get the US and Iran to go to war. http://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1381252527&sr=8-1&keywords=trita+parsi
Iran is perfectly capable of performing R&D and contributing to the sciences too. Anyone is, because Israelis are not inherently smarter or more scientific that anyone else. It is simply a matter of having resources. In fact Iran is the worlds' fastest growing country, scientifically-speaking, and there is a long long history of academic relations between the US and Iran. If ties were improved, all of this can create a great market for US products and services in Iran, from low-tech to hi tech ... and who needs Israel? What actual function does israel serve other than to create a mess in the Mideast and make 2.5 million peole homeless?
Link to hard evidence and not an opinion of an official please. All of which is irrelevant anyway. They should be permitted to have nuclear weapons. Our efforts should be directed at people who won't sign the treaty and who aren't subject to international and pressure like Iran, who has given in to sanctions many times.
Edit: http://reason.com/archives/2013/11/28/iran-its-not-about-nuclear-weapons
Feel free to address the arguments within. I'd also suggest a book - http://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
I cited it extensively in my thesis. The whole warmongering bullshit is traditional Israeli scare tactics, which is why they've been crying about Iran maybe getting nukes (very little evidence for) while stockpiling them with our money. Fuck that.
The "terrorist supporter" label is laughable now, considering that the actual Iranian terrorists responsible for actually killing Americans, were allowed to buy their way off the US terrorist group list and are now darlings of the Trump admin including Rudolph Guliani who receives millions of dollars from the Iranian terrorist https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/21/iran-mek-group-removed-us-terrorism-list
And Israel was the terrorist in S Lebanon, backing things like the massacres at Sabra and Shatila and running a torture center at Khiam prison https://www.hrw.org/news/1999/10/27/torture-khiam-prison-responsibility-and-accountability
You do realize that Iran's nuclear program started under the same Shah, right?
The Iranian people are big supporters of their nuclear program and resent foreign interference
https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR910.html
And FYI Iran's nuclear program was always quite legal with zero evidence of a nuclear weapons program ever found
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jun/09/iran-nuclear-power-un-threat-peace
Not even the US actually accused Iran of seeking nukes (only "intending to obtain the capability" which is actually inevitably, common and widespread)
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Panetta-No-Iranian-decision-yet-on-nukes-3337858.php
and Israeli intelligence agrees, contrary to Nuttyahoo's claims
https://www.haaretz.com/1.5206174
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/23/leaked-spy-cables-netanyahu-iran-bomb-mossad
And the Shah did not particularly like Israel, gave 2 million to Yasser Arafat, and resenting "Jewish control" in Washington https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kySR3fpa5s
Furthermore, it was Israel and in particular Likud that decided to use Iran to scaremonger and to promote themselves, and also decided that after the end of the Cold War, Israel risked becoming a third wheel should the US decide to "go to Iran" s0 they started pushing the US to attack Iran just as Israel pushed the US to attack Iraq:
Sharon: Attack Iran the day after Iraq https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/attack-iran-the-day-iraq-war-ends-demands-israel-gnggkk7pzbw
This book is all about how Israel is pushing the US into war not because of any "nuclear threat" but because the Israelis fear the US and Iran getting along
https://www.amazon.com/Treacherous-Alliance-Secret-Dealings-Israel/dp/0300143117
Popular alternatives to Treacherous Alliance: The S...
Come as You Are: The Surprising New Science that Will Transform Your Sex Life
White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism
