Monday, February 21, 2011
Agh, stop that crap.
Headline: Israel Concerned about Iran's Suez Canal Passage.
Why is everyone worried about Persia attacking other countries?
Follow history. The last time Persia attacked anyone was more than 1300 years ago. From about 700 BC to 700 AD, Persia was the big dog on earth, conquering everyone in sight.
Since 700 AD, Persia has been involved in three wars, always on the receiving end. In WW1, Russia, Turkey and Britain fought in Persia for no reason at all. (All of WW1 was fought for no reason at all; it was the ultimate modern war.) Britain ended up more or less in charge. After 1920 the Shah took over, strengthened Persia, pushed out the British, and favored Germany because it wasn't Russia, Britain or Turkey. Then in WW2, Britain and Russia repeated the same performance, fearing that the Shah's sympathy for the Krauts would turn Persia into a German helper. Again Britain ended up semi-occupying Persia for a while. In the '50s and '70s, America tried its hand at meddling, first restoring the Shah then removing him. Neither move served American interests, but that has never stopped us from meddling. Then in the 1980's, Saddam tried to take over Persian resources all by himself; a harsh ten-year war ensued, and Saddam finally gave up without admitting defeat.
All of these wars were directed against Persia from outside, all ended with Persia reasserting its independence.
Granted, Persia has done some meddling of its own, supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon and Israel. I'm not saying Persia is sweeter or nicer than any other country, just that its history doesn't support the picture of a wild-eyed attacker we're trying to draw. Unsurprisingly, the inventor of chess is good at strategic games, and its persistence through the last century of attacks and incoming meddles shows that the strategy works.
After all this foreign interference with a country that has been simply trying to survive for 1300 years, can you blame Persia for raising its hackles and rattling its sabers when it sees another meddle coming? ¶ 2:58 AM
Why is everyone worried about Persia attacking other countries?
Follow history. The last time Persia attacked anyone was more than 1300 years ago. From about 700 BC to 700 AD, Persia was the big dog on earth, conquering everyone in sight.
Since 700 AD, Persia has been involved in three wars, always on the receiving end. In WW1, Russia, Turkey and Britain fought in Persia for no reason at all. (All of WW1 was fought for no reason at all; it was the ultimate modern war.) Britain ended up more or less in charge. After 1920 the Shah took over, strengthened Persia, pushed out the British, and favored Germany because it wasn't Russia, Britain or Turkey. Then in WW2, Britain and Russia repeated the same performance, fearing that the Shah's sympathy for the Krauts would turn Persia into a German helper. Again Britain ended up semi-occupying Persia for a while. In the '50s and '70s, America tried its hand at meddling, first restoring the Shah then removing him. Neither move served American interests, but that has never stopped us from meddling. Then in the 1980's, Saddam tried to take over Persian resources all by himself; a harsh ten-year war ensued, and Saddam finally gave up without admitting defeat.
All of these wars were directed against Persia from outside, all ended with Persia reasserting its independence.
Granted, Persia has done some meddling of its own, supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon and Israel. I'm not saying Persia is sweeter or nicer than any other country, just that its history doesn't support the picture of a wild-eyed attacker we're trying to draw. Unsurprisingly, the inventor of chess is good at strategic games, and its persistence through the last century of attacks and incoming meddles shows that the strategy works.
After all this foreign interference with a country that has been simply trying to survive for 1300 years, can you blame Persia for raising its hackles and rattling its sabers when it sees another meddle coming? ¶ 2:58 AM
