Barack Obama admits US involvement in 1953 Iran's coup, your thoughts?

My dear friend. It's a pretty empty admission and highly hypocritical at a point in time where the US under an Obama government is once again undermining the Iranian government.

So he admits the atrocities of 1953 which is good but not one word about the current American terrorism in Iran let alone a stop to these crimes. Total and stunning hypocrisy, sorry

The real reason Iran leaders have not responded to the new president more enthusiastically" is that "the Obama administration has done nothing to cancel or repudiate an ostensibly covert but well-publicized program, begun in president George W Bush's second term, to spend hundreds of million of dollars to destabilize the Islamic Republic."

As reconfirmed in the same New York Times story, Iran helped the US topple the Taliban government in Afghanistan in 2001, but in return Iran was rewarded by being included in Bush's "axis of evil".

The story about the covert operations against the Iranian government was detailed in 2007 in an ABC News Exclusive called "The Secret War Against Iran". The news revealed that the group Jundallah's "guerrilla raid inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005" and had been indirectly funded "through Iranian exiles" to avoid "congressional oversight".

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KF03Ak02....

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080729_acts_...

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN2...

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=168...

The US is involved in the same behavior today under direct responsibility of the current American President

Once again Obama reveals himself to be all talk. Only those living comfortable lives in luxury can believe his smooth words and ignore his actions. For innocent Iranians, Iraqis, Afghans and Pakistanis who suffer under the American Imperialism today as ordered by Barack Obama that's a lot harder.

The vague and flowery rhetoric, the verbal tributes to Islamic culture and the equal rights of nations, constitute an adjustment of the language being used to cloak the policy of US imperialism, not a change in substance. Obama made not a single concrete proposal to redress the grievances of the oppressed peoples of the Middle East. That is because the fundamental source of this oppression is the profit system and the domination of the world by imperialism, of which American imperialism is the most ruthless.

Obama made one passing reference to colonialism, and to the US role in the overthrow of the democratically elected Mossadegh government in Iran in 1953. But in his litany of “sources of tension” in the region, he offered the same checklist as his predecessor, with the first place given to “violent extremism”, Obama’s rhetorical substitute for Bush’s “terrorism.”

As others have mentioned, we've been doing this for a long time, all around the world. I'm more interested in why this keeps happening, even under Presidents for whom such activities seem totally out of character. The only common factor I can see is that our involvement seems to begin at a lower, non elected level. Our bureaucracy seems to be the instigators of these problems. This would go along with the notion that bureaucrats are characteristically small f fascists, as in dedicated to a strong leadership with obedience by the masses. So, when looking over foreign situations, they tend to look among fellow authoritarian types in that country, since they understand each other. Bureaucrats are by nature repelled by people seeking freedom and independence, as they tend to be unruly and unreliable in following orders, especially from foreigners. So, by the time a President hears of a situation, our bureaucrats have already made their picks and written the reports that the President will use to make his decision. In short, they have a built-in bias that Presidents persistently underestimate. The only cure for this that I can think of is to abolish the idea of civil service as a career. Anybody got a better idea?

What the Carter Administration did to the Shah's government in 1979 takes the cake. Carter is Christian and a moral person, by all accounts, but his stupidity is so vast, that he caused more trouble in the world than most evil men.

One of the main reasons for the wars of the last 30 years was because Carter though the AYATOLLAH a batshit crazy theocratic terrorist, would be a good ruler. He thanked Carter by taking several American hostages.

I see no harm in admitting it, and I think we at least owe him a chance, since his predecessors ****** up so bad.

After Carter, the second criminally stupid Administration was Bush.

Bush Sr. and Clinton were hawkish on Iraq but very cautious. Rumsfeld and Cheney weren't.

Iran has become a regional superpower thanks to the absense of nutty, hostile dictator living next door ready to rekindle the war at any moment. Saddam Hussein would probably have bombed Iran's nuclear program (or at least found some way to sabotage it.)

So at least give Barry a chance. Republicans lost fair and square. Carter caused the mess in Iran, Bush helped strengthen the theocracy. Somebody needs to tackle Iran.

This was a MASTERFUL stroke on President Obama's part. Our task is to undermine Osama bin Laden's or al qaida's recruitment of angry young Muslims and simultaneously build trust in Muslim nations as a foundation for peace efforts. After the illegal war in Iraq and evidence of torture that inflamed not just the Muslim nations but our allies as well, there is not a lot of tolerance among other nations for a "holier than thou" attitude from the United States. The admission of this involvement was followed by a firm but softly stated reminder of the hostages taken that precipitated CIA involvement in the coup. The whole speech was a symphony conductor bringing all instruments into harmonious, balanced play. I was SO impressed, as were all who accompanied this President. He gave a strong, but small dose of the truth...enough to show we are willing to work with these nations, but not at the expense of our citizens' safety (President Obama quietly affirmed that, as President, a primary mission for him is to keep Americans safe). The speech spoke volumes to leaders like Ahmadinejad without being confrontational, and laid the foundation for changes in oppressive practices after first establishing a basis for trust through the admission of our own duplicity. If he had not done this, his words would have had less far-reaching impact. It was very smart.

He was pretty sharp last night. He was even better than he was in the first debate. He had to be though because Fox News tried to run him down. They had about as much success at that as Bill Maher. Ron Paul seems to be perfectly prepared for any trick anybody who hates him has up their sleeve. Nobody attacks Ron Paul and comes out the better for it. I guess he must have expected that to happen in advance on the Fox News channel. That place is Bizarro World. Black is White and White is Black on the Faux News channel. No wonder all the Democrats don't want to go on there.

He just said what most already knew. He just confirmed it. Everyone knows the Shah was placed their by the Americans. You have your eyes open a little bit, but do you realize that every leader of this world has actually been placed there by the rich elite? Now for example we really only had 2 choices in this last election. Both of which were owned and controlled by the rich elite. We think we had a choice, but unless a leader used a forced military coup then they were placed there by someone.

I think it is a great start. America has been involved in so many atrocities and honesty would be great for a change. So would taking responsibility. I like the way this president behaves, he doesn't act like he is the king of the world like Bush did, he treats others as equals, and with humbleness and a lack of arrogance which is refreshing from a US president. The only thing which would make this complete would be for him to face up to the lie which was Iraq, and bring those responsible for that war, and the war crimes committed as a result, to justice, instead of trying to brush it under the rug. The world already knows who and what they are guilty of, so why not show the world that America can make even those highest in their government pay for their crimes.

It's about time. I am still waiting to hear how the Government arranged the assassination of Kennedy. I have watched the video of his body guards on the motorcade being called off and away from that car and want an explanation as to why that was done.

Coming clean and creating a perception of goodwill by the international community is a good thing. Making friends is in the national interest of the United States. Making mends is good for national security.

USA played the main role in expelling Iran's prime minister and changing the country to a dictatorship, which ended with a revolution lead by religious fanatics. believe it or not, USA has interfered in many other countries and the answerers trying to find excuses are either clueless about the current events/history or simply admit imperialism. it could be good if USA had changed this, but unfortunately the same is happening and USA still sets puppets in countries.

so far Obama has tried to say it will be different from now on. it's admirable but unfortunately the changes he talks about have not yet happened.

How about our involvement in putting Saddam Hussein in power that ended up with 1 million dead Iranians defending their country? All of these conflicts can be blamed directly on USA, Britain, and Israel's financial and power-seeking interest groups.