Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

you have a problem sunshine. you do not understand who creates dictatorships in the middle east as well as the rest of the world and why. when somebody learns you that perhaps you can begin to understand.

Oh, I know who creates dictatorships in the middle east, because it is easier for the west to deal with one dictator than to deal with a democratic body, but that's because Muslims in general are sheep and can be lead by the nose than think for themselves. Turkey today is a perfect example in a so called "European country" who want's to be in the EU. Yeah right, only when pigs fly.

[Paphitis]

Paphitis, the truth of the matter is, no matter how fair elections are held in Syria, the west is not interested, because they want Assad gone their way, and not at the ballot box. The west has not learned a thing when it comes to removing foreign leaders they don't like because they do not any longer dance to the west's tune. Do you think the mess we have in the Middle east today would be if Saddam was still in power? The answer would be a resounding , NO. I have come to learn that in general, Muslim religion and Democracy cannot co-exists. Turkey thinks they are Europeans and look and see how democracy works there. Even there it does not work. Somethings are the way they are, and no matter how well intention the west may be, although, the west intentions mostly are not well intended, you cannot export west's understanding of democracy to Muslim countries. They don't understand it and they don't want it, and when you try to force it on them, you have the mess you have in the middle east today.

more bullshit. there was a respectable democracy in iran till the yanks removed it and placed a dictatorship in its place in the 50s and have done the same ever since right up to more recently when they removed an elected government in egypt and replaced it with another dictatorship. you understanding of democracy in the middle east and who is responsible for the dictatorships says more about you then them kikopoulluimu.

The Shah was deposed in 1980 and yes we saw the quality of the democracy that followed.

Did it ever occur to you that the Shah was necessary to keep the Islamic Mulahs out of office?

[Robin Hood]

The Mullahs never claimed that it was a democracy, it was always going to be a Theocracy. The Shah was a far bigger butcher than Assad and he was bought into power by yet another CIA/MI6 coup. The CIA even set up and trained the Shahs notorious SAVAK (Secret Police) that were responsible for the torture and murder of thousands of Iranians.

The Iranians were glad to see the back of him but at least the choice was theirs. The US let it happen because they thought that the mild mannered, religious Khomeini would be feeding out of their hands but the Iranian people never forgave the US for destroying the democracy of Mossadegh in the 50’s and then supporting 28 years of extreme suffering under The Shah.

I lived in Iran for over four years post revolution and in 1990, we were some of the first westerners to go back into Iran after the Revolution and I can tell you that there were far more freedoms than any of the other ME countries I worked in. The rules are strict, about that there is no doubt, but I always found the place to be very safe and never felt we were under any threat from the people or the Regime ..... provided we followed the rules. But doesn’t that apply anywhere?

The same will happen in Syria as happened to Iran in the 50's if the west gets its way and puts another puppet government in the driving seat. Assad has to stay until the people make the choice to replace him. First stop the civil war and, as Assad has already offered, give an amnesty to all the FSA fighters. Not a surrender but a recognition of their grievances and a step toward an end to hostilities. They can then solve the problem diplomatically ..... like they should have done in the first place and would have done had the west not poked their nose in.

Then concentrate on destroying the IS fighters of Daesh with outside help at Syria's request.

One thing is certain ..... no amount of weaponry or boots on the ground will kill Daesh! It is an ideology and you cannot destroy an ideology with bombs and bullets! The only thing you will ever achieve is to reduce those willing to die for the cause and that will be through hearts and minds because nothing else will work. Reduce the support these Islamist get and they will become a depleted force, still dangerous but incapable of raising an army.

[repulsewarrior]

...well said.

[DrCyprus]

I second that, well said Robin Hood.

[Lordo]

bafidobullo get a life boy.

[kurupetos]

It's all easily solved in a forum, especially when the belligerent parties are not involved in the discussion.

If they don't get rid of Islam, and then Zionist control, there will never be an end to this.

[GreekIslandGirl]

Yes, great post, Robin Hood. Merry Christmas.

[Paphitis]

Yes, great post, Robin Hood. Merry Christmas.

Oh yes well said dear!

But of course there is something you should know.

The Theicracy resulted in the stoning of thousands of women because their "husbands" thought she was having an affair, or was seen having coffee in public with other men, or just because the husband wanted the Mrs out the way so that he can get custody of the kids. Even if the woman was being unfaithful, there is still no justification.

Under the Shah there was a solid attempt to keep Sharia out of Iran and move across to modern secularism.

Good post indeed. I suppose you support Sharia now.

We don't, not even in KSA who is our ally.

The Shah was Iran's best chance of becoming a modern secular State and it had our backing.

[Paphitis]

The Mullahs never claimed that it was a democracy, it was always going to be a Theocracy. The Shah was a far bigger butcher than Assad and he was bought into power by yet another CIA/MI6 coup. The CIA even set up and trained the Shahs notorious SAVAK (Secret Police) that were responsible for the torture and murder of thousands of Iranians.

The Iranians were glad to see the back of him but at least the choice was theirs. The US let it happen because they thought that the mild mannered, religious Khomeini would be feeding out of their hands but the Iranian people never forgave the US for destroying the democracy of Mossadegh in the 50’s and then supporting 28 years of extreme suffering under The Shah.

I lived in Iran for over four years post revolution and in 1990, we were some of the first westerners to go back into Iran after the Revolution and I can tell you that there were far more freedoms than any of the other ME countries I worked in. The rules are strict, about that there is no doubt, but I always found the place to be very safe and never felt we were under any threat from the people or the Regime ..... provided we followed the rules. But doesn’t that apply anywhere?

The same will happen in Syria as happened to Iran in the 50's if the west gets its way and puts another puppet government in the driving seat. Assad has to stay until the people make the choice to replace him. First stop the civil war and, as Assad has already offered, give an amnesty to all the FSA fighters. Not a surrender but a recognition of their grievances and a step toward an end to hostilities. They can then solve the problem diplomatically ..... like they should have done in the first place and would have done had the west not poked their nose in.

Then concentrate on destroying the IS fighters of Daesh with outside help at Syria's request.

One thing is certain ..... no amount of weaponry or boots on the ground will kill Daesh! It is an ideology and you cannot destroy an ideology with bombs and bullets! The only thing you will ever achieve is to reduce those willing to die for the cause and that will be through hearts and minds because nothing else will work. Reduce the support these Islamist get and they will become a depleted force, still dangerous but incapable of raising an army.

Extreme suffering under the Shah? According to who RH?

You mean extreme suffering of the religious zealots because they were unable to practice Sharia. Because the Shah had banned these medieval practices across Iran. Is that what you call extreme suffering?

We knew the Khomeini was not going to be friendly to us when all our embassy staff were trapped in Iran and surrounded with lynch mobs under the Ayatollah's direction of course. But we decided to not interfere with the revolution because it was a loser and we would just become the bad guy again.

So we all cut diplomatic ties instead and implemented strong sanctions.

If you like the results of this revolution then be my guest!