The Two Way Street

Politics for a New Generation

Stale Hope, Fresh Uranium: America’s Relationship With Iran


In 1953, the CIA and British Intelligence overthrew Mohammed Mossadegh, Iran’s first popularly elected leader. Even though, for the better part of the 20th century the US has been a strong advocate for the right of the people to elect a leader, we participated in a coup destroying that elementary right, for fear that the new government would favor the Russians. Instead of democracy, the Shah returned to power, bringing back the oppression and cruelty of before the original revolution. Since then, America has taken a hypocritical approach to foreign policy involving Iran, mostly in order to avoid an alliance between Iran and Russia. Yet now, Because Russia is so dependent upon Iran for their non-domestic oil, if NATO were to attack Iran, Russia would be dragged into the battle, emulating the Chinese involvement in the Korean War.

In 1975, National Geographic published an article about Iran expressing hope for its future, discussing Iran’s oil money and enginuitive spirit. Three years before the start of the Islamic Revolution, Iran was a rising tourist destination for Americans. But as violence began to erupt, eventually provoking the flee of the Shah, America became cold to Iran. Under Ahmedinejad, Iran began to pursue nuclear capabilities, and Bush became wary. America mildly threatened use of military power against Iran, but even then, they knew the consequences. Then, in June, Ahmedinejad and the Ayatollah, Iran’s supreme religious leader, rigged the election in Ahmedinejad’s favor. When the followers of Moussavi, the opposition candidate, began to protest, America stated that it didn’t care in order to preserve diplomacy, even though Moussavi is far more aligned with American ideals.

When Iran is involved, America is hypocritical and painstakingly cautious with everything we say and do. Why does Iran mean so much? Russia. As stated before, Russia is dependent upon Iran, and is therefore motivated to involve themselves in any military campaign of Iran’s, and a conflict with Russia could easily end in nuclear war. But is the delicacy paying off? Not really. The majority of Ahmedinejad supporters still have death-wishes for America, the Ayatollah still dislikes us, and the US friendly candidate lost by election fraud. Essentially, this two-faced, coded message isn’t working. It’s time to give Iran what everyone deserves: straight talk.


Author: Julia

I'm a seventeen-year-old college student at Simon's Rock of Bard in Western Mass. I'm a writer and an aspiring journalist.

5 thoughts on “Stale Hope, Fresh Uranium: America’s Relationship With Iran

  1. Again, you seem to be missing the point that the United States is the world superpower. Russia would never dare to launch an attack on us, as within minutes we could have nuclear bombs and the submarines mentioned earlier and every member of NATO decimating their population. Sure, it would be costly on both sides, but far more so for them because, and this is the last time I will say this, it is absolutely impossible for Russia to launch any sort of sizeable assault on America due to our supreme defense systems.

    And, in case YOU haven’t looked at a world map lately, less than 500 miles separates North Korea from Vladivostok, a major Russian city that is their center of import/export and the home of 4/5 of their naval fleet. Sure, we can”t knock out the entire population, but we would cripple their economy, destroy their largest food supplier, and wipe away more than 2% of their population with Vladivostok and the Primorsky Krai, which Vladivostok happens to be the capital of.

    I will, however, admit my mistake in saying that North Korea borders Russia.

    Who said anything about invading Iran? Then the price of gas would really go up…

  2. It is possible. Is it really worth the risk? a single modern nuclear bomb could wipe out DC, Alexandria, Richmond, Annapolis, and Baltimore in one blast. While, sure, we could start bombarding them with nukes, it would come at an enormous cost of human life on both sides. America does not care to invade Iran enough to risk that. And in case you haven’t looked at a world map lately, 1st Korea borders China, not Russia, and 2nd, the population centers are in northeastern europe.

  3. The Russians cannot out- nuke us. One nuclear bomb could be considered a formidable arsenal simply due to the great power of the atomic bomb. However, we have approximately 2600 more nukes than any other country in the world, as well as the best system by far to deploy them. We have incredibly powerful stealth bombers and other aircraft that they could not possibly hope to match. And we’re not exactly being quiet either; just two months ago 60 Minutes did and exposition on the aircraft that we were using in the Middle East.
    Add our warships and submarines, we got them beat. As my uncle, who works for a government defence contractor, said when I read him as story about North Korea threatening America with nuclear bombs “Someone should remind Kim Jong- il that if he were to attack, we have ten fully armed submarines within six hours of Korea.” In case you haven’t looked a world map recently, Korea borders Russia.
    And yes, the safety net I mentioned is real. Homeland Security uses high strength balloons to test said net, resulting in a very funny SNL bit. See my comment to the latest post for more.

  4. You say that I cannot back up the idea that Russia is the reason for any of our troubles in the middle east. However, I must point out that, in fact, all of our problems in that region were caused by the Soviet Union and the collapse there of. Considering that I could write an entire editorial on the subject, I will write it as an article rather than a comment. and by the way, although Russia has an inferior infantry, THEY STILL HAVE A FORMIDABLE NUCLEAR ARSENAL!!

  5. Frankly this time I have to disagree. Of course the politicians are giving double talk to and about Iran, they’re politicians. Yes, it would be nice if we could just give straight talk to Iran, but then we would have to clean up all aspects of our government, which would be effectively going back to the drawing board they faced in the 1780’s-90’s. Our government will be as honest and efficient as flawed human beings can make it, regardless of the issue at hand.

    And on another point: how exactly can you support your claims that Russia is the reason we are walking on eggshells and lies around Iran, or anywhere in the Middle East? Are they anymore reliant on a steady oil supply from Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. than we are? Why do you think we entered this war in the first place? They claimed that they wanted to avoid another Korea, yet far worse military and political conditions existed and still exist now, in Africa, parts of South America, and Myanmar. The reason? Oil. Not for Russia, but for us. Russia is barely a military threat to the United States, if you only take a look at our Homeland Security measures.

    Oil is a very, very powerful industry. Vast amounts of money, hundreds of lobbyists, and more political ties than any other group in America. Remember how George W. Bush circumvented getting Congressional approval to declare war by declaring it a “preventative” and “policing” (I know that is not the right way to say it, but you know what I mean) measure? Perhaps he did that because of his family’s bond to the oil industry.

    Though your writing remains clear and precise, I find this article to be out- dated and under- researched.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s