backtop


Print 82 comment(s) - last by luseferous.. on Jan 22 at 10:18 AM


  (Source: teribon.ir)
Iran has some fun at the expense of the U.S.

The United States was more than a bit embarrassed when it lost an RQ-170 Sentinel stealth drone over Iran. Although the U.S. government initially claimed that the aircraft malfunctioned and was missing "somewhere near Afghanistan", Iran boldly claimed that it spoofed the Sentinel's GPS feed causing the drone to "think" it was landing at an airbase in Afghanistan instead of its actual landing spot -- an Iranian military base.
 
In a surprise move, President Barack Obama engaged Iran during a press conferencing, stating, "We've asked for it back. We'll see how the Iranians respond."
 
Iran is now humorously responding to President Obama's request in toy form. “He said he wanted it back, and we will send him one,” joked Reza Kioumarsi of the Ayeh Art Group, which is responsible for the production of the 1/80 scale toy that sells for the equivalent of $4 USD.

[Source: teribon.ir]

Iranian officials are quick to point out that unlike most toys sold in the U.S., these won't be made in China. They'll be produced in Iran using Iranian plastic. The toy replicas will come in a number of different colors and will feature a clear plastic stand with the inscription: "We will put America under our feet.”
 
To add insult to injury, the Ayeh Art Group is said to have reserved a pink replica to send directly to President Obama.

Sources: The Washington Post, ABC News, The New York Times



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Goal?
By shanomacadaemia on 1/18/2012 8:31:50 AM , Rating: 5
Ok, but you're completely ignoring the fact that previous US involvement in Iranian affairs is what has led to their strong anti-US sentiment. A CIA-led coup in the 50s led to the overthrowing of Premier Mossadeq, a much-loved and progressive leader of a parliamentary government, and placed an authoritarian puppet "Shah" in his stead, who brutally ruled the land while serving US interests.

The 1979 revolution was the result of an Iranian nation tired of having a brutal dictator thrust upon them by a foreign power.

Believe it or not, Islamic Extremism and the prominence is enjoys today in the Middle-East is a direct by-product of US intervention in the Middle East and Africa.

Do you honestly believe that further meddling is going to improve the situation?


RE: Goal?
By armageddon51 on 1/18/2012 8:47:42 AM , Rating: 3
Absolutely. It surprising how the Americans easily forget history when it comes to foreign policy. The US/CIA involvement in other countries is littered with legitimate regimes destituted and replace with US manipulated puppets. No wandering that US is much hatred in many countries. They are after all the most aggressive country in the world. That said their is a big difference between the government and their people which is sadly manipulated by the medias.
p.s. Where can I buy the figurine again ?


RE: Goal?
By tamalero on 1/18/2012 10:19:24 AM , Rating: 2
and have you tried to think why they're hated that much?
because they move, middle, bomb, corrupt, steal..etc.. on them.
most people in every country just want to live their life.
getting their family members killed just because your little oil tycoon wants a new yatch.. is just why your country is the most hated in the world.


RE: Goal?
By Ryrod on 1/18/2012 6:09:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Absolutely. It surprising how the Americans easily forget history when it comes to foreign policy. The US/CIA involvement in other countries is littered with legitimate regimes destituted and replace with US manipulated puppets. No wandering that US is much hatred in many countries.


The US has done a lot to affect the world and quite a bit of it has come about due to the economic interests in the US. Much of it derived from the saying "What's good for business.." and much of what the US is dealing with now is the blowback from those decisions. I'm not blind to the fact that we have chosen the wrong horse on many occasions, but some of what the US has done wasn't done entirely to promote US interests. For example, in Iran, we deposed a democratically elected Prime Minister to support the economic interests of the British. We tried to do something similar for France in Vietnam and that blew up in our face.

There is plenty of blame to go around for the hatred the Middle East and other regions have for the West. Now I'm not trying to say that the US is blameless, because like I said, we have chosen the wrong horse quite a bit. By the way, I am well versed in the history of the world during and after World War II. When I made my statement about invading Iran, as opposed to Iraq, I didn't make the statement in an intellectual vacuum.

quote:
They are after all the most aggressive country in the world.


You could have said the same thing about the British before the 1920s and the Spanish prior to them, or you could mention the Papacy during the Crusades or even the Roman Empire. Each hegemon during any given period of time has been aggressive because they seek to maintain the system that has been put in place. The US is only as aggressive as it needs to be to maintain its position in the world as the leader, and recently, the US has attempted to be a benevolent leader, which is a marked change from the past. With that being said, you can't really blame a dog for a behavior that it learned from its former master, but you should at least try to appreciate the attempt to change.


RE: Goal?
By Ryrod on 1/18/2012 5:44:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ok, but you're completely ignoring the fact that previous US involvement in Iranian affairs is what has led to their strong anti-US sentiment. A CIA-led coup in the 50s led to the overthrowing of Premier Mossadeq, a much-loved and progressive leader of a parliamentary government, and placed an authoritarian puppet "Shah" in his stead, who brutally ruled the land while serving US interests.


I'm well aware of the history of Iran, but there's a few things that I want to correct about your statement. The Shah was already in power for over a decade when Mossadeq was elected to the Prime Minister position.

Mossadeq wasn't really a huge progressive, as much as he was a nationalist. Mossadeq hated western influence in Iran, especially the influence of Britain and the AIOC. There were also strong feelings of hatred that came from the occupation of Iran during World War II, which was at the hands of the British government, along with Russia.

When Mossadeq decided to nationalize the oil industry, we did what we've always done in the past, protect our economic interests and those of our allies. The US moved in to capture Mossadeq, which left a power vacuum in the nation and Mossadeq assumed the powers of the Prime Minister and used his secret police, the SAVAK, to cripple and destroy any resistance to his rule. We never really put the Shah in power, it was the British and the Russians that did that during World War II because they thought his father supported the Nazis. All the US did was to solidify his power at the top.

However, you are correct that the brutality of the Shah is what led the Ayatollah Khomeini to take power in Iran and turn it into an Islamic Republic. This did lead to an anti-US and anti-western feeling in the country as Khomeini attacked western influence in Iran and labelled it part of the problem.

quote:
Believe it or not, Islamic Extremism and the prominence is enjoys today in the Middle-East is a direct by-product of US intervention in the Middle East and Africa.


This isn't entirely true and I think you are trying to simplify the situation. Islamic Extremism derives primarily from the feeling of displacement (economic and social) in the world. Most extremist leaders are well-educated individuals who feel like the world has turned its back on them so they find other people who feel displaced and recruit them. You could blame the US for that, but you should blame the Bretton Woods pact and globalization more than anything, but I do see the appeal of saying the US is at fault, as opposed to the economic system the US has created and maintained with the help of other nations.

quote:
Do you honestly believe that further meddling is going to improve the situation?


Yes, I do believe that. There are a large number of moderate Muslims in Iran and around the world. Iran is not homogenous in its view that the US and western powers are horrible. There is a reasonably large group of moderate Iranians that would like to see the country return to the time of the Shah when it was more prosperous than it is now. The US would only need to tap into that base of moderate Iranians and provide the support necessary for the country to thrive. This would probably include overthrowing the current government, allowing general elections, providing money and aid to the new government, and allowing the government to maintain its nationalization over the oil fields.

However, given the debacle that we had in Iraq (which don't get me started on), I doubt the US would be willing to give aid to a new Iranian government nor would the US government, under pressure from business interests, would be willing to allow Iran to keep its oil fields under national control.


"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki