Monday, March 12, 2007

History Insults Iranians

The Iranian government is all upset about the way the movie "300" retells history. First off, I'd be willing to bet that 99% of the people watching the movie have no idea that the Persians in the movie are the historical relatives of the Iranians of today. Second, they may try to rewrite history as much as they like, but the truth of the movie is just that, truth. A few very courageous men battle a huge army of invaders and while they all died, their sacrifice saved many lives.

It is a great analogy of today. We have men and women in our armed forces who are bravely sacrificing so much so that we may continue to enjoy the freedoms we have in this country. To bad there are many Dems that are just like the traitor in the movie that would rather see us lose as opposed to a victory that would benefit President Bush and the Repubs.

The movie is definitely very violent and they unfortunately has a couple of sexually explicit scenes, but the courage and loyalty shown by the King and his men should serve as an example of what can be accomplished if we were united as a country against the same enemy faced over 2000 years ago by the Spartans.

13 comments:

The leftist southpaw said...

I don't care what anyone says or thinks about Persia and Iran- "300" was a freakin' AWESOME movie!!!

Little Miss Chatterbox said...

Great review. I have heard nothing but good things about this movie. And as Southpaw proves it seems to appeal to both conservatives and liberals.

Jenny said...

Persians are misunderstood and oppressed. I wish the US would lay off them and allow a sovereign nation to pursue its own interests. Why does the US have to butt into everyone's affairs? Does it say in the Constitution that the US must butt into other country's affairs?

Cajun Tiger said...

Jenny...their are allowed to pursue any interest they want as long as it doesn't endanger us.

Being that isn't what they are doing, the constitution gives us every right to protect ourselves from aggressors and if ever there was one, Iran is it. To believe anything less just take a look at the statements from their President. If he wants us to leave him alone, he might want to stop saying Israel will be wiped off the map and a world w/o America is possible.

Now as far as Persians being oppressed you are absolutely right however your implication that we are the oppressors is not accurate as Iran is constantly in the top 10 of worst human rights offenders. If you want to target the true oppressor target your anger at the rulers of that country.

Jenny said...

I say just stay out of their business and they won't have any problems with us. Geez, the audacity and arrogance of right wingers. The Iraq war hasn't made us safer but has actually endangered us! More and more have declared Jihad against us. MYOB!!!

Cajun Tiger said...

Jenny if that were the case I'd agree. But let's see. Who attacked first? Who has been attacking at least since 1979 in Iran, Lebanon, on our soil twice, multiple embassies, our military ships, our citizens, Israeli citizens, on and on and on?

We have FINALLY gone on the offensive and now it is us who are the bad guys? I'm sorry but thinking like that is exactly why they think we are weak and for nearly three decades continued to attack our interest with little response. We are much safer since the Iraq war here in the US. How many attacks have we had since then on non-US military targets? NONE...why...b/c they are all in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting our military or they are dead or captured.

Jenny said...

The US is nothing more than a super power bully.

Cajun Tiger said...

Good tactic...when you can't debate the facts, resort to name calling.

Jenny said...

"Jenny if that were the case I'd agree. But let's see. Who attacked first? Who has been attacking at least since 1979 in Iran, Lebanon, on our soil twice, multiple embassies, our military ships, our citizens, Israeli citizens, on and on and on?"

--You want to debate some facts pal? If the imperialist US hadn't interfered in the Persian Gulf in the first place, they wouldn't have had reason to attack us. Why is the US in the region in the first place? Humanitarian reasons? Fact finding tours? Attempting to show them the beaming light of Christianity? Errr, no, they want the oil. Period. We allied ourselves with leaders we wouldn't tolerate in our own country. The Shah was brutal to his people and the people can only stand for so much hence why they threw him out. This is where the animosity came from buddy. Do some homework on the Shah and the reasons we are there before you begin regurgitating bull. You know what the reasons are but you are blinded by blind faith and the ability to cover up that which you don't want to admit to.

Cajun Tiger said...

Oh yeah...Iran is SOOOOOO much better since the Shah was overthrown.

Let's take a little walk through history.

After WWII, Iran had very strong ties with the west as it was a major help in defeating Germany.

A prime minister rose to power in the 50's that was very pro-Soviet and in order to stop the communist takeover, the west intervened.

In the 60's and 70's Iran was the economic powerhouse of the Middle East due to it's vast oil resources. The Shah made lots of changes including giving women the right to vote and establishing diplomatic relations with Israel. Two of the biggest reasons the mullahs and the Islamic radicals hated him.

Due to more and more pressure from the Islamic radicals, in Jan. of '79 he left in hopes of abating total chaos in the country.

The mullahs broke their word that they would form a unified government and keep the constitution and free elections nearly immediately.

The Shah's non-Hodgkin's lymphoma began to grow worse, and required immediate and sophisticated treatment.

Reluctantly, on 22 October 1979 President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah to make a brief stopover in the United States to undergo medical treatment. The compromise was extremely unpopular with the revolutionary movement, which were against the United States' years of support of the Shah's rule, and demanded his return to Iran to stand trial.

This resulted in the kidnapping of a number of American diplomats, military personnel and intelligence officers in what became known as the Iran hostage crisis.

Just so you don't think I found all this on some "crazy right wing website", I found it all on liberal favorite Wikepedia.

Now that the history lesson is done, my next comment will cover where we are now.

Cajun Tiger said...

Since the islamic radicals have taken charge, Iran has become one of the poorest nations in the middle east. Women have absolutely no rights whatsoever. And there are no freedoms whatsoever to speak of. It is always in the State Department's top 10 of worst human rights violaters.

So, go ahead and support them all you want. Yes it is all the fault of the evil US. However, don't forget one thing. If you were in the great and wonderful Iran, you would not be allowed to speak in public or have any rights whatsoever as a woman.

As long as Iran is controlled by radical Islamist, the middle east will never be a peaceful place until their goals of world wide Shiria law are followed and all infidels (that includes you unless you are muslim) are either slaves or dead or convert to Islam.

If the US and every other western nation were to immediately pack up every single troop from the middle east, the first thing that would happen would be the attepted destruction of Israel (who has nukes). Then the Saudi, Jordanian, Egyptian, Pakistani and Turkish secular governments would be overthrown. Then India (who has nukes) and Greece would be attacked. Then on to Spain and eastern Europe so that the old islamic empire could be reestablished. Then I guess they would leave the rest of the world alone to leave in peace...NOT!

Mike's America said...

"Does it say in the Constitution that the US must butt into other country's affairs?

Jenny: You're confusing the US Constitution with Hillary "Nanny State" Clinton.

P.S. Second attempt to post comment. Have I mentioned how much I hate the squiggly letter "word verification" feature?

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

Now, now, Cajun....there ya go, making sense again! Stop it!


--You want to debate some facts pal? If the imperialist US hadn't interfered in the Persian Gulf in the first place, they wouldn't have had reason to attack us. Why is the US in the region in the first place? Humanitarian reasons? Fact finding tours? Attempting to show them the beaming light of Christianity? Errr, no, they want the oil. Period. We allied ourselves with leaders we wouldn't tolerate in our own country. The Shah was brutal to his people and the people can only stand for so much hence why they threw him out. This is where the animosity came from buddy. Do some homework on the Shah and the reasons we are there before you begin regurgitating bull. You know what the reasons are but you are blinded by blind faith and the ability to cover up that which you don't want to admit to.

My God Jenny...that reads like sixth grade history class from a Howard Zinn textbook. You need to go back and do your own homework.

It amazes me how anyone can accuse the U.S. today of imperialism. People who do have no inkling of what true imperialism entails, let alone how a real fascist state behaves.