blueguyinaredstate

            I want to take this time to delve into history, because in politics the past is very significant especially in the arena of International Relations. A lot of the issues the United States have today internationally I believe can be traced back to a decision we made half a century ago. In 1953, the
United States in collaboration with the British government engineered and enacted a plan that would overthrow the Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq and in doing so, they restored the puppet government of the Shah. The coup developed out of the sentiments of the British who were angry with Mosaddeq for Nationalizing Iranian oil fields, possessed formerly by British Petroleum (Anglo-Iranian Oil Company), and represented a great source of income for
Great Britain. The British so Mosaddeq as a problem and convinced the United States that Iran was to fall prey to communism if they did not act and remove Mosaddeq.

            This move ended up not being what the British had in mind, because after the success of the coup the United States took the place of the British in Iran. Prior to 1953, we had a real chance in
Iran to form something that would benefit both countries in the future, but we chose a course of action that would set the stage for the Islamic revolution of 1979 as well as the hostilities that would come to characterize the relationship between these two countries for the past thirty years. Had we taken the chance to back Iran and there rights as a sovereign nation we would have avoided the events that spurred the revolution of 1979. A revolution that in its aftermath created an Islamic Republic an Ironic outcome given that its initial supporters were students who embraced Marxism and other leftist ideology conducted the initial revolutionary fervor but as the Revolution grew, they found there leader in Khomeini who would eventually hijacked the revolution to press his agenda of Islamic fundamentalism.   Essentially my argument is we had an opportunity with
Iran to formulate a friendly and beneficial relationship instead we pressed upon the people a government of our choosing in the form of the Shah. I believe had we developed a positive relationship with them our current situation in the world would be drastically different. We would have a friend other than Israel in a volatile region that could help us support
Israel. Iranian agents are responsible for forming Terrorist groups such as Hezbollah in Shiite parts of Lebanon and
Syria. We would not of had to back Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war of the 1980’s, which in many ways was the start of a destructive relationship between the U.S and Iraq since the relationship gave Saddam the sense of U.S support in his future endeavors such as invading Kuwait.

We cannot know for sure what the future could have been. but a lot of the negativity that exists between U.S and Iran would be different had we been the White knight the Iranian people hoped we would be after they threw the British out of their country instead, we in many ways were worse.

The question of the separation of church and state is an issue that brings great frustration’s too many people in the United States in regards to the position religion should occupy in a given society. Both the conservative religious right and the liberal secular left have different ideas in respects to what principles society should govern by, and the role religion should play in governance. I personally agree with the idea that society should rule separately from the powers of the church, but I must say that the lack of understanding on the side of the left frustrates me, especially since I fall on their side of the arguments so often. They argue that when a ruling goes against the principles of a free society, and embraces a religious stance that we are not enforcing the constitutional right to the separation of church and state.

A good example of such an instance would be the recent ruling on proposition eight in
California in which the citizens of the state ruled against gay marriage, opponents of this decision argued the church has too much power in this country. They also say that here in the United States we are far behind the secularist policies embraced in
Europe. My frustrations stand from the idea that people are so naïve to think that we can actually separate ourselves from something that is such an integral part of who we are. The Only reason why so many people in Europe and
Canada have such secular views is that religion plays a minor role in their lives in comparison to Americans. Studies indicate that 90 percent of Americans believe in God and roughly half of Americans go to church on a relatively regular basis where as in
Europe respectively only 50 percent believe in god and a measly 10 percent go to church regularly.

The point I am trying to make is simple we can only separate our societies from certain institutions and ideas only to the extent in which individuals exist outside of these ideas. Therefore, secularism can only exist truly in a society in which the citizens yield little faith in God. Secularism and freedom from the ideology of church guiding government can only exist when the people of the society free themselves from religion.

Hello all, My name is Dave i am a Political Science major with minor background in sociology and i want to use my time here to write about certain political issues and my opinions on them. I seek not to offend, but to discuss, disagree and present forth possible differing ideas. I hope you read and enjoy my future posts