I need books about middle east and west relations
bonus points if:
Related to Iran
Related to recent history(1900-today)
Introduction to islam expansion over the middle east throughout history
In short, this wave of terrorism and "conquering" of Europe and North America by Islam can be blamed on: The English, The Americans, and the French.
Iranians were fed up by massive westernization of Iran that was happening under the Shah. They sought solace under Khomeini as he appeared to be a moral, religious man who was basically a Liberal. He had a "take from the rich and give to the poor" attitude. This couldn't be farther from the truth. Anyway... Mosadegh became prime minister, and promised to nationalize the oil, which the English didn't like. Khomeini was given asylum in France until they were ready to strike. Helped by, CIA (who paid street gangs and other minority "militias" ) to hit the streets and overthrow the DEMOCRATICALLY elected government. After getting into power, the clergy (instead of helping the people, abused them instead) started a war with Iraq to increase influence and assert dominance. This led to other nations in the middle-east to use oil profits to stop this influence via extremist Islam, suh as Wahhabism.
There's a lot of crucial details and facts missing from the above, but you should get the gist.
I'm often dumb-founded people in France or other Western countries are shocked when terrorist attacks take place. You were completely okay with electing a government who started dirty and unprofessional wars abroad but are now surprised when they retaliate?
As much as I hate Islam, I'm slightly happy to see Europe getting destroyed. You reap what you sow.
I'm not from France or Usa, i'm not taking this personally. I know a lil bit about history so I knew that.
Just tell me when do you see that an attack in Paris is justified by the fact that some government did shit in the middle-east. (And that was the USA, in that case)
The lost lives of innocents lost is always a tragedy. Please don't misunderstand me. When I said it brought me a little joy to see Europe destroyed, I meant culturally.
The people in the West have a small knowledge of their governments. They may take their protests to the streets to make themselves feel-good but don't do jack shit when it comes to elections. Why? Because deep down inside they could not care less. They want bigger TV's and lower taxes. They don't want to know about families that got killed oversees because of their countries' interest. It doesn't make them feel good. That's what pisses me off. They can't put themselves in the shoes of other people.
Do you know why terrorists act? Sure some of them are literal psychopaths, but the others? They starved. They've watched their families and neighbours get slaughtered because of countries like yours. What would you do if it happened to you? Just sit idle? I think not. When you've been emotionally scarred like that.. It makes it easy for clever people (such as Muslim Extremists who by the way don't give a shit about Islam - all they want is power and wealth) to get the scared kids to act on their behalf.
I was born to a non-muslim family who had everything taken from them. Our land, our wealth, everything. We left Iran for Canada. The regime will get toppled and fall on its own head in time. A revolution won't work in Iran because Iranians just had one 40 years ago. They're tired of the bloodshed.
>The people in the West have a small knowledge of their governments. They may take their protests to the streets to make themselves feel-good but don't do jack shit when it comes to elections. Why? Because deep down inside they could not care less. They want bigger TV's and lower taxes. They don't want to know about families that got killed oversees because of their countries' interest. It doesn't make them feel good. That's what pisses me off. They can't put themselves in the shoes of other people.
This is a generalization, but it's fair enough since most of it is real. Still a rough generalization, but it would be wrong to say that the majority in europe gives a shit about who they elected.
Well besides this, all the rest is totally true. Our opinons aren't opposed.
Look brother, we're a minority. We read and read and read. We have a good understanding of how this world works but hesitate to act to make it better. For me personally, I would never last in politics. Why? Because I would end up playing dirty and go against my morals and virtues. That's why the best way to change the world is to be the best person you can be. Everyday, you should strive to get better. I have a great job and I still find time to volunteer. Why? Not just because it makes me feel good inside. But because I hope one day someone sees something good in me and decides to change their life for the better. And so on and so forth.
And as for your original question just start to read on the topic. Anywhere you can find. My dad's been my main source of information. It's hard to find a good source on 4chan because most people here are too busy shitposting and arguig about who's white. Best of luck!
>A revolution won't work in Iran because Iranians just had one 40 years ago. They're tired of the bloodshed.
At some point though Islam and Liberalism will clash in Iran. I just don't think religion (which means "to be bound") and freedom can coexist.
Well.. Iran is Liberal in some senses. For example, their employee rights outweigh employee rights in Canada.. Seriously.. With that said, there is huge unemployment and a brain drain. The best minds are travelling to the west and Iran is kind of okay with that why? More education = less power for them.
>It's all the West's fault
Fuck off, while I won't deny we were totally complicit in Mosadegh's removal, you're absolutely dreaming if you think Khomeini didn't enjoy unprecedentedly vast levels of popular support.
>The best minds are travelling to the west and Iran is kind of okay with that why? More education = less power for them.
This doesn't make sense to me, more education means less power for the best Iranian minds? What the hell do they teach in Iran then? Like seriously, what sort of history is taught in Iran? I'd like to think it isn't a predominantly muslim one..Iran is much deeper than just Islam.
Iran is the best-educated country on the planet IIRC, in terms of degrees per capita, and the government itself is technocratic, both the secular and clerical figures are highly academic. Khomeini was a well-respected scholar of Plato IIRC.
Khomeini was popular right before he was elected and right afterwards when he had not yet acted. He turned the country into shit with your help. Now we have quite a sizeable minority who whole-heartedly believe in the regime because they've slowly been brainwashed. Because if you're loyal to the regime, you get to drive in BMW's. So you fuck off. All of this happened with your country's HELP. So you fuck off.
Okay but I'm still interested in what is taught with regards to Iranian history in Iran. How indepth and far back does it go?
Tbh i'm not asking you specifically, but those are questions I have in general with regards to Iranian youth education.
At anything besides University level, there is little discussion of Iran's past before the revolution. I can't tell you about high school because I was only there until the first year of HS.
Whoops, pretty repetitive there. Fucked up the editing. Oh well. You get the point. The west orchestrated the regime change. Financed it and provided logistics. Made Khomeini seem like the only choice. Made Mosadegh look like a villain. It was mostly the West's fault. I have a right to be angry. But in the end, I have to be okay with it. Why? Because they were acting in their best interests. You can't blame people for wanting what everybody else wants: to be on top.
>At anything besides University level, there is little discussion of Iran's past before the revolution.
You see, to me this is where future problems will arise in Iran. Like I said, the Iranians I see on youtube or even 4chan, they're not prescribers to the Islamic faith, I see many say "We're Zoroastrian", "Persians", "Aryans". Yet they live in a politically Islamic country which doesn't prescribe to notions of anything pre-Islam. I'm probably wrong on that statement, but it seems inate to me that those with the political clerical powers wouldn't want people thinking in those ways, they'd rather keep Iranians in the Iranian or Muslim boxes.
basically what i'm trying to say is that a islamic republic wouldn't be acceptive to anything other than islam. But Iran historically speaking and culturally speaking is much more than Islam.
The Ayatollah is already on the defence of the Islamic Revolution, he puts the blame of trying to destroy it on the US/Israel (in some respects he's right), but in reality some Iranians aren't keen on remaining a Islamic republic, but rather a secular one. That's a reality these Islamic clerics dread.
atleast with Iran the west pretty much accepts that they deliberately influenced your country.There are more, countless more countries who suffered juntas, and ''revolutions'' and military stepping into state affairs, all backed by the west with no one accepting their crimes.
In my opinion giving sources to someone is fine, its up to them to understand the content's particular discourse and thesis. As well as whether the evidence cited by the article or book is sound or not. I.E. Why do people get a big dick about not suggesting articles? Getting the sources is a mere fraction of the work involved, if you just slap others work down its shitty work of your own.
Anyway, Books Incoming::
-The Unmaking of the Middle East by Jeremy Salt
-Afghanistan: A Short History of Its People and Politics by Martin Ewans
-A Modern History of Iran by Ervand Abrahamian
-Modern Iran: Roots and Results of Revolution by Nikki R. Keddie
-Secularism Confronts Islam by Oliver Roy
-The Golden Age of Persia by Richard N. Frye
-A History of the Arab Peoples by Albert Hourani
-A History of Islamic Societies by Ira M. Lapidus
That should be a good start for the topic you said. Check the back of these books though, all have great bibliographies for further reading. Also the last two are more reference I would say.
Why are Iranians so obsessed with Sean Connery
Op here, thanks for the information, i've already knew that tho. I just want a more deep knowledge about it(that's why im asking for books), i want to read and know every names that participated in the overthrow of the Sha and how did islam managed to expand on the region over the zoroasthrians and other non-muslim persians through past history, since i love the history of persia, im surprised on how a bunch of tribes under a fucked up version of christiainism managed to destroy a once prosperous empire and then in 1979 destroy secularism impulsed by the Sha.
Iran/Persia deserves a much greater present and future than the current fanatical muslim, backward government.
That said, fuck you, we're(us common folks living in europe) not responsible for what some businessmen do to make profit with your problems.
Ervand Abrahamian has several great books on modern Iran, look up his books. It may also help to read the actual writings of Khomeini, just to get an idea of the context he was writing in and what issues made his ideology what it was.
What about the Russians? Perhaps they didn't play a part in those events of the cold war, but they subjected Iran to humiliating concessions and treaties before the Russo-Japanese war crippled them. I mean, they invaded the country (with the british) during the war because they wanted that Persian oil and didn't like Reza shah's attitude.
Michael Axworthy's Revolutionary Iran is especially good.
Also, Ryszard Kapuscinski's The Shah of Shahs, but that's more in the direction of literary non-fiction/journalism, it's an amazing read.
> Iranians were fed up by massive westernization of Iran
So then they were fed up with proper sanitation, schools, roads, washing machines…
Iran was on the cusp of 1st World status and could have become the leading light of the Muslim world and lead them to the long needed reformation but instead, Iranians chose to bow down to bat-shit crazy fundamentalist religionists, enter into conflict with _both_ superpowers, get into a horrendous war with Iraq and essentially flush several entire generations of its people down the toilet.
And ironically, it was the very Westernization they opposed that allowed the mad mullahs to gain power.
The fall of the Shan and rise of Khomeini was truely a historical tragedy, a nation hasn't voluntarily fucked up that bad since Japan bombed Pearl Harbor.
>dont convince yourself that history is eye for an eye
Also dont convince yourself that life is a zero sum game;that there must be a loser for every winner. Peasants today live as the aristocrats of old ages lived.
>The Shah was in charge before Mosadegh
Anyways, as I was saying. The American people were so fed up with the taxation under Abraham Lincoln that they joined George Washington in overthrowing the tyrant and giving all white men suffrage. Only then would Andrew Jackson be elected. Now some people don't like Andrew Jackson, particularly because of his policy of breaking up trusts, but it wouldn't matter in the long term. George W Bush would get in charge and enact the Trail of Tears act a very predatory and unconstitutional act which he claimed was necessary after the Confederacy's surprise attack at Pearl Harbor. Fortunately Eisenhower would remove it and ensure the Native Americans were not wiretapped and only had to drive from their homelands on the new Highways instead of via the railroads which all the Chinese made and shortly after revolted in the Whiskey rebellion. None of this really matters, since Barack HUSSEIN Obama shut everyone up by dropping nuclear bombs on San Francisco and Los Angeles in 1969.
Anyone else need help reviewing American history? I'm here all night.
He's written several books:
A history of Modern Iran has already been mentioned and covers general Iranian history from the Qajar dynasty all the way up to 2008.
Tortured confessions is an in depth look at the history torture and political repression in Iran, namely by SAVAK, the shah's secret police, and the Islamic revolutionaries and the Basij.
I don't think I have to explain what his book "The coup" is about.
Iran between two revolutions was written in 1982 and isn't as up to date, but also contains information not present in the other books.
All of these can be found on amazon or google books.
>sanitation, schools, roads, washing machines only come with Westernization
It sure as shit doesn’t come from fundamentalist Islam.
>what kind of a ruler the shah actually was
The kind of ruler who brought his people into the light of modernity, only for them to regress into a medieval theocracy.
>He probably meant consumerism and capitalism in general.
You don’t get washing machines without consumerism and capitalism in general.
Alright, nevermind, you're baiting or actually retarded. Either way, talking with you any further will accomplish nothing, since you clearly lack the mental capacity to understand actual history.
ruler were ready to back stab each other to get piece of land, men were forced from their home to the battlefield, the prince were laid in gold while their peasants were starving. I wouldn't call that prosperous.
i have read many a time that there are still parts of germany and scandanavia that do no have running water or electricity. would you say that they are not westernized. on the other hand, the entirety of saudi arabia has runing water and electricty and yes also washing machines. would you say that saudis are westernized. you might say no. but i would say that saudi arabia is a nation state. and the nation sate is a western plague. so yes they are westernized and so is iran and every other nation state on this earth. the age of imperialism has not ended.