Jerry Holbert by Jerry Holbert

Jerry Holbert

Comments (21) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    We sowed the seeds for the rule of the Ayatollahs. In 1953, MI6 & the CIA overthrew Mohammad Mosaddegh, who tried to nationalize the Iranian oil industry. He wanted to use the oil money to build a secular, democratic nation. BP had secured a 60 year deal to fix the price of oil on extremely favourable terms. (Intentional Brit spelling.) They weren’t about to give that up without a fight. Thanks to the help from the CIA, American oil companies were given a piece of the action.

    I would approach Rouhani with extreme skepticism. He has little real authority, nor did Ahmadinejad. Maybe the replacement of the bellicose Ahmadinejad with the more temperate Rouhani signals a willingness to negotiate.

    The Ayatollahs aren’t crazy or stupid. They are under a great deal of internal & external pressure. They’re more interested in staying in power in Iran & retaining influence in Iraq, Syria & Lebanon than competing in a nuclear arms race with Israel.

    (Cut n’ paste from an earlier comment, but what th’ heck.)

  2. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, about 3 years ago

    @Uncle Joe

    Truth, backed with facts, warrants repetition.
    Thanks to Uncle Joe and MichaelWME, as noted by GP.

  3. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 3 years ago

    Iran doesn’t have to wish that! Obama is already delivering it!

  4. jack75287

    jack75287 said, about 3 years ago

    What they have been trying to kill us for over thirty years that’s about right.

  5. ARodney

    ARodney said, about 3 years ago

    I don’t get the cartoon. The new Iranian president wished Jewish people a happy new year, and has said he wants to talk about ending their nuclear arms program in exchange for ending sanctions. It would be stupid not to talk to him about this.

  6. ARodney

    ARodney said, about 3 years ago

    Obama has a lot of plans that all economists agree would help the economy. The GOP has blocked all of them. What happened to the jobs bill? Progressive tax reform to increase consumer demand? Stimulus spending? Infrastructure spending? Education spending? Ending the stupid sequester? Fixing the economy is simple, but the GOP would lose if the economy improves under Obama, and to hell with America when the party’s success is at stake.

  7. jack75287

    jack75287 said, about 3 years ago

    Sorry Kent your argument is slightly wrong & simplistic. The anglo-Soviet invasion did not include the U.S. It was the British other CommonWealth powers & the Soviet Union. Its purpose in 41 was to keep oil flowing the Soviet Union to fight Nazi Germany.

    After the war we the U.S. helped restore the same constitutional monarchy with the elder Shah’s son the one we know of today. (Read Norman Schwarzkopf autobiography his father was part of that effort.

  8. lonecat

    lonecat said, about 3 years ago


    Britain, resentful of the nationalization of Iran’s oil industry, came up with the idea for the coup in 1952 and pressed the U.S. to mount a joint operation to remove the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh1 and install the Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi to rule Iran autocratically. Partially due to fear of a Communist overthrow due to increasing influence of the Communist Tudeh party, and partly to gain control of a larger share of Iranian oil supplies, the US agreed. Brigadier General Norman Schwarzkopf, Sr. and CIA guru Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. were ordered to begin a covert operation to overthrow Mossadegh. A complex plot, codenamed Operation Ajax, was conceived and executed from the US Embassy in Tehran. Full details of the operation were released fifty years later, in 2003. Britain, who previously had controlled all of the Iranian oil industry, lost its monopoly and allowed U.S. oil companies to compete in Iran.

    The United States and the West helped to overthrow Mohammed Mossadegh, the prime minister of Iran, in Operation Ajax. Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi gained in political power. Over the next decades the Shah increased the economic strength of Iran but he also repressed political dissent. This eventually led to the rise of political Islam in Iran.

    Through the 1960s and 1970s the CIA used their alliance with the government of Iran to gain staging grounds and Iranian Air Force assets for aggressive, airborne reconnaissance missions into Soviet Territory in Project Dark Gene.

    The CIA colluded with the Shah of Iran to finance and arm Kurdish rebels in the Second Kurdish-Iraqi War in an attempt to overthrow Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr. When Iran and Iraq signed the Algiers Agreement in 1975, the support ceased. The Shah denied the Kurds refuge in Iran, even as many were slaughtered. The U.S. decided not to press the issue with the Shah.4 “Covert action should not be confused with missionary work”, declared Sec. of State Henry Kissinger.5 Subsequently, al-Bakr attempted in 1979 to demote the Vice-President, Saddam Hussein, to a position of relative obscurity. Hussein responded with a counter-coup, forcing al-Bakr to resign, conducting a ruthless purge of hundreds of Ba’athists and naming himself President.

  9. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago

    “Fall of the Peacock Throne”- interesting history on Iran.

    From the posts over the years here, and across the blogosphere, like with Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and right-wing “religionists”, something IS consistent.

    The REAL issue goes all the way back to the Crusades, and the “good Christian” view that Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, HIndus, Buddhists, and everyone else on the planet but them MUST BE SLAUGHTERED!!

    If they don’t do it, then end the end, “God” will of course do it for them. While there are a few Christians with an alternate view, they are the targets of the “religious teapots”, just as any moderate in politics is subject to the hate and derision of the “political” tea-nuts.

    Yes, the “right wing” mullahs, ARE just as bad as rignt-wing Christians and Jews (think Sharon and the camps in Lebanon, or Netanyahu and the current prison camp called “Gaza”) who have distorted the teachings of their own religions to conquer, kill, and subdue not just the people, but the Earth itself to satisfy their greed, either for resources, profit, or more dangerously, power! (hmm, a double entendre’)

    The refusal, or abhorrence, to compromise defines nothing as specifically as either religion, or nationalism in the name of religion. (The most dangerous combination of all! Theocracy.)

  10. jack75287

    jack75287 said, about 3 years ago


    All true but lets look at it this way, the Shah was pretty much in power before and after. How bad could we have been? The Prime Minister that was kicked out was nationalizing the oil fields and something this country never really loved the idea of pretty much anywhere, while the real issues that started what we are talking about was a decade before 1952. Also if you want to get picky Truman a Democrat was in charge of the country at the time.

  11. eugene57

    eugene57 said, about 3 years ago

    This is called a teaching moment, hoping some will learn something and modify their viewpoints.

  12. lonecat

    lonecat said, about 3 years ago


    I don’t care if Truman was a democrat or not. I’m not a democrat, and I don’t have any interest in protecting the image of democrats. But I don’t buy your justification for the way the US engineered the overthrow of a legitimate government. Yes, he was nationalizing the oil fields, and we didn’t like it. So when we don’t like what another government does we can overthrow it? Sounds like the Soviet Union in Hungary, etc. And of course the result was that US companies got in on the oil profits. As usual, US foreign policy is mostly aimed at maximizing the profits of US companies, with little regard for little niceties such as overthrowing legitimate governments.

  13. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago


    The anglo-Soviet invasion did not include the U.S. It was the British other CommonWealth powers & the Soviet Union. Its purpose in 41 was to keep oil flowing the Soviet Union to fight Nazi Germany.

    Time for another history lesson. Clark was responding to my post about the British/American overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected leader in 1953. That coup opened up Iran’s oil fields to the U.S.

    The 1941 coup replaced Reza Shah with his son, Reza Pahlavi. Reza Shah tried to stay neutral. The Soviets needed the guaranteed supply of oil, but the British army & fleet in the Mediterranean also relied on Iranian oil.

  14. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago


    How bad could we have been?

    I’m guess you would love for another nation to overthrow Obama & replace him with their puppet.

    Also if you want to get picky Truman a Democrat was in charge of the country at the time.

    Democrat Presidents have been as guilty of foreign meddling as Republicans, but again: read the history before you make a false claim. The coup was in 1953, not 1952. This is important because Truman opposed it & refused to back the Brits. In 1953, Eisenhower agreed to move the plan forward.

  15. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, about 3 years ago


    Great summary. It’s interesting to think about what might have happened if Mossadegh remained in power. He remains a popular figure in Iran, but is not favored by the Ayatollahs because he was in fact a secularist, focused on Westernization. The Shah & his family were pro-Western, but focused on putting billions of dollars in their pockets. Would the religious extremists have gained power if not for the coup? We’ll never know.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (6).