PA:I apologise,yes you are right.
I didn't mean to put the word "bomb" in there,it was supposed to say PROGRAM. Because that's what the Shah invested the initial 6 mullion dollars that the CIA gave him to invest with Siemens,to build his nuclear domestic energy program.He was funded totally from then on by Iran's oil profits and millions fron the CIA and US govt.That's what paid for his lavish palaces(especially the one in Niavaran(northern Tehran)with it's solids gold phones and 15 million dollars worth of Persian rugs ALONE,LOL.
Some of the old palaces,after the Shah flew himself out of Iran in his private Boeing jet(Jan 1979),were auctioned off or turned into museums.LOL.
And the Mullahs sold of the loot to fund their party etc.
And by the way,it was the SAVAK(CIA,MOSSAD) that was behind the fire in the Abadan cinema in 1978,that killed 419 Iranian civilians.It was set up to look like the crazy Iranian Islamic revolutionaries had done it.
Anyway,that'a all past and there is no denying that Iran was steeped in corruption whether during the Monarchies,Democracies or Islamic regimes,and STILL is today. None were better than the other,all lusted after power,money for the luxury of the few at the loss of the MAJORITY of citizans.
Take away the corrupt governments of many nations like the US,Iran,Israel,Saudi,Egypt,Pakistan,Afgfahnistan etc etc and you are always left with millions of just ORDINARY WONDERFUL PEOPLE who just want to live in peace and harmony.
I have met SO MANY wonderful people of all faiths,ethnicities,cultures on my travels throughout the world,including the Middle/Near East,Persia,Central/Southern Asia,Europe,Africa,India,Australasia,Scandinavia etc etc and we all have many things in common,and tend to be wonderful,generous creatures of good heart,soul and conscience.
I see Iran as an ancient and deeply rich part of history,with a long troubled history internally,from the Qajars,Cossacks,New Dynasties,Democracies and theocracies,but the differences between the PEOPLES are few and similarities many.I would love to see Iran move forward in the Democratic,independent way that is chosen by the majority but suits ALL equally,fairly and respectfully.That's difficult for sure in Iran where political Theocracy and political Democracy are always butting heads.
And I still believe that Iran and the USA could be very strong allies in the future and enjoy an extremely healthy relationship,especially for the youngsters who are our future,just like here in the States.
I am sick of seeing Iran handled,financed and messed up by outsider govt's.
Just as Iranians must be sick of COUPS,COUPS,COUPS on their own soil.
And Americans are sick of the US Govt's involvement and increasing botching of these coups in foreign lands.
But it's hard for ordinary people to have quality of mutually respectful life,when power-hungry govt's have PERSONAL AGENDAS and PUPPETS to install.
One day hopefully,but I doubt soon.

If only we had STRONG,WISE,INTELLECTUAL LEADERS who look to the future,for all,instead of weak,power-hungry,selfish harpies that can't see further than their OWN IMMEDIATE PROFITS.
One day......

Grassroots - I respect your service in WWII, and I share your dislike of war. But as you said, it's important to know history and know who is on the right side of history. You don't really think we Americans are the bad guys, do you? If so, I'm afraid you've allowed yourself to be seriously mislead. America has enemies. Our enemies make up all kinds of lies and exaggerations to discredit our country. It's up to us to investigate and find out the truth.

You talk a lot about SAVAK, but what about SAVAMA, the mullahs' secret police, thugs, torturers and murderers? Everything you said SAVAK did is still being done by SAVAMA, and worse. They even rape young girls before they execute them because 'virgins can't go to hell', and they WANT them to go to hell after they murder them. I'm talking about teenage girls here! How come we never hear about SAVAMA? Just because the new acronym sounds (slightly) less savage than 'SAVAK' to English ears doesn't mean it is less brutal!

On the contrary - SAVAMA tortures and kills far more people than the Shah's security forces ever did. That is why the Iranian people have no chance to overthrow the mullahs. Mullahs are far too cruel and brutal.

You think SAVAK was bad? As you said, there were 400 terrorist bombings in Iran between 1971 and 1975. Were these bombings of police and military installations or government buildings? No - they were bombings of crowded MOVIE THEATERS, discos, hotels, etc. As always, the cowardly Islamists love to target and murder defenseless civilians. I would torture those bastards too!

There is of course a difference between brutality and effectiveness. Brutality can be counterproductive. The CIA knows this. That is why they directed SAVAK to be so brutal - because they knew it would be counterproductive and lead to the downfall of the Shah. Another example is that the U.S. refused to sell 'rubber bullets' and other advanced methods of riot-control, so that the Shah's police had to use more deadly methods, or be defeated.

Still, SAVAK didn't torture people because they were teachers, students or "faith-based". They tortured hateful, violent revolutionaries - members of the Iranian Communist party and Islamist terrorists who were bombing and murdering innocent civilians in an attempt to sow chaos, overthrow the government and impose a totalitarian dictatorship.

The Mullahs' SAVAMA, on the other hand, rapes and tortures young girls just for not completely covering their hair, or for having a boyfriend, etc. They also torture and murder homosexuals, people who practice the Bahai faith, or convert to Christianity, etc. - never mind students and civilians who risk their lives to bravely protest against the mullahs and their 30 years of totalitarian oppression, hate-mongering, war-mongering, skyrocketing inflation and unemployment, etc.

The Shah told his troops not to fire on the mobs in the streets and gave up his country peacefully because the Western countries told him to. The U.S., UK, France etc. all ganged up against the Shah and drove him out of power. Why? It doesn't make sense! The Shah was pro-West, pro-Israel and anti-communist. He was a force for stability in the Persian Gulf. He was a loyal ally of the West. Why would they betray him and help Islamist savages take over Iran?

I can only guess it is because the West seriously miscalculated and got too greedy. It seems they don't want any Middle Eastern country to rise, even one with a pro-Western, pro-Israel government like the Shah's Iran. And the Shah was making Iran a rich, progressive, modern country. That is why Western governments instructed their "human rights organizations" and media to spread all kinds of lies and propaganda, exaggerating the brutality of SAVAK, calling the Shah a dictator, etc. (This is why you "know" what you do about Iran, and why most of it is false). They thought that if they installed some backward, medieval mullahs in power that Iran would go back to being a third-world basketcase and remain that way forever. Well, it worked, except that the mullahs want to destroy Israel, spread their hateful Islamo-fascism all over the Muslim world, and eventually destroy the U.S. and the West.

I'm sorry to tell you but most of what you wrote isn't quite right or else doesn't make sense. It's not your fault - you've been misinformed by a massive, ongoing campaign of propaganda and disinformation. For instance, you say Mossadeq was "democratically elected". Not true. He was "elected" by his fellow members of parliament, and APPOINTED prime minister by the Shah himself! The Shah agreed with Mossadeq on the goal of getting a bigger share of oil revenues for Iran, but Mossadeq went too far in pushing the British. Iran was in no position to make one-sided demands of one of the most powerful countries on earth.

But rather than listen to reason, Mossadeq created an economic disaster for Iran by insisting on total nationalisation. So the Brits simply shut down the oil wells and blockaded the country, strangling it of all oil revenue. Furthermore, Mossadeq was openly insubordinate and refused to step down when the Shah asked him to, instead threatening the Shah and running him out of the country. So the UK and U.S. didn't "install" the Shah in 1953 - they RESTORED him to his rightful throne.

Did the Shah then "de-nationalize" Iranian oil and give it all back to the Brits? No! He negotiated the best deal he could at the time, which was a hell of a lot better than before and gave Iran a massive influx of wealth.

The Shah wanted nuclear weapons? I never heard that. Why would he want nuclear weapons? He didn't need them. Unlike the mullahs, he had no interest in starting a war, destroying Israel, etc. He wanted to develop the Iranian economy so that Persian people could join the modern world and be proud. He wanted nuclear power, but that shouldn't have been a problem for anyone. The Shah's Iran was a force for peace and stability, the opposite of what it became under the mullahs.

Another lie which you repeated here (again, not your fault - you didn't make it up, you're just repeating what you've heard): that the Shah "stole billions of dollars from Iran, built palaces and offshore properties". What offshore property? After he left his country in January 1979 he had no property to go to - he was an international refugee, travelling with his family from one third-world country to another in search of asylum and medical care. All the Western countries refused him entry, except the U.S., which gave him a million mixed messages and made him feel extremely unwelcome, but admitted him briefly for medical treatment. It is monumentally tragic what happened to this great man and his family.

Palaces? What palaces? He inherited ONE very MODEST "palace" which was built by his father. He never built even one more for himself. (There were one or two other old, decrepit palaces left over from the Qajar dynasty which were used for some ceremonies, etc.). Contrast this with someone like Saddam Hussein, who built 30 palaces for himself, each one grander than the last. THAT is a dictator.

Iran hasn't committed any wars of aggression in over 200 years? Wrong. Although they didn't start the Iran-Iraq war, the mullahs turned it into a war of aggression once Iraq asked for peace and they refused. The mullahs at that time wanted to take over Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. They still do.

Furthermore the mullahs have and ARE committing acts of aggression all over the world they bombed our Marines in Beirut, support Hezbollah and Hamas wars against Israel, help their Islamist allies in Iraq and Afghanistan kill American soldiers, etc. And they continue to threaten to "wipe Israel off the map", which explains their need for nuclear weapons. All of that is very aggressive!

The Shah wasn't perfect, but he wasn't a dictator. You cannot judge the Shah's government by comparing it with Western governments. The West has had hundreds of years to built stable, prosperous, and civil societies based on the humanist values of the Enlightenment. Iran has a history of being conquered and occupied for hundreds of years by brutal Arabs, Mongols and Turks. And it has the unhelpful legacy of Islam, which was imposed on it by the Arabs.

The culture is messed up. The people are prone to extremism and brutality, as in all cultures influenced by Islam. But the Pahlavi dynasty was trying to change all that and create a new enlightened, prosperous, modern society. It couldn't be done overnight.

Still, between 1925 and 1979 tremendous progress was made. Women were allowed to step outside their homes unescorted by male relatives, and without the need to cover their arms, legs and hair. Literacy and hygiene were taught. Schools and universities were built, for both boys and girls. Infrastructure was built. Hospitals were built. Hundreds of thousands of students were sent to study in Western countries on full scholarships.

But the country wasn't yet ready for democracy. It needed (and still does) an enlightened autocrat to set the preconditions for democracy, as happened in Japan, Taiwan, Korea and Singapore, all of which went from third-world status to first-world under enlightened autocrats. Contrast with such backward, poor, corrupt "democracies" like India, Philippines, Mexico, or today's Iran. Still, the Shah's intention was for Iran to become fully democratic under his son, had he been allowed to take power in the 1980s.

Actually I think you should go and read your history books a bit more first.
The TORTURE of thousands of Iranians was at its highest when the Western-backed coup ousted democratically elected Mossadeq and installed the 'peacock' Shah (1958)under "Operation Ajax" all to de-nationalise Iranian oli and put it BACK into B.P hands(previously AIOC).
He just looked more western and didn't scowl so much as Khomeini,but believe me,HE WAS BRUTAL and he knew what his SAVAK were doing to the people.
He ran 60,000 SAVAK(Sazman-i Etelaat va Amniyat-i Keshvar) intelligence agents/thugs many of whom brutally raped,tortured and murdered anyone who dissented,many people from the poorer classes and many who were students,teachers,and faith-based people(the Shah was there to be SECULAR).
Did you know it was the Shah's SAVAK who had the unique way of tying Persian political dissenters to metal bed-frames,naked,strapped by their ankles,necks and wrists and they would "cook" them front and back on the electrified bed-frames.
This went on in a permanent US mission right next to the Savak HQ(maybe the building is STILL there)in the basement.There was a fountain in the courtyard outside.
Other methods under the Shah were tying electric cables to genitals-male and female-, beating the soles of feet and nail pulling from feet and hands(it's all in the archives). Yes,it was all done by the Shah's 'man' Colonel Nimatullah Nassiri,known by the CIA and Kermit Roosevelt.
The CIA actaully had video footage of Nassiri's Savak agents torturing a young naked Iranian woman by burning her breasts with cigarettes.The ICRC have it all recorded from 1975-7.
Sorry folks! I know the truth hurts but unless you read your TRUE history you will see that Iran was no better under the would-be Western Shah than under the Islamic revolution "Mullahs".
The SHAH also BILKED BILLIONS from the Iranian people,for his palaces and OFFSHORE properties,money that belonged to the people and the nation and HE WAS ACTUALLY THE FIRST TO REQUEST NUCLEAR POWER for which Europe(Siemens)was only TOO happy to help him INSTALL.
Yes! It was the Shah that brought the first nuclear plant(Bushehr)into Iran not the "Mullahs" lol. The Shah was given 6 billion dollars to invest and build Bushehr(and the other one)with German company Siemans and it was the Shah WHO WAS THE FIRST TO WANT THE NUCLEAR BOMB,just before the Islamic Revolution!
Maybe you're not old enough to remember the democracy of Iran(Persia) being overthrown by US/british powers(oil-men) or to remember 1979 when the majority of Iranian people(not the wealthy minority elite of course)said,"Enough of this thieving,murdering Shah"?
But I do remember it all and it's all in the history/media archives STILL.
Especially the Shah's WESTERN-BACKED TORTURES AND BRUTALITY(they were getting cheap oil so they pretended not to notice that Iranian citizens were getting tortured and slaughtered.
And life under the Shah wasn't stable for Iranians otheriwse why were there 400 BOMBINGS between 1971 and 1975?(Read the history books).I remember all the riots in the 1960's in Iran shown over the world media.
And remember,Iran has NOT committed ANY ACTS OF WAR or AGGRESSION on ANYONE in 200 years.
Unlike our America and Israel and the West,LOL.
You really need to get your history right first,if you were not there to witness it. If it was your grandparents/parents who were there,then ask them.

Nobody wants war except WAR MONGERERS,OIL-MEN,DELUDED EXCEPTIONALISTS and ABSOLUTIST IMPERIALISTS.
After having fought in WW2 I certainly don't want to see more war.
But,in order to see what's REALLY going on now,you MUST study your history.
Just my humble human American opinion:)

I don't want war either. Obviously the Iranian people are not the problem, but there IS a big problem - the mullahs.

Unfortunately, there's gonna be a war if the Iranian people are unable to overthrow those mullah savages who run their country. Why? Because they love war, oppression, cruelty and murder. Ever since they took over 30 years ago they've been causing problems, torturing and murdering 10s of thousands of Iranian people and constantly threatening to destroy Israel, Britain and the U.S.

Why does Iran need nuclear weapons? Hmmm...let's see. They claim it's their right as a sovereign nation. Yeah, sure. And they claim that they feel threatened by the U.S. and Israel. This doesn't stand. For 30 years the U.S. or Israel could've bombed the hell out of Iran and changed that horrible regime. Did they do it? No. So that is a bogus rationale.

So what else? Let's see...the mullahs repeatedly threaten to destroy Israel. They repeatedly threaten to spread their fascist Islamic government all over the Muslim world. They repeatedly threaten America. Yeah - I think this is why they want nukes. They are the aggressors. They must be stopped. Either the Iranian people overthrow the bastards or else the U.S. and/or Israel are going to have to take defensive measures and destroy Iran's nuclear sites.

It is a terrible tragedy what has become of Iran these past 30 years. The West is partly to blame - they betrayed the Shah and brought him down. They put these mullah barbarians in power. Now everyone is suffering the consequence. What did they think was going to happen? They thought Khomeini was an Iranian Gandhi? Give me a F*CKING break. He was a hateful, murderous animal right from the beginning. Anyone could tell that with one glance at his hateful face. So how could his regime be anything but trouble?

If the Pahlavi dynasty had continued until today, Iran would be one of the richest, most civilized countries in the world - certainly one of the G8. It would be a huge force for peace and stability in the world. Instead Iran today is a total embarrassment - backward, poor, fanatic, murderous. The whole thing is just too sad and tragic to even think about. Just horrible.

To both Presidents of Iran and USA. I DON'T WANT WAR!!!!!!!!!!! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

I lived in Tehran, Iran in the mid 1970's and frankly I never felt the Iranian people wanted kill me and I wandered all over the city.

I think if Empress Farah Pahlavi of Iran and her family were back on the Throne in Iran their Country would be alot better off than with Irans current Government.

I love the Iranian people and I love their Country and History. I hope one day to live there again with all my Persian friends.

Ernie Smith
Charleston,SC