US Officials Warn Iran While Ignoring Their Own Regime Change History
The article frames Iran's 'warning' as a reaction to Trump administration comments, seemingly newsworthy in its isolation ( Newsweek ). What's left unsaid is the 1953 US/UK-orchestrated coup against Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, which installed the Shah. That's 70 years of historical context Newsweek conveniently forgets, turning Iran's deep-seated distrust into
a quirky foreign 'warning' rather than a logical consequence of serial regime change attempts. One might wonder why a nation repeatedly targeted for 'democracy promotion' (read: resource control) might be wary of officials openly discussing its future. This isn't about 'Trump official comments'; it's about the consistent, bipartisan US foreign policy of destabilization, conveniently whitewashed as
Iran being 'paranoid.' How many times can a nation be threatened before its warnings are seen as anything other than unprovoked aggression? Perhaps if the US focused on non-intervention, such 'warnings' would be less frequent. But then, who would sell the weapons?