Some History On Iran - Something To Consider As The Propoganda Continues

All this builds on an age-old stereotype, which sees the Persians as cunning, interfering, manipulative, and essentially mendacious; a prejudice that precludes any meaningful dialogue or negotiation. No caricature is without its truths, but it rarely penetrates beneath the surface. Iranians (or Persians – they are one and the same) may be both charming and manipulative, but this may reflect the fact that historically speaking, they have relied more on their wits than their military might for their survival, whether as a distinctive culture or as a state. In short, the Persians are quintessentially political animals rather than military ones. A recognition of this salient fact will help shed a different light on the reality of the "Persian menace". Let us first deconstruct the notion that Iran poses a military threat to the stability of the region or, in more hyperbolic renditions, the world. As suggested above, the historical record does not support this proposition. Strictly speaking, the last war of aggression launched by an Iranian monarch was in 1739, and since that time, the Iranian state has largely been on the defensive. Such was the military impotence of the Iranian state that James Morier's witticism that Persians would be happy to fight as long as nobody had to die, became a staple of many a briefing. http://telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;sessionid=VP5P5KM4VFTLBQFIQMFSNAGAVCBQ0JVC?xml=/opinion/2005/02/13/do1302.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/02/13/ixnewstop.html When you hear your favourite talking head claim Iran is a threat, ask them how many wars the US has started since 1739. There is no comparison.