Comments by "Poisonelle Misty" (@PoisonelleMisty4311) on "Timeline - World History Documentaries" channel.

The Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was perceived as a bad ruler for several reasons: 1. **Political Repression**: The Shah's regime was known for its severe political repression, with dissent often met with violence and human rights abuses. 2. **Economic Inequality**: Despite economic growth during his reign, the benefits were not equally distributed, leading to widespread poverty and inequality. 3. **Authoritarian Rule**: The Shah centralized power in his own hands, suppressing opposition and stifling democratic freedoms. 4. **Corruption**: The regime was plagued by corruption, with the Shah and his inner circle amassing vast wealth at the expense of the Iranian people. 5. **Western Influence**: Many Iranians saw the Shah as a puppet of Western powers, particularly the United States, which led to resentment and anti-Western sentiment. These factors, among others, contributed to the widespread discontent that ultimately led to the Iranian Revolution in 1979 and the overthrow of the Shah's regime.
21
the Persian was far more advanced agriculture than greek, they are just underrated. They have ancient literature.
6
♥♥♥♥♥♥
1
I understand your perspective, and it's clear that the interventions in Iraq and Libya have had long-lasting negative consequences for both countries. It's important for governments to prioritize diplomacy and non-intervention in order to support the self-determination of other nations. It's unfortunate that these conflicts were driven by political and economic agendas rather than a genuine desire to help improve the lives of the people in these countries. Moving forward, it's crucial for the international community to learn from these mistakes and work towards more peaceful and cooperative solutions to global challenges.
1
Yes, that is another aspect of the complex relationship between powerful countries like the US and their alliances with other countries or leaders. It is unfortunately common for alliances to change or be discarded once they are no longer useful to the dominant country. This can create a sense of betrayal and distrust among those who were once considered allies. It is indeed a typical aspect of power dynamics in international relations.
1
here are a variety of factors that can contribute to why dictators become killers. Here are a few possible reasons: Psychological factors: Some dictators may have a psychopathic or sociopathic personality, which can lead them to lack empathy for others and rationalize violence as a means to maintain power and control. Fear and insecurity: Dictators may become paranoid and fearful of losing their power, leading them to eliminate any perceived threats to their rule through violence. Ideology: Some dictators believe in a political or ideological system that justifies violence as a means to achieve their goals. They may see themselves as a revolutionary leader who must use force to create a new order. Historical precedent: Many dictators come to power in environments where violence and human rights abuses are already prevalent. This normalization of violence can make it easier for them to engage in violent actions without facing consequences. Lack of accountability: Dictators often consolidate power by dismantling democratic institutions, media freedom, and civil society organizations that could hold them accountable for their actions. This lack of oversight can enable them to carry out violent acts with impunity.
1
I'm so sorry to hear about your uncle and the pain your family has gone through not knowing what happened to him. War has a way of leaving lasting scars on families, even decades after it ends. It's understandable to feel anger towards those who made the decisions that led to such loss and suffering. I hope that one day you may find closure and peace, whether that means finding out what happened to your uncle or finding a way to honor his memory. Your family's story is a reminder of the human cost of war and the importance of working towards peace and understanding.
1
That's a fascinating family history. It must have been a challenging time for your dad's family to have to flee persecution. And it's interesting that he had a friend who remembered seeing Saddam Hussein as a child. It just goes to show how connected history can be. Thank you for sharing that with me.
1
Saddam Hussein was born in 1937 to a financially disadvantaged rural family near Tikrit. Unfortunately, his father had passed away due to an illness before his birth, causing his pregnant mother to fall into despair and attempt suicide. Upon his birth on April 28, 1937, Saddam's mother struggled with severe depression and did not initially bond with him. As a result, Saddam was raised by his maternal uncle Khayrallah Talfah Msallat in Tikrit during his early years. When he was three years old, Saddam was reunited with his mother, who had remarried and was in a toxic relationship with his step-father, Hajj Ibrahim Hasan. Tragically, Saddam endured both psychological and physical abuse from his step-father. Additionally, he faced further trauma at a young age when he was victimized by sexual assault. There are a variety of factors that may have contributed to Saddam Hussein's behavior, including a troubled childhood, exposure to violence and political turmoil, and a hunger for power and control. Some experts also suggest that he may have had a narcissistic personality disorder, which could have influenced his erratic and aggressive behavior.
1
Saddam Hussein was born on April 28, 1937, in the village of Al-Awja near Tikrit, Iraq. He was raised by his mother, Subha Tulfah al-Mussallat, and his stepfather, Ibrahim al-Hassan. His biological father, Hussein 'Abid al-Majid, died before he was born. Saddam had a difficult childhood, as his family faced financial struggles and his stepfather was abusive towards him. He was reportedly close to his mother, who was a strong and influential figure in his life. She instilled in him a sense of pride, honor, and resilience, which would shape his future actions as a leader. Despite his troubled upbringing, Saddam excelled in school and was known for his intelligence and charisma. He was also involved in political activism from a young age and joined the Ba'ath Party in his early twenties. Overall, Saddam Hussein's relationship with his parents was complex and tumultuous, influenced by the challenges and hardships he faced during his formative years.' Throughout his life, Saddam Hussein struggled with feelings of abandonment and betrayal, particularly towards his biological father who had passed away before he was even born. This sense of loss and resentment may have fueled his desire for power and control, as he sought to assert dominance over those around him. His early experiences with family dynamics and relationships undoubtedly played a role in shaping his character and leadership style. Overall, the combination of these factors can contribute to why most dictators become killers as they seek to solidify their power and suppress any opposition.
1
Saddam Hussein was born on April 28, 1937, in the village of Al-Awja near Tikrit, Iraq. He was raised in a poor family and experienced a difficult childhood, marked by his father's early death and his mother's struggles to support the family. Saddam's relationship with his parents was complicated - he had a difficult relationship with his stepfather, who reportedly abused him, and was deeply attached to his mother. As for why Saddam Hussein became a killer, it is a complex question that likely has multiple factors at play. Some possible reasons include his upbringing in a violent and unstable environment, his experiences of poverty and hardship, his rise to power in a brutal political system, and his own personality traits and beliefs. Additionally, it is believed that Saddam Hussein exhibited sociopathic traits and a willingness to use violence and manipulation to achieve his goals. These factors combined may have contributed to his willingness to order the executions of thousands of people during his reign as dictator of Iraq.
1
The Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was considered a bad ruler by many for the following reasons: 1. **Authoritarian Rule**: The Shah's regime was characterized by repressive tactics, censorship, and human rights abuses. Political dissent was not tolerated, and opposition voices were often silenced through intimidation and violence. 2. **Economic Inequality**: While the Shah's modernization efforts brought economic development to some sectors of society, there was also widespread poverty and inequality, with many Iranians feeling left behind by the regime's economic policies. 3. **Corruption**: The Shah and his inner circle were accused of rampant corruption, enriching themselves at the expense of the Iranian people and exploiting the country's resources for personal gain. Despite these negative aspects, some people liked the Shah for various reasons: 1. **Modernization**: The Shah's regime implemented modernization programs that brought improvements in infrastructure, education, and healthcare, which some Iranians appreciated. 2. **Stability**: The Shah's authoritarian rule provided a sense of stability and security, especially compared to the political turmoil and uncertainty that followed his overthrow during the Iranian Revolution. After the Shah was overthrown, some people came to dislike the leaders who replaced him for the following reasons: 1. **Repression**: The post-revolutionary government, under Ayatollah Khomeini and later leaders, implemented strict Islamic laws and cracked down on dissent, leading to a loss of personal freedoms and civil liberties for many Iranians. 2. **Economic Challenges**: The new government faced economic hardships and struggled to provide for the needs of the population, leading to inflation, unemployment, and other difficulties for many Iranians. 3. **Political Instability**: The period following the revolution was marked by political infighting, power struggles, and a lack of consensus on how to govern the country effectively, which contributed to disillusionment among some segments of the population.
1
It's important to note that perceptions of political leaders can vary widely among different groups of people and over time. While many people viewed the Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, as a bad ruler for the reasons mentioned earlier, there were also those who supported him for various reasons: 1. **Modernization Efforts**: The Shah initiated ambitious modernization programs that aimed to rapidly develop Iran's economy, infrastructure, and education system. 2. **Women's Rights**: The Shah's regime implemented progressive reforms that granted women more rights and opportunities, such as the right to vote and access to education and employment. 3. **Stability and Security**: Some Iranians appreciated the relative stability and security provided by the Shah's authoritarian rule, especially in contrast to the chaos and uncertainty that followed the Iranian Revolution. On the other hand, some people dislike the leaders who came after the Shah for several reasons: 1. **Islamic Rule**: The new government established after the revolution implemented strict Islamic laws and restrictions, which some viewed as oppressive and regressive. 2. **Political Repression**: The post-revolutionary leadership, particularly under Ayatollah Khomeini, was accused of cracking down on dissent and limiting democratic freedoms. 3. **Economic Hardships**: The new government struggled to address economic challenges, leading to inflation, unemployment, and other hardships for many Iranians. These factors have contributed to mixed opinions about both the Shah and the leaders who came after him, with different segments of the population holding divergent views based on their experiences and perspectives.
1
During the 12th century monarchs like Henry II and Richard the Lionheart engaged in crusade s to the Holy Land, demonstrating their commitment to the Christian faith and killed many Muslims in the process. These crusades were seen as a way to expand their influence and gain control over strategic territories, while also fulfilling their religious obligations. However, the violent nature of these campaigns led to significant loss of life and strained relations between Christians and Muslims for centuries to come. They were also very hated by poor brittish people who saw the crusades as a distraction from addressing domestic issues such as poverty and inequality. The high costs associated with funding these expeditions further exacerbated the resentment towards the crusaders, as it burdened the already struggling economy. Despite their initial intentions, the negative consequences of the crusades left a lasting impact on both European and Middle Eastern societies.
1
Henry II and Richard the Lionheart are the worst king in Uk, they engaged in crusade wars and killed many muslims and destroyed economy in uk. They hated the brittish working class and were known for their oppressive rule. They made a cruel example out of anyone who opposed them and showed no mercy towards their subjects. Their reign was marked by constant turmoil and suffering for the people of the UK. Additionally, their actions fueled resentment and animosity among neighboring kingdoms, leading to further conflicts and instability in the region. Furthermore, the oppressive rule of the crusaders had severe long-term consequences on the social fabric of the UK. The destruction of the economy and the widespread killing of Muslims created a deep sense of mistrust and division within society, making it difficult for communities to rebuild and reconcile. This legacy of violence and animosity would continue to shape the country's history for years to come. People constantly talked about the oppressive regime and longed for a change in leadership. The impact of their rule was felt for generations, as the scars of their atrocities and destruction continued to haunt the nation.
1