Talk:United States support for Iran during the Iran–Iraq war

Untitled
Hi,

Based on this feedback I will create separate pages for US support for Iran and Foreign Support, and link these in tandem with US Support for Iraq page.

Thanks, Erxnmedia (talk) 15:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Whose feedback? As the majority of users on Talk:U.S. support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war have pointed out, it's POVish to equate USA's extensive support for Iraq ( a topic on which a large body of academic research and work exists) with USA's limited dealings with Iran (Iran-Contra affair, which has an article anyway). What you're doing here is a volition of WP:Point as well. --CreazySuit (talk) 06:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

There are two separate documented aspects to US support of Iran: weapons and satellite imagery, tied by a common theme of strategic intent to wear out both sides. This is larger than Iran-Contra. It is POV to exclude this information. Also by replacing "Iraq" with "Saddam" in title (which is only redirected back to "Iraq" you are pushing an emotional statement, also highly POV. Erxnmedia (talk) 15:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This page is nothing but a POV fork, which you unilaterally created after your efforts to rename US support for Iraq failed and the community opposed the renaming. Based on the same discussions, this page should either be renamed to "Foreign involvement in Iran-Iraq war" with a sub-section on US arms sales to Iran, or merged with Iran-Contra. You can't just pretend that USA's 8-year long extensive support for Iraq (which is an extensively researched topic, with tons of references) somehow equates USA`s arm-for-hostage sales to Iran for 2 years, and that both can just be magically classified as `support`. Your actions are both against WP:NPOV and WP:POINT. --CreazySuit (talk) 18:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

CreazySuit,

US supported both Iraq and Iran in arms-length maneuvers. Iran support was less and covert. US had a policy to prolong the conflict. This is documented. It doesn't fit with your worldview, but the references are there.

By throwing around WP:NPOB and WP:POINT you are only covering up your own extensive and persistent and aggressive POV edits.

Thanks, Erxnmedia (talk) 23:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Erxnmedia, what is the material we have for (US supporting Iran in the war)? we have the (2,000 TOW anti-tank missiles) and the (satellite intelligence). TOW missiles are already covered in Iran-Contra Affair, so we only have the (satellite intelligence), is this addition sufficient to create a new article for it? Imad marie (talk) 14:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Imad,

We have two sources supporting the idea that US wanted to promote a stalemate in Iran-Iraq War. This is consistent with US foreign policy in other areas. For example, in Afghanistan, US policy accepted Taliban but also supported Massoud, but support to Massoud was limited to an amount which was calculated to be less than Massoud needed to achieve victory, i.e. stated goal was "not to upset balance of power".

Because this is such a striking and little-known feature of US policy towards Iraq-Iran, and because it is quite separate from the issue of US support to Contras, and because in some sense US support to Contras may even have been, in its own way, cover for arms transfer to Iran, it is necessary to keep this article separate.

It is also necessary to have a separate article because other editors are so passionate in promoting the view that US only supported Iraq and was an ally of Iraq against Iran, that it is not possible to present the US support of Iran in a balanced way in the US support of Iraq article (which would have to have it's name changed, and we've seen where that has gone).

Thanks, Erxnmedia (talk) 15:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I get your point,


 * Now, honestly, I think that the title is kind of misleading, it's true that US balanced powers in the war, but we can not call that (US support to Iran). As I mentioned above, the only addition in this article is the (satellite intelligence) and this is not enough to create an article about it, and maybe it is unbalanced.


 * What I suggest, creating an article Foreign involvement in the Iran-Iraq war, I already suggested that in Talk:Iran-Iraq_War. I believe this would be fair and it gives the reader the "full picture". Imad marie (talk) 08:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Disagree that title is deceptive. Simply discusses lesser support instances and limited counterbalancing moves; never indicates this limited aspect is equal to larger Iraq-supporting efforts. Mydogtrouble (talk) 00:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Content dispute
Can it be established exactly when Intel sharing with Iran occurred, and do other sources support this view? I can cite several different sources all saying the United States provide Iraq with operational intelligence on the battlefield. Can the same be said about Iran? smb (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * UPI says:


 * former official said that he personally had signed off on a document that shared U.S. satellite intelligence with both Iraq and Iran in an attempt to produce a military stalemate. "When I signed it, I thought I was losing my mind," the former official told UPI.


 * Imad marie (talk) 06:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Cut and paste
Moving some text from the International aid to combatants in the Iran–Iraq War article, which is too US centric. Dynablaster (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

{{quotation|According to the report of the U.S. Congressional Committees Investigating the Iran-Contra Affair issued in November 1987, "the sale of U.S. arms to Iran through Israel began in the summer of 1985, after receiving the approval of President Reagan." These sales included "2,008 BGM-71 TOW anti-Tank missiles, and 235 parts kits for MIM-23 Hawk surface-to-air missiles had been sent to Iran via Israel." Further shipments of up to US$2 billion of American weapons from Israel to Iran, consisting of 18 F-4 Phantom II fighter-bombers, 46 A-4 Skyhawk fighter-bombers, and nearly 4,000 missiles were foiled by the U.S. Department of Justice, and "unverified reports alleged that Israel agreed to sell Iran AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, radar equipment, mortar and machine gun ammunition, field telephones, M-60 tank engines and artillery shells, and spare parts for C-130 transport planes." The London Observer also estimated that Israel's arms sales to Iran during the war totalled US$ 500 million annually, and Time Magazine reported that throughout 1981 and 1982, "the Israelis reportedly set up Swiss bank accounts to handle the financial end of the deals." For more on Israeli Hawk missile sales to Iran see.

Aircraft
During war, Iran operated U.S.-manufactured F-4 and F-5 fighters, as well as AH-1 Cobra light attack helicopters. It also operated a number of F-14 Tomcat fighters, which, according to a few sources, proved devastating to the Iraqis in the early phases of the war. However, due to the Iranian government's estrangement, spare parts were difficult to obtain. Despite this the Iranians managed to maintain a constant presence with their Tomcats during the entire conflict, mostly due to a combination of spare parts acquired on the black market and parts made in Iran. These were supported by KC-135s, a refueling tanker based on the Boeing 707. }}