Stephen Kinzer's Synthesis Essay

Throughout today’s society, media contributes to almost everyone’s daily life. From informative news channels to comical television shows, media proves to be effective in advertisement, releasing messages and informing the audience. Although media proves to be wildly effective in advertising, releasing messages and informing the audience, periodically destructive and misleading messages are provided to the audience and directly influencing women. Cultural critics widely agree that media tends to negatively influence women and all the critics point to research which supports the belief that women are portrayed as subordinate to men, having no

Furthermore, the Shah purchased billions of dollars worth of weapons of security from the US. In 1979 the realm was overthrown by extreme Islam’s that were followers of Ayatollah Khomeini. The intention of the Iranian students was to display their displeasure against the Shah. Their demand was the return of the Shah for a trial followed by his death. In addition, they asked that the US stay out of their country’s affairs. Carter’s approach required the safeguarding of American hostages but also guaranteed an alliance with Iran. Carter’s tactics on the situation had devastating effects on his run for re-election (Hamilton, 1982).

All the Shah’s Men by Stephen Kinzer details the 1953 American-orchestrated coup in Iran. Iran was under British economic control, but as it modernized, Iranians began fighting for their own control. Their fledgling democracy was working to modernize, until the UK and the US decided to interfere to protect Britain’s colonial holdings from Soviet influence. Because the US was not interested in protecting a British business, British politicians emphasized the threat the USSR held to Iran, leading to Americans inserting themselves into a nation’s politics in which they had no place. They successfully orchestrated a coup, however, the negative, long-term, anti-Western results overwhelm any positive effect. All the Shah’s Men by Stephen Kinzer paints a picture of the results of action without adequate attention to future results.

On David Farber 's book Taken Hostage, Farber informs us about the Iran Hostage Crisis and America 's First Encounter with Radical Islam. This book tells us how the United States and Iran got into conflict, leading to the Iranians holding American Embassy members hostage as revenge for them feeling betrayed by the United States. It also informs us about other events that occurred in a decade that caused the United States many problems. Farber talked about all the events that lead to the Iranian Hostage Crisis. November 4, 1979, seizure of the United States embassy in Tehran and the hostage of four hundred and forty four days following, were the first steps leading up to the perpetual War on Terror. Farber believes the failure from American policymakers and more specifically from President Carter, to identify the severity of the crisis made for the prolonged crisis. The sheer ineptitude of Carter administration was the cost of the US to lose it’s way economically, culturally, politically and even military. Carter struggled to respond to the impulses of Islamic fundamentalism within the prevailing Cold War paradigm. They saw the real battle as against secular modernism and they recognized that the US was the major force spreading this cultural and political belief throughout the world. The media misrepresentations of the struggle and mass media manipulation of Americans played on the peoples emotions. Although Carter was popular at the beginning of his presidency, this began

Looking back to 1953, the nation was at a much different place. However, the decisions that were made in 1953 greatly impacted the nation’s involvement in terrorism today. Stephen Kinzer, author of All The Shah’s Men, addresses how the United States’ role in the 1953 CIA coup in Iran leads up to modern terrorism that can be seen in society currently. Additionally, Kinzer is a very credible source considering he has worked in more than fifty countries and is an award-winning foreign journalist. Furthermore, Kinzer has been the New York Times bureau chief in multiple different countries; some being Berlin, Managua, Nicaragua, and Istanbul. With that being said, Kinzer has a vast amount of knowledge regarding the nation’s role in foreign affairs. According to Kinzer, the 1953 CIA coup in Iran politically destabilized the nation, led to the rise of modern terrorism, and immensely affected the CIA’s reputation. This paper examines Kinzer’s arguments with the assessment that the nation involving itself in foreign affairs undeniably leads to unintended consequences.

Into the Wild, by Jon Krakauer that tells the story of a young man who's been in his 20s, went into Alaska alone and died, however their are more about him that we did not think about. That he makes us understand the real Chris McCandless, from a bibliographic point a view. The people he met, his actions, and Chris own ideas to have one reason to go to Alaska. Chris McCandless is a humble person, he went into the wilderness to test himself the feeling of his own belief about taking a break from socially, to journey without the help of friends that to offer him help to make his journey easier. Furthermore he, does not want them and his family to be part of his odyssey journey for the sake of a test for him to survive alone without having

It has recently been brought to my attention that our school is looking to adopt a sustainable menu into our meal program and I would like to give my viewpoint on the matter. As one many students here at Oxford Academy this change will affect me directly. Although people may at first oppose this conversion I think if we are able to overcome the first obstacles, this change would bring a great positive impact to the environment and the health of our students.

The book, Overthrow by Stephen Kinzer, is organized by chapters and parts. It begins with the introduction, and then it flows into the following parts: The Imperial Era, Covert Action, and Invasions. After these parts are the notes, bibliography, acknowledgments, and index. The book also features pictures of the people and places that are spoken of within it. The book is targeted at a mature, college-aged, or even older, audience, while remaining easy to read, and its tone is not at all tense for the subject portrayed. Overthrow is written as a historical recountal of America’s overthrow of foreign governments, including those of Hawaii, the Philippines, Nicaragua, Puerto Rico, Iraq, etc. The book uses these examples to argue that a strong nation strikes against a weaker one because “it seeks to impose its ideology, increase its power, or gain control of valuable resources.” The author of Overthrow did a phenomenal job of proving his thesis statement through his examples and making the book suitable for the audience.

The United States history during 1977 to 1989 went through two presidencies and whirlwind of events happened. When President Jimmy Carter became president he wanted to lower the inflation rates to make life easier for the people of the United States. While that was his goal it got completely derailed. Near the end of Jimmy Carters presidency, a group of Iranian students took over the U.S Embassy in Tehran and took people hostage. Over the course of the 444 days the hostages where held captive while the people of the United States voted for a new president to help lead them into a new direction. The people voted for Ronald Reagan. While he was president things didn’t go as he planned as well. The issues with Iran did not calm down and escalated to something bigger. After the Iran hostage crisis, the US had another issues with Iran and it was the Iran- Contra affair. During this essay I will be talking about the book called “Taken Hostage” by David Farber and the information in the book. The book is about the time frame of Jimmy Carter’s presidency and the issues with Iran and the hostage crisis. The second half of my essay is towards President Ronald Reagan’s and the issues about the Iran- Contra affair and the lasting issues between Iran and the United states.

However, at that time to the American people the crisis invoked a feeling of national inferiority; for one of the first times, the US had been manipulated by a foreign country and could do nothing about it. However, the Iranian Hostage Crisis proved to be more than just an embarrassment for the country. It’s evident 33 years later that the Iranian Hostage Crisis had other significant effects on the political environment of the United States, including the negative influence on the 1980 presidential election, complete destruction of diplomatic US- Iran relations, and the establishment of a precedent for foreign, anti-American terrorism as an effective strategy against the US.

“Because his American-supplied army and his American-trained secret police kept the shah in power, his opponents hated the United States almost as much as they hated their autocratic ruler. The shah’s rule was not one of constant decency” (Carnes and Garraty). From 1977 to 1979, Iran grew more and more unstable, as the Iranian people’s hatred of the shah further intensified. 1977 saw numerous riots, along with both the wounding and even killing of large numbers of the Iranian people. The Iranian people finally rose up against the shah in 1978, by January of the next year the shah was forced to flee. “A revolutionary government headed by a religious leader, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, assumed power. He that freedom was an enemy of Islam, as well as that Islam condoned terror. Khomeini denounced the United States as the “Great Satan” whose support of the shah, he said, had caused the Iranian people untold suffering” (Carnes and Garraty). Upon his exile, the shah was dying of cancer, after seeking refuge in numerous countries he was finally given refuge in the United States. The Iranian people wouldn’t have it, and began protesting outside the U.S. Embassy demanding the shah be returned, tried, and hanged. The Iranian Hostage Crisis was quickly approaching.

Although I agree with most of the opinions that Kinzer has put forward in this book, there is one area that he jumps the gun, at least from my perspective. In the last chapter of the book Kinzer talks about how the current Iranian government out of hatred for the west, has been financing terrorist groups like Hamas for years and this on its own is harmless and factual, it’s the assertion he makes next that will cause your head to spin. Out of nowhere he says, “It is not far-fetched to draw a line from operation Ajax through the Shah’s repressive regime and the Islamic Revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Center in New York.” (Kinzer, p203-204) To be totally objective he meant that Iranian revolutionary leaders had

In her essay, Shareen Brysac tells the story of the 1950 coup of the Iranian government through a particular lens which paints Persians as too simple-minded to see the overthrow coming; while also implying that the CIA coup of the Mossadegh was a result of the Cold War and not US interest. On the other hand, Ervand Abrahamian asserts that the US has actually been hiding information about the Coup because people wouldn’t want to really know what is going on, furthermore he views the overthrow of Mossadegh as a strategic move to protect US oil interest in Iran, because as doctor Varzi explains in her note to the reader, he was advocating for the nationalization of Iranian oil. Furthermore, she discusses how the rule of the Shah who was attempting

The American government is known to promote democratic values throughout the world. Though the ideals America was fighting for during the Cold War, the government still managed to participate in the overthrow of democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. Mossadegh threatened to nationalize Iran’s oil in 1951 and later gained the support of the Iranian government. The British companies had many investments in Iranian oil. It is with the approval of nationalization that the economies of both British and Iran were ultimately harmed. The British government requested the help of the US so that they could perform a coup to overthrow Mossadegh. With suspicions of Mossadegh supporting communism, and being supported by the Tudeh Party, the United States government was willing to sacrifice their democratic ideologies and credibility in the region for the insurance of an anti-communist leader. This would prove to cause problems that still resonate in today’s political and military negotiations in this region.

The effects of this coup, jointly orchestrated by the CIA and MI6, were far profound than those planned by the coup plotter. A consensus is forming among the observers about the rapidly increasing radicalization and anti-US sentiment among the Iranians intolerant towards secular and democratic politics after the coup with regards to the illegitimate interests of the West.