Alright, I will concede that yes, Mousavi (in addition to bearing a striking resemblence to stephen Spielberg) is a political oppotunist. I will also acknowlege that the yanks want to control Iranian oil. This does not mean however that however, that everybody in the opposition necessarily likes or trusts old Mir( being anti Mullah doesen't make you stupid) or that the anti cleric forces are recieving instructions from lilly white CIA officers from Constipation Nabraska
Frustrated Mess wrote:The Iran/Contra scandal, the sanctions, that much of Iran's current actions and aliances (Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas) would seem to contradict you.
If you brought those examples to contradict my point about foreign influence in Iran, the fact is that Iran/Contra and US sanctions had no political impacts inside Iran whatsoever.
So you say so, but clearly outside influence, and especially US and Israeli belligerence, has impacted Iranian politics from nuclear power, to missile development, to ending dependence on the US dollar, to seeking allies beyond the mid-East. Certainly you would not argue that the 10 year US backed Iraq war against Iran had no influence? And we can only guess what influence the US has inside Iran today. Interestingly, Afghan insurgent attacks have focused on a USAID contractor deemed to be a CIA front group also operating in Venezuela and Cuba. Is it in Iran?
Perhaps you could be more specific: which of the current reformist leaders in Iran, can remotely be considered US allies? This is laughable to anyone who follows the Iranian affairs. This is a movement that started from within the ideological ranks of the system itself (even thogh it is far broader now).
Who funds it? the demonstrators have no TV station, practically no newspaper, no headquarters, nothing that requires funding. Rest assured if there was a shred of evidence that CIA money had played a role in the protest, the regime would have made it the center point of the trials that just wrapped up. Would not a money trail to outside be a golden evidence for a regime who is attributing the unrest to everyone from Bahai minority to zionists to imperialists to the British to Saudi fundamentalists to communists etc?
Whose interests do they serve? Their own. Unless you think anything that we people of 3rd world do, is somehow managed by you whitey supreme masters of the world, and that we have no roles but pawns!
BTW, stop trying to teach us about our own history. Shed this orientalist/colonialist mentality that somehow we are some sort of guinea pigs studied by you guys and that we should fit into your theories about the global affairs. The world is not revolving around you! You can learn about us by listening to us, not by lecturing us about what we should think and how we should behave to fit your prejudices.
That's why I have asked repeatedly here: there are many well known progressive/leftist Iranians that can never be accused of being at the service of Washington; take Hamid Dabashi, Saeed Rahnama and many others as example. How come all of them are in support of this movement? Can you name any major progressive Iranian figure who thinks like you do? Or perhaps you think you know something that all of them collectively missed?
What a pathetic joke. Iran's modern history is the history of Western Imperialism. Iranian self-determination has not been a failure of the Iranian people, as you might prefer us to believe, but a matter of US and British interference. From whence came the Islamic Revolution? Is it not a root of the tree planted in 1953 when the British and Americans conspired to abort Iranian democracy? What was the state of Iranian self-determination prior to 1953?
Don't insult me with the pretense of some sort of offense. How dare you. If you can't argue the facts then simply admit as much. Are you going to argue we can't debate Afghanistan because we aren't Afghani or China because we aren't Chinese? Am I limited by your ethnic purity laws to only debate the history of Southern Ontario from the point of confederation on-ward?
You have not addressed a single relevant point. Rather you retreat to this pathetic tactic.
Alright, I will concede that yes, Mousavi (in addition to bearing a striking resemblence to stephen Spielberg) is a political oppotunist. I will also acknowlege that the yanks want to control Iranian oil. This does not mean however that however, that everybody in the opposition necessarily likes or trusts old Mir( being anti Mullah doesen't make you stupid) or that the anti cleric forces are recieving instructions from lilly white CIA officers from Constipation Nabraska
That doesn't matter. Again, read history. Can every Iranian govern? Of course not. The point of the US involvement is to undermine stability. Instability hurts the economy, it distracts the government from governing and addressing other critical issues (energy? border? security?), and it can quickly spiral out of control. It is impossible to ensure how any revolution will unwind. From the perspective of the US, it doesn't even matter who is eventually successful. A revolution in Iran would weaken the state, cement Israeli and US domination of the region, and whatever government eventually emerges can't be worse, from the US perspective, than the current one.
You asked if there is any popular movement supported on this board besides the Bolshevik revolution of 1917? Yes, every indigenous peoples movement, and mass civil society movement, and most worker based movements, all of which have been opposed by the US and often violently in the case of indigenous movements.
I support the right of Iranians to determine their own method of government. But I think they can only do so free of foreign interference by states only too eager, willing, and able to spill blood for cheap oil and gas--the very basis of not only the Western economy, but Western Imperialism. There is a lot at stake and, like it or not, the Iranians are pawns on "The Grand Chessboard", a term coined by Zbigniew Brzezinski. I suppose everyone remembers him. Where was he in 1979? And what did he mean by 'The Grand Chessboard"?
Bump!
Happy New Year by the way.
That doesn't matter. Again, read history. Can every Iranian govern? Of course not. The point of the US involvement is to undermine stability. Instability hurts the economy, it distracts the government from governing and addressing other critical issues (energy? border? security?), and it can quickly spiral out of control. It is impossible to ensure how any revolution will unwind. From the perspective of the US, it doesn't even matter who is eventually successful. A revolution in Iran would weaken the state, cement Israeli and US domination of the region, and whatever government eventually emerges can't be worse, from the US perspective, than the current one.
When do believe it will be safe for a revolution to take place?
It strikes me that regardless of when the Clerics are overthrown, chaos will result, so should the Iranian people not oppose the theocrats at all?
I support the right of Iranians to determine their own method of government. But I think they can only do so free of foreign interference by states only too eager, willing, and able to spill blood for cheap oil and gas--the very basis of not only the Western economy, but Western Imperialism. There is a lot at stake and, like it or not, the Iranians are pawns on "The Grand Chessboard", a term coined by Zbigniew Brzezinski. I suppose everyone remembers him. Where was he in 1979? And what did he mean by 'The Grand Chessboard"?
Ultimatley I think this Chess Board stuff masks a very sutble Leftish racism. It says that majority worlders can't sneeze whithout western intelligence agencies being responsable. It also portrays the people involved in this struggle as being nieve at best, and evil at worst. You cannot say the goals of the movement do not matter, of course they do.
Ultimatley I think this Chess Board stuff masks a very sutble Leftish racism. It says that majority worlders can't sneeze whithout western intelligence agencies being responsable. It also portrays the people involved in this struggle as being nieve at best, and evil at worst. You cannot say the goals of the movement do not matter, of course they do.
You're expressinmg an ignorance. There is a racism and it's not at all covert. It says, quite clearly, our, that is Western, economic and energy interests are more important than their (anyone in the global south) lives and right to self-determination. We will happily kill hundreds of thousands of them without even requiring tough fuel standards for our obese vehicles carting around our obese consumers (we no longer have citizens).
You tell me, what has been the history of Iran over the past fifty years and over that period what has been the role of the West? So you would have me believe, that this one time, just this once, despite not a thing having changed, there is no Western involvement in Iranian affairs or what is happening there despite, DESPITE, the US openly acknowledging that they are engaged in destablilizing Iran, that they have effectively surrounded Iran, that Iran has been designated as part of the "Axis of Evil", and that both the US and Israel have been engaged in belligerence against Iran since prior to the Iraq invasion, including threasts of war, and Secretary of State Clinton threatening to obliterate Iran. Do you at all see the parallels with Iraq?
At what point do you remove the rose colored glasses and acknowledge that, indeed, the US may, in fact, be responsible for fomenting anti-state violence and revolt in Iran in pursuit of its own interests?
At what point do you remove the rose colored glasses and acknowledge that, indeed, the US may, in fact, be responsible for fomenting anti-state violence and revolt in Iran in pursuit of its own interests?
Will you please answer the first part of my post.
I am assuming no one can question Hamid Dabashi's leftist credentials. here are some of his articles on the issue:
"The crisis of an Islamic Republic"
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2009/964/op22.htm
"Left is wrong on Iran"
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2009/956/op5.htm
"Commentary: Middle East is changed forever"
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/07/20/dabashi.iran.domino/index.html
and if you can read Persion, here is his great assessments of the achievments of the movement:
http://www.mardomak.ws/news/hamid_dabashi/ and "on green movement in Iran" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngcjoKqErZ8
Don't insult me with the pretense of some sort of offense. How dare you. If you can't argue the facts then simply admit as much. Are you going to argue we can't debate Afghanistan because we aren't Afghani or China because we aren't Chinese? Am I limited by your ethnic purity laws to only debate the history of Southern Ontario from the point of confederation on-ward?
You have not addressed a single relevant point. Rather you retreat to this pathetic tactic.
You can argue about Afgan or Chiense issues as much as you want, but if on an issue you have the whole spectrum of Afghan progressive voices (particulaly those on the ground) agree on one issue, you south ontarian view would become of little credibility and your persistent criticism and accusations against them becomes a point of arrogance, especially considering your total ignorance of the history and facts of the region (in case of Iran, obvious by your continued reference to the 50 year history of Iran).Imagine you taking a view opposite of every native Canadian on this forum on an issue related to native Canadians. I doubt the forum moderators would have let you do that. But naturally on middle east, every South Ontarian is automatically an expert!
Of course one has the right to voice his views even if ignorant, however your attitude is not: "This is my view". your attitude is: "This is my view and the rest of you are ignorant (or have their heads in the sand). No dear, those who oppose your view have their feet on the ground, not their heads in the sands.
So answer this one question, can you quote from any well known progressive Iranian figures inside or outside Iran that agrees with your view and speculations? ( I have already directed you to Hamid Dabashi, Hamid Rahnama and several others who fully support this movement).
As for your reference to the "grand chessboard", you have been spoon fed your side's propaganda and swallowed it happily. The great architect of that chessboard had the board and pieces crashed on his head once so badly he had to pretend it was all part of the plan! But of course it must really hurt your sense of western superiority to see people of the south, whom you consider so inferior and merely "pawns in the game", trying to take control of their destiny.
At what point do you remove the rose colored glasses and acknowledge that, indeed, the US may, in fact, be responsible for fomenting anti-state violence and revolt in Iran in pursuit of its own interests?
Like how? Care to give some examples of how my people are being forced or tricked to go to streets, risk their lives or risk tortures and rapes in jails, and fight govenment security forces on the streets?
Will you please answer the first part of my post.
Sure. It is never safe for a revolution to take place because every revolution takes on a life of its own. Perhaps what you mean, is when it safe for a people to rise up and attempt to seize power? Never as an such action will likely result in loss of life and could represent a step backwards. Does that mean people should not rise up? Keep reading, I will get there.
You can argue about Afgan or Chiense issues as much as you want, but if on an issue you have the whole spectrum of Afghan progressive voices (particulaly those on the ground) agree on one issue, you south ontarian view would become of little credibility and your persistent criticism and accusations against them becomes a point of arrogance, especially considering your total ignorance of the history and facts of the region (in case of Iran, obvious by your continued reference to the 50 year history of Iran).Imagine you taking a view opposite of every native Canadian on this forum on an issue related to native Canadians. I doubt the forum moderators would have let you do that. But naturally on middle east, every South Ontarian is automatically an expert!
Of course one has the right to voice his views even if ignorant, however your attitude is not: "This is my view". your attitude is: "This is my view and the rest of you are ignorant (or have their heads in the sand). No dear, those who oppose your view have their feet on the ground, not their heads in the sands.
So answer this one question, can you quote from any well known progressive Iranian figures inside or outside Iran that agrees with your view? ( I have already directed you to Hamid Dabashi, Hamid Rahnama and several others who fully support this movement).
As for your reference to the "grand chessboard", you have been spoon fed your side's propaganda and swallowed it happily. The great architect of that chessboard had the board and pieces crashed on his head once so badly he had to pretend it was all part of the plan! But of course it must really hurt your sense of western superiority to see people of the south, whom you consider so inferior and merely "pawns in the game", trying to take control of their destiny.
The ignorance, superiourity, arrogance and possibly racism is yours. We are speaking of modern Iranian history, not ancient history. You dispute that the last 50 years of Iranian history has been dominated by Western intervention? Really? And you accuse me of arrogance. Maybe I am, but at least my arrogance is grounded in reality.
Further, your arrogance is incapable of even basic comprehension. If you actually paid attention to what I have argued with an interest in open dialogue rather than propagating some bullshit, you may have understood what I've been saying. To answer the question above, if you're still here CMOT, yes, people should rise up seeking true democracy whenever the opportunity arises as that is the only way progress will be won. But democracy movements must develop their own leadership, goals, and objectives. The failure of popular revolutions, almost always, has been the absence of popular movements and institutions to rise to power when a vacuum is created.
So, to be clear, I have never argued popular protest in Iran is wrong, or is wholly the product of Western influence. What I have argued, consistently, is that we, in the West, must be aware, before we take up the banner of the Iranian opposition, that US influence is at work and is not supportive of true Iranian self-determination.
And no one, despite all the hostility and all the back-biting, has been able to contradict me on the history or on the facts, and with all due respect, you'd have to be foolish to disagree with me on my last point as, again, all the facts support my contention.
As for ignorance and propaganda, my dear sanizadeh, you are full of both. As for the Grand Chess Board, maybe you've failed to notice that US occupies Iraq, has circled Iran, occupies Afghanistan, has neutralized Pakistan in civil war, has flanked Russia, and has allied India. Only Iran, Syria, and a couple of non-state actors prevent full US/Israeli hegemony in the middle-east. If that's having the chess board smashed I bet they can't wait to see it thrown across the room.
CMOT, yes, people should rise up seeking true democracy whenever the opportunity arises as that is the only way progress will be won. But democracy movements must develop their own leadership, goals, and objectives. The failure of popular revolutions, almost always, has been the absence of popular movements and institutions to rise to power when a vacuum is created.
Then how will we know when a uprising is legitimate? When will this happen and do you believe the Iranian opposition is malevolent, or nieve?
I didn't know that Afghanistan and Pakistan were in the bag, FM. - a fracturing Iraq about to dissolve into three parts, too, for that matter. (And are we favouring theocracy this week, or criticizing ? Or how does that fact/prospect play out in sorting good guys from bad? Or should that question not come into play as the old empire struggles to retain a bit of turf ? ) It all can't be so simple for Iranians struggling toward a legitimate (not theocratic) democracy, either.
I enjoy this picture
FM: Who makes up the Iranian resistance. Be specific. Please don't tell me it dosen't matter.
The ignorance, superiourity, arrogance and possibly racism is yours. We are speaking of modern Iranian history, not ancient history. You dispute that the last 50 years of Iranian history has been dominated by Western intervention?
The Islamic republic has been in power in the past 31 years of those 50 years. and while its external affairs were dominated by issues related to foreign powers (most importantly, the Iran-iraq war, which you watched from the comfort of your house and I had to be in the forefront of it), the foreign intervention at its internal affair has been largely ineffective (even though they tried). Which one of the following events were determined by foreign intervention: The 1979 revolution? Declaration of Islamic republic? Fall of Banisadr? Mass execution of political prisoners in 1988? Selection of Khamanei? Rafsanjani years? Khatami's surprise election in 1997? the reform movement? Ahmadinejad's election? The new movement in Iran is simply the continuation of those events.
So, to be clear, I have never argued popular protest in Iran is wrong, or is wholly the product of Western influence. What I have argued, consistently, is that we, in the West, must be aware, before we take up the banner of the Iranian opposition, that US influence is at work and is not supportive of true Iranian self-determination. And no one, despite all the hostility and all the back-biting, has been able to contradict me on the history or on the facts, and with all due respect, you'd have to be foolish to disagree with me on my last point as, again, all the facts support my contention.
Obviously every progressive Iranian must have been foolish, as you have still failed to find a single one who would support you. nevertheless don't try to evade the question: which fact on the ground supports your contention? What element has brought the Iranian people to the streets in a protest that s now far beyond Ahmadinejad, and has targetted the core of the regime? How did the US foment this revolution? Give specific examples instead of generic, vague points.
So, to be clear, I have never argued popular protest in Iran is wrong, or is wholly the product of Western influence. What I have argued, consistently, is that we, in the West, must be aware, before we take up the banner of the Iranian opposition, that US influence is at work and is not supportive of true Iranian self-determination.
How much influence do the yanks have? Do you know?
How much influence do the yanks have? Do you know?
Neither half of the bipartisan party of warmongering plutocrats in Warshington will allow a "peace scare" to cause another downturn in the stock market. And our two mirror image parties in Ottawa await further instructions from their bosses in the imperial-master nation. Fear and a fanatical devotion to warfiteering are their main weaponry. No country wants to be pulled into what is a liquid state of perpetual war around the world, and especially so since 1991.
with all the rhetoric in this thread, does no one care to find Iran's statement made yesterday on its nuclear option?
pundits, even at babble, like to hear their own voices i guess.
the NYT, Al Jazeera, guardian, CBC, no one seems to have a link to the actual statement made.
Neither half of the bipartisan party of warmongering plutocrats in Warshington will allow a "peace scare" to cause another downturn in the stock market. And our two mirror image parties in Ottawa await further instructions from their bosses in the imperial-master nation. Fear and a fanatical devotion to warfiteering are their main weaponry. No country wants to be pulled into what is a liquid state of perpetual war around the world, and especially so since 1991.
You didn't answer my question.
Thanks: statement on the nuclear option?
with all the rhetoric in this thread, does no one care to find Iran's statement made yesterday on its nuclear option?
What business is it of ours?
What does Iran's national energy policy have to do with Canada and Canadians? How much Yanqui bullshit about sovereign oil-rich countries on the other side of the world can people possibly absorb?
Obama and this new round of warmongering plutocrats, and instructing our stooges in Ottawa, are all full of shit, too. They could lay them al down in a pile of manure and grow duplicates.
with all the rhetoric in this thread, does no one care to find Iran's statement made yesterday on its nuclear option?
the NYT, Al Jazeera, guardian, CBC, no one seems to have a link to the actual statement made.
Here it is:
http://tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=211169
What does Iran's national energy policy have to do with Canada and Canadians? How much Yanqui bullshit about sovereign oil-rich countries on the other side of the world can people possibly absorb?.
A lot
Do you know that in 2008 when there was all that coverage of the anti Tibet protests surrounding the Olympic Torch relay, and I decided to say something in favour of that? I was told very patronizingly that I should pay attention to Iran rather than China. Now that I am paying attention to Iran, babblers want me to switch my focus from the Islamic republic to human rights abuses in Egypt. Good god, but you people like to bait and switch.
The ignorance, superiourity, arrogance and possibly racism is yours. We are speaking of modern Iranian history, not ancient history. You dispute that the last 50 years of Iranian history has been dominated by Western intervention? Really? And you accuse me of arrogance. Maybe I am, but at least my arrogance is grounded in reality.
Wow. A white Westerner calling an Iranian ignorant, superior, arrogant and "possibly racist" in a thread about Iran. Really? Perhaps you should give things a little bit more thought before you type, FM and recognize that there are people in the majority world with experience and knowledge that the rest of us could not have gained from our comfortable seats behind keyboards.
What does Iran's national energy policy have to do with Canada and Canadians? How much Yanqui bullshit about sovereign oil-rich countries on the other side of the world can people possibly absorb?.
A lot
Do you know that in 2008 when there was all that coverage of the anti Tibet protests surrounding the Olympic Torch relay, and I decided to say something in favour of that? I was told very patronizingly that I should pay attention to Iran rather than China. Now that I am paying attention to Iran, babblers want me to switch my focus from the Islamic republic to human rights abuses in Egypt. Good god, but you people like to bait and switch.
My-my the company's been busy. And some of us follow them around the world in lock-step with newzpaper headlines. Their concerns are our concerns, or so it would seem.
As for ignorance and propaganda, my dear sanizadeh, you are full of both. As for the Grand Chess Board, maybe you've failed to notice that US occupies Iraq, has circled Iran, occupies Afghanistan, has neutralized Pakistan in civil war, has flanked Russia, and has allied India. Only Iran, Syria, and a couple of non-state actors prevent full US/Israeli hegemony in the middle-east. If that's having the chess board smashed I bet they can't wait to see it thrown across the room.
Those who haven't just become interested in the middle east recall that a little more than 30 years ago, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and most of the Arab world were all fully owned by the US (and the rest by the other main player); No Al-Qaida or insurgents; Israel was the most dominant player in the middle east with no one hearing any news from Palestinians; Arab nationalism was already dead; Turkey was a force of secularism; and oil was at a lovely price. You guys must have been one hell of a chess player that now you are proud of "circling" the countries that you owned 30 years ago!
What business is it of ours?
Why can't we be interested?
Why can't we be interested?
Do you believe Iran's leaders want to nuke Israel and America?
No. But still. It's an interesting country with an ancient history.
No. But still. It's an interesting country with ancient history.
Yes it is an interesting country with an ancient culture. Almost as old and interesting as the civilization that sprang out from that country now known as Iraq. Or at least, it used to be a sovereign country unto its own before 2003.
I think we have to be really careful about what we read in newspapers about Iran. I'm not saying I know everything about current events in Iran, because that would be ridiculous of me to claim it. What I do believe is that our largest trade partners have a tendency to put out disinformation about a country and treat is as truth in all subsequent news diddies and official government statements about the same country we find interesting, and, which they, too, find interesting at or around the exact same time we do, but in a bizarre kind of way. And when enough people around the world believe the lie, then the number of people who believe it is presented as proof that it's true.
Fidel, I don't like you very much, but you do have a point. The number of nations talked about on Babble is very small. We discuss Iran, Israel, China and Cuba. That's it. Why isn't there a discussion of the pro democracy struggle in Jordan or Syria, Swaziland Or Bahrain? Damn but this place is dull.
I think we have to be really careful about what we read in newspapers about Iran. I'm not saying I know everything about current events in Iran, because that would be ridiculous of me to claim it.
Yes, and since that is the case(for most people in the West, anyway) it's silly to claim that student protesters will contribute to the destruction of Iran. It's bedtime for yours truly. Goodnight
PS: When do you sleep? It must be late as hell in Ontario.
I think we have to be really careful about what we read in newspapers about Iran. I'm not saying I know everything about current events in Iran, because that would be ridiculous of me to claim it.
Yes, and since that is the case(for just about everybody outside it) it's silly to claim that student protesters will contribute to the destruction of Iran.
Not the destruction of Iran, no. And after Tiananmen, the CIA could maybe only expect to make further contacts with dissidents, the country's scientific and technical leaders etc and arrange for US citizenship papers for them. Or some plan with a goal that doesnt necessarily aim for regime change. They could merely want to establish ties with dissidents on left, right or whatever their political banner. And those people may be paid handsomely for the information they provide western newzies and intel agencies. Sometimes the juicier the information that can be attached to their foreign sounding names from an interesting country, the more they are paid and rewarded. Money can be a good thing to have. But like the end results for torture, money doesn't guarantee truth either.
Aren't you sleepy?
No, but I'm suddenly interested in Iran for some reason. You?
Not the destruction of Iran, no.
Hang on, now. FM said that the student protests would weaken Iran, which would allow Israel to get the upper hand, which would allow the IDF to bomb Iranian cities flat which would cause the downfall of the republic.
So according to his reasoning they would be contributing to, if not the destruction, the near destuction of the Iranian state.
No, but I'm suddenly interested in Iran for some reason. You?
Seriously, when do you sleep?
Not the destruction of Iran, no.
Hang on, now. FM said that the student protests would weaken Iran, which would allow Israel to get the upper hand, which would allow the IDF to bomb Iranian cities flat which would cause the downfall of the republic.
So according to his reasoning they would be contributing to, if not the destruction, the near destuction of the Iranian state.
FM could be exactly right about it, too. Many of the same psychotics who were there in crazy George's regime are still there calling the shots. I don't think FM or I can be blamed for not knowing the minds of these megalomanical psychopaths inside out. They are crazy like foxes, but FM and I are at least aware of the psychopathy involved in this brinkmanship in general. Whereas, some babblers seem to think Iran is this terrible threat looming over the democratic western world and Israel. I'm just saying that I don't think that cold war era mentality produces a very clear picture of things in general.
No, but I'm suddenly interested in Iran for some reason. You?
Seriously, when do you sleep?
Is it really any of your business? What about Iran and imposing American style democracy on them? Is Iran's national energy policy anyone else's business but Iran's? We know that a succession of stooges in Ottawa don't mind our national energy policy dictating to us from corporate board rooms in America. But maybe Iranians don't see things the same way, you know?
Which Iranians are you referring to, Fidel? Or do you rule out a complexity that might make incessant, generalized statements about yanquis, etc., seem sort of silly?
Just for a break from your "big picture" view of the land, Fidel, try to imagine the folks up in the Appalachians and their love for simple things, like Sarah, as "dumb as a bag of hair" (Deer Hunting with Jesus). And imagine those Iranian peasants loving Allah to the exclusion of all else...as they have been programmed to do by the current administration of (what else) Mullahs. You know, the clerics that you have admired throughout our own history. Just imagine that situation for a mo', Fidel.
Think. Isn't it just possible that you might be leading a revolt, here, someday, if Sarah is anointed? In all her borno-again, moose hunting finery? :D
Which Iranians are you referring to, Fidel? Or do you rule out a complexity that might make incessant, generalized statements about yanquis, etc., seem sort of silly?
[url=http://inthesenewtimes.com/2009/08/09/overthrow-inc-peter-ackerman%e2%80... Inc.[/url]
What do you make of this Peter Ackerman fellow, George?
I don't know about anyone else here, and I don't know if I would ever want to live in Iran, but my intuition and gut feeling on the matter makes me think I would tend to want to side with the vast majority of peasants and working class Iranians who elected Ahmadinejad. I'm pretty sure I would not find common cause with more affluent Iranians, and many who were educated in the west and voted for Mousavi, a pro-west neoliberal stooge.
But George, would any other country have the right to interfere with the democratic process in Sarah's country? Would neoliberal stoogery be an improvement over what they have now? [url=http://www.monthlyreview.org/mrzine/puderbaugh201209.html]Iran's Health Houses Provide Model For Mississippi Delta[/url]
What if Russia or China or Cuba were to fund "NGOs" and maybe even Cuba-AID groups in the US for "non-violent" struggle? How can USAID and IRI and IDI and Optor possibly claim they are politically neutral when the money comes from the US Government and both bipartisan war parties, which in turn are funded by rich people, corporations and US capitalists?
What we have here, George, is one group of whacko rightwing fundamentalists in the US who are at odds and even cross purposes with other fundamentalist whackos in Asia and Middle East . Except that they dont own Ahmadinejad nearly like they own the Saudi and Kuwaiti and Pakistani elite and their whacko Pashtun relatives running the ISI, and extension of the CIA. There is no "Al Qa'eda" running around Iran and attacking the anti-US insurgents as has been the case in Iraq according to Seymour Hersh. But that all could change with a few bombing runs and military invasions of Iran, couldnt it? First comes the medieval siege for some number of years though in order to unite Iranians under Ahamdinejad against the great satan. Clear as mud, George?
You started off well enough Fidel, but soon resorted to speculation.. "a few bomging runs" etc. Really works at the imagination.
But the "fundamentalist whackos" over there "don't own" Ahmadinejad like the Saudi and Kuwaiti whackos. And he doesn't play the role of Sarah for the folks out on the hustings...different setting.
Same function.
I wonder if Sarah will be able to see a doctor when she needs to? The equivalent of half of Iran's population are food insecure in Sarah's country.
I'm afraid the fundamentalists are going to pauperize America and make Sarah and her kin and her kin's kin pick up the tab for generations, George. The Persians and Egyptians at least believed in debt jubilees every generation or two. Not so in the western world's most fundamentalist country. They need electrical power alternatives in Iran. According to the UN, every country has a right to develop electrification technologies in order to increase standard of living for people, pump water and sewage, lower disease and mortality rates etc. I'm not freaking out over Iran. The US is friendly with some perpetually developing countries resembling shitholes that aren't worth mentioning by any of us or our corporate sponsored newzies at the aame time.
I believe that Iran is doing the right thing in developing nuclear power to meets its burgeoning need for electricity. And I truly hope that a means can be found to verify its development for that purpose. The scientists and technicians at work on the project, graduates of Iranian schools, must certainly want that. Hopefully, that nation can show the way forward for many people in the middle east. A middle way.
Is it really any of your business?
No. I'm sorry. 
It's a shame that the voice of sanizadeh has been drowned out. I really hope he's out there still and can return to contribute to this thread.
Frustrated Mess, you need to dial it back and debate the content not the person. Both of you engaged in personal attacks and need to desist.
A reminder that such discussions are merely discussions for some of us. For others of us it is a depiction of lives and people who are our communities and countries of origin. In such discussions, richness and complexities are often lost when only those speaking from the "detached" position are allowed agency and validity of content.
While much of the mess in Iran, and the Middle East as a whole, is the responsibility of the US and leaders in strategically selected nations, there are always home-grown oppressors and opportunists. And, on the ground resistance always occurs and has always occurred. Ongoing struggle against tyranny and oppression should not be minimized.
As for ignorance and propaganda, my dear sanizadeh, you are full of both. As for the Grand Chess Board, maybe you've failed to notice that US occupies Iraq, has circled Iran, occupies Afghanistan, has neutralized Pakistan in civil war, has flanked Russia, and has allied India. Only Iran, Syria, and a couple of non-state actors prevent full US/Israeli hegemony in the middle-east. If that's having the chess board smashed I bet they can't wait to see it thrown across the room.Those who haven't just become interested in the middle east recall that a little more than 30 years ago, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and most of the Arab world were all fully owned by the US (and the rest by the other main player); No Al-Qaida or insurgents; Israel was the most dominant player in the middle east with no one hearing any news from Palestinians; Arab nationalism was already dead; Turkey was a force of secularism; and oil was at a lovely price. You guys must have been one hell of a chess player that now you are proud of "circling" the countries that you owned 30 years ago!
Thirty years ago was 1980. The Iranian revolution was almost complete and violence against opponents was reaching a cresendo; Iraq was a US ally and engaged Iran in a long and bloody war as a US proxy; the US retreated from Lebanon following the bombing of the US barracks; the USSR was in Afghanistan, etc ... For those who follow world politics and history, one could argue that US hegemony is close to consolidation (although by no means assured). But, more importantly, your statement above only supports my argument that modern mid-east history has been shaped over the period primarily by external influences and in particular western imperialism and its thirst for energy. Thanks.
I didn't know that Afghanistan and Pakistan were in the bag, FM. - a fracturing Iraq about to dissolve into three parts, too, for that matter. (And are we favouring theocracy this week, or criticizing ? Or how does that fact/prospect play out in sorting good guys from bad? Or should that question not come into play as the old empire struggles to retain a bit of turf ? ) It all can't be so simple for Iranians struggling toward a legitimate (not theocratic) democracy, either.
What is in the bag in the age of permanent, contracted war, George? Recent history tells us a state need not be stable nor at peace to pillage its resources. Iraq, in a state of civil war and beset with vilolence, but with a permanent US military presence, including mercenaries, is now producing what? Upwards of 2 million barrels per day? As well, partittion of Iraq was a favoured option of neo-cons (and they are now speaking of such for Pakistan). In Afghanistan progress is made on the pipeline and in Pakistan, once a regional power and potential site of alternative energy transit routes, is now a basket case with a government, beset on all sides, allied with US interests. Read on:
An independent Balochistan would balkanize Pakistan, create a US-friendly state between Iran and India, and hurt Iran badly by stymieing the IPI pipeline. It would also provide a side benefit by isolating the large new port that the Chinese are financing in Gwadar, on Balochistan's coast. In March 2002, Chinese vice premier Wu Bangguo laid the foundation for Gwadar port, which is intended be a key Chinese facility on the Arabian Sea, not far from the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. The US might consider this a threat to The Carter Doctrine, which dictates that the US shall be the big dog in the Middle East.
Operation Enduring Freedom? With John McCain and Barack Obama now arguing about widening the Afghanistan war and invading Pakistan, the TAPI natural gas pipeline has a better chance than freedom ever had. It would be an American-controlled cash cow that would hurt Iran. All the US needs to do is pacify Afghanistan with more troops (to safeguard TAPI) and balkanize Pakistan (to stymie IPI) while widening the war and antagonizing India. Freedom be damned. Freedom was never an option anyhow, especially when there's money to be made by endless war.
For those interested in more details of US involvement:
Arch neo-conservative Kenneth Timmerman spilled the beans on activities of the other arm of US meddling overseas, the obscenely mis-named National Endowment for Democracy, in a piece written one day before the election, stating curiously that “there’s the talk of a ‘green revolution’ in Tehran.” Interesting. I wonder where that “talk” was coming from. Timmerman did not appear to be writing from Iran.
Timmerman went on to write, with admirable candor and honesty, that:
“The National Endowment for Democracy has spent millions of dollars during the past decade promoting ‘color’ revolutions in places such as Ukraine and Serbia, training political workers in modern communications and organizational techniques.
“Some of that money appears to have made it into the hands of pro-Mousavi groups, who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds.”
Yes, you say, but what does a blow-hard propagandist like Timmerman know about such things? Well, he should know! His very spooky Foundation for Democracy in Iran has its own snout deep in the trough of NED’s “open covert actions” against the Iranian government.
How does the “Foundation for Democracy in Iran” seek to “promote democracy” in Iran with our tax dollars? Foundation co-founder Joshua Muravchik gives us a hint in his subtly-titled LA Times piece, “Bomb Iran.”
Who Put the ‘green’ in the Green Revolution?
FM said that the student protests would weaken Iran, which would allow Israel to get the upper hand, which would allow the IDF to bomb Iranian cities flat which would cause the downfall of the republic.
I did not say that.
