Since so many of our troops are stuck in Iraq, an attack on Iran would not follow the same method as the one on Iraq, in order to spare the use of troops there, we should try arming and training oppositional groups in Iran. Just the only problem is, is there any oppositional military in Iran? How powerful are they? Are they willing to cooperate with the United States and Israel? Do they support democracy? What are the name of those opposition groups?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Does Iran have any armed opposition?
Collapse
X
-
Iran has several armed groups operatign inside its borders, some they claim are US supported. Most are small and the nation does enjoy a high level of national identity so unravelling the country via internl dissent is not really an option. Besides within 20 years the IRGC will start a civil war on its own when it moves to replace the clerics as the supreme authority. Might be as soon as when the current supreme leader dies.
Comment
-
Originally posted by zraver View PostIran has several armed groups operatign inside its borders, some they claim are US supported. Most are small and the nation does enjoy a high level of national identity so unravelling the country via internl dissent is not really an option. Besides within 20 years the IRGC will start a civil war on its own when it moves to replace the clerics as the supreme authority. Might be as soon as when the current supreme leader dies.
zraver, why do you say the IRGC will try to oust the clerics within 20 years?Smells like napalm, tastes like chicken!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jews4Peace View PostSince so many of our troops are stuck in Iraq, an attack on Iran would not follow the same method as the one on Iraq, in order to spare the use of troops there, we should try arming and training oppositional groups in Iran. Just the only problem is, is there any oppositional military in Iran? How powerful are they? Are they willing to cooperate with the United States and Israel? Do they support democracy? What are the name of those opposition groups?
There are several token armed 'resistance' and separatist groups in Iran. None of them are a serious threat to the regime or to the territorial integrity of Iran. And none of them are stupid enough to co-operate with Israel if they want to have even a shred of credibility with ordinary Iranians or the Iranians they claim to represent.
Just look at what happened to the MEK/MKO/PMOI when it sided with Saddam. Lost any last bit of credibility it might have once had with Iranians.
So, sorry. You're out of luck. Iranians wont side with Israel, not even the anti-regime or secessionist terrorist groups.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jews4Peace View PostSince so many of our troops are stuck in Iraq, an attack on Iran would not follow the same method as the one on Iraq, in order to spare the use of troops there, we should try arming and training oppositional groups in Iran. Just the only problem is, is there any oppositional military in Iran? How powerful are they? Are they willing to cooperate with the United States and Israel? Do they support democracy? What are the name of those opposition groups?sigpicFEAR NAUGHT
Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?
Comment
-
Originally posted by zraver View PostBesides within 20 years the IRGC will start a civil war on its own when it moves to replace the clerics as the supreme authority. Might be as soon as when the current supreme leader dies.
Once Ayatollah Khamenei dies the Islamic system in Iran might undergo somewhat of a reform. But i think its wishful thinking on your part that the IRGC would attempt to take control of the country.
Iranian society is not like American society. Iranians do not think like Americans do either. People in Iran actually believe in God, religion and patriotism - without needing the incentive of money, power and personal accumulation. These are the kinds of people a hardcore military like the IRGC would attract. People who are genuinely ideologically committed. Not people who are 'looking to make a buck or two'.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mercenary View Postarming the kurds would be akin to kicking turkey on its balls..
US/israel isn't stupid enough to do that - they'll pretty much be looking at another hostile nation in the region
Comment
-
Originally posted by snapper View PostI am not suggesting that we should support Kurds in Turkey yet for the last part of Saddams time we basicaly supported a semi-autonimous kurdish state in the north of Iraq. The same could possibly be done in Iran...
Comment
-
Originally posted by 1980s View PostIranian society is not like American society. Iranians do not think like Americans do either. People in Iran actually believe in God, religion and patriotism - without needing the incentive of money, power and personal accumulation. These are the kinds of people a hardcore military like the IRGC would attract. People who are genuinely ideologically committed. Not people who are 'looking to make a buck or two'.
In my opinion, the Guards have the belief that only 'they' are fitted to guard the nation, the fruits of revolution and the memory of the Imam, hence they will move to acquire more power with time against the clerics who are fatten with money and wealth. You are right that the Guards have their fanaticism and commitment in regards to Islam and the Islamic Revolution, but only 'they' are worthy enough - in their view - to continue that path that was set 27 years ago. That is my view.
Comment
-
Irgc
They've been anointed as the revolution's "praetorian guard". Certainly, there could be vanity and, perhaps, an elitist and (therefore) entitled sense attached to this status with some. If so, that's a potential source of political perversion.
"Iranians do not think like Americans do either. People in Iran actually believe in God, religion and patriotism - without needing the incentive of money, power and personal accumulation."
Perhaps we've just identified one of those vain and elitist types here. 1980s might wish to take a deep breath here and re-assess his perspective. This one is chuck full of holes and renders a decisive slam of it's own accord to his/her credibility.
As to more "base" motivations, don't assume that IRGC status renders one invulnerable. In point of fact, there are economic numbers around here somewhere proffered by Zraver, IIRC, that indicate that the largest "corporate" entity in Iran may just be the IRGC. My suspicion is that the insidious intersection of money and power may have it's usual corrosive influence regardless of the projected image of ideological zeal that may be assumed by the IRGC."This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
Comment
-
[QUOTE=1980s;558123]Its a possibility, but a slim one. You underestimate the fanaticism and commitment of IRGC cadre to Islam and the Islamic Revolution. Afterall, that is what they exist for.[quote]
Get off your high horse there sport. Ever heard of the Mamluks? The Janniseries? Both were created to serve the state and God, both rebelled, both were Islamic. If you give a group poltical, military, and economic power it will not long remain content with being 2nd.
It had been claimed and predicted before that the Islamic Republic was built around the personality cult of the Imam Khomeini, and that it would collapse after him. 20 years after Khomeini's death and the I.R has never been in a stronger position.
Iranian society is not like American society. Iranians do not think like Americans do either. People in Iran actually believe in God, religion and patriotism - without needing the incentive of money, power and personal accumulation. These are the kinds of people a hardcore military like the IRGC would attract. People who are genuinely ideologically committed. Not people who are 'looking to make a buck or two'.Last edited by zraver; 15 Oct 08,, 22:48.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jews4Peace View PostSince so many of our troops are stuck in Iraq, an attack on Iran would not follow the same method as the one on Iraq, in order to spare the use of troops there, we should try arming and training oppositional groups in Iran. Just the only problem is, is there any oppositional military in Iran? How powerful are they? Are they willing to cooperate with the United States and Israel? Do they support democracy? What are the name of those opposition groups?
It is a rather dichotomous setup, but I don't think this division can be realistically exploited by external forces. Any perception of foreign involvement/direction by the Iranians will result in complete failure of any oppositional movement. Again, if the Iranian people believe there is foreign influence upon the actors attempting to exact a change in the political system, they will reject those actors. Thus a political change can only take place in an environment that is free from foreign involvement and must be entirely homegrown.
The Iranian people are very conscious of the US-backed 1953 coup against Mossadeq and American (and even Israeli support) of the Shah and his repressive, brutal policies. It is a very emotional issue for them just as the 1979-81 hostage crisis is for Americans.
Groups in Iran such as the pragmatists (e.g. Rasfanjani) and reformists (e.g. Khatami) completely denounce any efforts by outside parties to effect a change in Iranian policy. Just a few days ago there was a meeting between Khatami and former/current EU/UN leaders, and Khatami instantly and bitterly denounced suggestions that such a meeting constituted an endorsement for him to run again for President against Ahmadinejad in 2009.
Most people in Iran do support democracy, and Iran already has a few democratic institutions, though combined with autocratic institutions that can overrule the parliament and President. The vast majority of Iranians would prefer that the Supreme Leader be elected. So there is no need to find oppositional groups to support democracy because the support is already there. Though the press in Iran is not entirely free, there is however a marked amount of freedom and a wide range of opinion, including dissident, that is tolerated.
Personally, I believe that best policy with regards to Iran is to not to make statements or undertake actions that serve to strengthen the hands of the hardliners. Remember, Iran was for all practical purposes a US ally, fully supporting the US-led NATO intervention in Afghanistan. There were face-to-face meetings between high level US and Iranian officials that are now a subject of debate with regards to "preconditions" between McCain and Obama. The thawing of relations that began to trickle in the late Clinton Administration serendipitously turned to a flood in the first year of the Bush Administration, during the aftermath of 9/11. All evidence points to Iran under the reformist President Khatami seeking to re-establish diplomatic relations with the US with the blessing of the Supreme Leader, and perhaps a re-alignment even more favorable than that. In 2001, circumstances existed that could have effected a nearly 180 degree turnaround in US-Iranian relations, the possibility of which was then destroyed by the "Axis of Evil" statement in Bush's 2002 State of the Union Address. This missed opportunity is very regrettable, for at that point in time I believe the stars aligned and there existed a window for a "Nixon to China" moment. It also served to make the 2005 triumph of the hardliners under Ahmadinejad inevitable.
Since then, there have been a number of complications that have re-driven the wedge between the US and Iran, such as the Iranian nuclear program as well as material and other support to Shi'ite militias in Iraq. It might be a number of years before the circumstances again exist for a US-Iranian reconciliation."Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."
Comment
Comment