Thread: Endgame in Iran?

Originally Posted by citanon

Haha, hahaha, hahahahhahahahahahahahaha! We might try more unilateral sanctions.

The only thing he's tightening the screw on is any lingering doubts about his ineptness. What a joke.

Oh yeah, great rhetoric on Iran. He didn't even wear a tie. Talk about showing respect to people dying on the streets. Taking dress cues from Ajad now, nice.

Incisive analysis. The intellectual equivalent of poking out your tongue & calling Obama 'stinky'.

Originally Posted by pChan

Question is will it become a "responsible" regional power?
Answer : No

Well....yes. And?

"For defence" is a BS term. You cannot trust this regime. Its policies towards its own citizens, towards israel and the its ideological bindings with hardline Islam.

It isn't necessary to trust them to believe that they want a nuke to warn off any potential enemies. Doesn't mean giving them a nuke is a good idea.

If this regime survives an attack is the only option. Always been that way. As for the recent protests there is a very slim chance of success but given that Iran is some time away from getting nukes the west should give the Iranian opposition the chance.

Probably (though not certainly)yes to the first and yes, I've been saying that all along to the second.

The only time Khamenei was interested in negotiations was when US attacked Iraq.

Actually, there were feelers when the US took down the Taliban. The Bushies well & truly screwed the pooch on Iran. In the end all they had was empty posturing, though this is apparently enough for some.

Now he does not want to negotiate with US. What does that tell you about this regime?

Nothing I didn't already know.

There is a reason behind why the republicans perceived to be better than democrats when it comes to security. Same reason why most don't get on board the Obama peace train. I am sure you are on-board well too-bad its going nowhere. Enjoy your trip.

Peace train? Not hardly, though it says a lot more about your perception of the world than mine that you consider the thought worth posting.

By offering a hand for Iran to slap down Obama has made it easier to isolate the regime & paint it as unreasonable. You & I may already know that, but the brilliance of the Bush people left US cred in the toilet. This way America can say 'we tried in good faith'. It is really aimed at wavering allies, neutrals & the UN. If America is going to do this thing it will need at least the appearance of international support. A rerun of the invasion of Iraq would mean many more years of running just to get back to zero with bits of the world the US needs either freindly or indifferent.

In the meantime Russia & China have already begun to back away (though they may yet change course) while Iran looks crazier by the day. All good news for the 'bomb baby bomb' crowd.

Under the last Republican Adminstration Iran went from isolated to a regional power. Another fine mess.

Even a changed regime may not completely scrap the nuke program. It enjoys good support among the populace. But the key point is if the new regime ideologically different from the current one then there is a good chance the current israel/ME policy will change.

Quite.

The thing about nuke programs is that they may get you lots of cheers when you flaunt them about, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they will make you as many enemies if you quietly shelve them. If there are some cool incentives on the table an incoming regime may figure they can stay popular using less irritating (and potentially dangerous) means.

Originally Posted by Bigfella

The intellectual equivalent of poking out your tongue & calling Obama 'stinky'.

Actually not a bad idea. That response is about appropriate for the level of stupidity evident here.

Are you seriously going to defend him on this??? By now his actions are so painfully inept, they make your attempts at defending him resemble some guy plugging his ears, closing his eyes and repeating "blah blah blah".

Originally Posted by Bigfella

By offering a hand for Iran to slap down Obama has made it easier to isolate the regime & paint it as unreasonable.

Isolating the regime from whom? Liberal posters on the internet?

In the meantime Russia & China have already begun to back away (though they may yet change course) while Iran looks crazier by the day.

Unlike you I happened to watch Chinese state television recently. China is "welcoming greater cooperation and friendship with Iran," and is very excited about prospects for "economic cooperation." The Iranian envoy was most encouraged and was especially interested in "greater cooperation in the banking sector."

You're right, sounds like they won't touch Iran with a ten foot pole.

The thing about nuke programs is that they may get you lots of cheers when you flaunt them about, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they will make you as many enemies if you quietly shelve them. If there are some cool incentives on the table an incoming regime may figure they can stay popular using less irritating (and potentially dangerous) means.

Name one thing that could help the regime stay "popular". I mean, they're real popular now. They've been all about that economic development and greater welfare of the Iranian people.

Originally Posted by citanon

Actually not a bad idea. That response is about appropriate for the level of stupidity evident here.

Are you seriously going to defend him on this??? By now his actions are so painfully inept, they make your attempts at defending him resemble some guy plugging his ears, closing his eyes and repeating "blah blah blah".

And what should his response to the current protests be? Are you really trying to tell me that wearing a tie would somehow make a difference?

Originally Posted by Countezero

Nuclear weapons are a stand in. The important thing is to figure out what they are a stand in for. In other words, why does Iran want nukes. It hasn't always. Why now? And is there anything that we could give them that would satisfy that need so they wouldn't want them?

The destruction of Israel, the removal of all foreign influence throughout Persia and Arabia, the supremacy of Iran within that region, and the establishment of Iranian relations with non-aligned countries outside the region to garner block-vote support within the UN.
It's not a secret, they talk about it all the time.

Originally Posted by Countezero

Agreed, but that's a different issue. You dodged the question. Do you think Iran wants the nukes to use them on Israel?

Sorry. Yes.

Originally Posted by citanon

Isolating the regime from whom? Liberal posters on the internet?

From potential defenders in all forms - especially in international forums. The more unreasonable they look the less opposition the US will face if it acts.

Unlike you I happened to watch Chinese state television recently. China is "welcoming greater cooperation and friendship with Iran," and is very excited about prospects for "economic cooperation." The Iranian envoy was most encouraged and was especially interested in "greater cooperation in the banking sector."

You're right, sounds like they won't touch Iran with a ten foot pole.

Congratulations on your language skills. Did you catch the reports where they supported the IAEA rebuke of Iran at the start of the month? Chinese support for the US is not necessary, just a preparedness to stand by & not cause problems - like the Russians eventually did with Milosovic.

Name one thing that could help the regime stay "popular". I mean, they're real popular now. They've been all about that economic development and greater welfare of the Iranian people.

You clearly haven't read what I actually wrote in context. Try again. (hint, read the quote I was responding too - what is it talking about?).

Originally Posted by Bigfella

And what should his response to the current protests be? Are you really trying to tell me that wearing a tie would somehow make a difference?

Oh silly me. You're right, why would respect, decorum, and seriousness matter in a television message to the world? Heck, Obama should start wearing sweater vests, like Carter. )

Some interesting stuff here, especially the attacks on mourners & their consequences. If this has really hurt Khamenei/A-jad in th rural areas then it could be game over. Sort of a reverse of the Shah, who was dead once he lost the urban middle classes.

Of course, it is always hard to judge the accuracy of reports from closed societies in chaotic circumstances. Here's hoping.

p.s. Not great on names here, but does an Iranian sounding name with a 'Meir' in front indicate an Iranian jew? just curious.

The start of an Iranian intifada

by MEIR JAVEDANFAR in Tel Aviv

28 Dec 2009

An Iranian-style intifada seems to be in the making. At the beginning of the current period of opposition, which started soon after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's controversial reelection, quiet periods of seeming normalcy occurred between what were less frequent demonstrations.

Judging from the events of Ashura, however, the protests now seem to carry the potential to turn into a full-scale civil disobedience campaign, not unlike the first intifada the Palestinians initiated against Israel in 1987. Such an uprising will mean continuous periods of strikes and civil disobedience, as well as more confrontations between members of the public and security forces.

The main factor contributing to the new status quo is the unrelenting policies of the Supreme Leader, which have pitted his philosophy of the Islamic Republic against longstanding Islamic institutions.

This is a battle that Khamenei will find extremely difficult to win. In fact, if developments continue in their current form, they can result in significant changes to the structure of his regime, or more drastically, lead to its total demise.

His decision to allow the Basij to mount an attack on mourners at Ayatollah Montazeri's funeral was one factor leading to the spread of opposition in rural areas, faster and more efficiently than any campaign the reformist camp could have orchestrated. Yes, members of the opposition tried to take advantage of the mayhem, but also many genuine mourners had come to pay homage to a Grand Ayatollah. To Ayatollah Khamenei's forces, they were all the same. To allow attacks against the residents of a holy city where the seeds of the 1979 revolution were planted was not just dead wrong from a religious perspective, it was politically counterproductive as well.

To make matters worse, the very next day, the Supreme Leader's forces attacked mourners attending a ceremony for Montazeri at Isfahan's Seyyed mosque, where inside members of the public were beaten. The Basijis also tried to assault Isfahan's former Friday prayers leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Jalaleddin Taheri, who had arranged the ceremony. However, his supporters protected him.

If the Shah had committed such an affront, one could have attributed it to his brute dictatorial secularism. But for the Supreme Leader of an Islamic Republic to order violence against Islamic institutions means turning against the very establishment that formed the foundation -- or the very DNA -- of the current regime.

In 1987, to Palestinians, Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and the deteriorating political and economic situations there formed the nucleus of the political ideology that legitimized the first intifada.

Khamenei's increasing attacks against the Iranian public, followed by full-scale assaults against mosques and religious members of the community, are creating the nucleus of an ideology that is legitimizing opposition, not just in cities, but throughout Iran.

However, ideology is not enough. To succeed, what is needed is to increase the frequency of opposition to the point where the morale of the regime and its forces are sufficiently eroded and they can no longer afford to carry on with their current policies, or their ability to function.

Here again Ayatollah Khamenei seems to be aiding the opposition. The brutal attack against the mourners at Montazeri's funeral meant that more people were motivated to turn up in the streets on Tasua (the day before Ashura), as well as on Ashura, which happened to fall on the 7th day of Montazeri's passing. In fact, small demonstrations have continued in different places since Montazeri was buried.

Further, on Ashura, his forces killed Seyed Ali Habibi Mousavi Khameneh, the nephew of Mir Hossein Mousavi. It's very possible that he happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. However, the Mousavi family might understandably assume that he was targeted for assassination. After all, how is it possible that among thousands upon thousands of demonstrators, he was one of the few shot dead? Was he followed from the beginning by an assassination team? Was he marked for death before he left the house? These are questions that cannot be overlooked.

And now his funeral, as well as the 7th day of his death, will provide other occasions for the opposition to demonstrate. Add to this 15 religious holidays, plus at least five major political ones. Meanwhile, more are expected to be killed or arrested, meaning further mourning congregations and demonstrations. Put all of these dates together and the regime could start facing an unprecedented number of demonstrations.

Things could get much worse if the opposition turns to public strikes. With violence against the public expected to continue unabated and Ahmadinejad's plan to cut subsidies, translating to more economic misery, the regime could add to the attraction of this backbreaking scenario.

More than ever, the future of this regime hinges on Ayatollah Ali Khameni. He can save his regime and keep it in its current form if he learns from his recent mistakes and modifies the way his forces and government reach out to the public. Failure to readjust could turn out to be a very costly mistake.

Copyright © 2009 Tehran Bureau

FRONTLINE: Tehran Bureau: The start of an Iranian intifada | PBS

Originally Posted by Bigfella

From potential defenders in all forms - especially in international forums. The more unreasonable they look the less opposition the US will face if it acts.

Fantastic. Now a blanket statement covering the vacuous international ether....

Congratulations on your language skills. Did you catch the reports where they supported the IAEA rebuke of Iran at the start of the month? Chinese support for the US is not necessary, just a preparedness to stand by & not cause problems - like the Russians eventually did with Milosovic.

The Russians stood by when we went to war with Milosovic. I'm sure the Chinese would also stand by if we go to war with Iran. If you want war and not sanctions, then China's "close economic cooperation" with Iran doesn't matter one bit.

You clearly haven't read what I actually wrote in context. Try again. (hint, read the quote I was responding too - what is it talking about?).

Oops I should have. Yes, I agree that if the current regime is overthrown then our stance towards Iran should change. I hope you are not suggesting that we should base our policy towards the current regime on what we imagine to be the makeup and motivation of a new regime that might possibly exist if things go spectacularly our way in the unforeseeable future.

Originally Posted by Bigfella

Some interesting stuff here, especially the attacks on mourners & their consequences. If this has really hurt Khamenei/A-jad in th rural areas then it could be game over. Sort of a reverse of the Shah, who was dead once he lost the urban middle classes.

Of course, it is always hard to judge the accuracy of reports from closed societies in chaotic circumstances. Here's hoping.

p.s. Not great on names here, but does an Iranian sounding name with a 'Meir' in front indicate an Iranian jew? just curious.

FRONTLINE: Tehran Bureau: The start of an Iranian intifada | PBS

I saw that article. If true this is one intifada I can support. Good luck to those protesters, I hope they succeed.