WAR

outside Intervention: Not Required, But Necessary

 Upon Reading and thinking and contemplating over the string of articles and comments that have been written over the past few years on the issue of whether we should support the war/millitary option or not, I have seriously come to the conclusion that the ones advocating a "Reform what we have got" and "We get rid of you when we are ready" are not doing anything but deceiving themselves to such horrendous Degree.

Frankly, And i must say to some extent even sadly, they have plenty of sympathizers within the iranian society, not because they really do not favor that option, but because they have grown wayyyy too complacent. I have been back in Iran for 8 months now and i have not seen anything like this in my life ever. Granted that i have been away for almost two decades, but this is just far beyond what i could really fathom/believe.  Everyone has given up. That is right. You'd better beileve it and stop beating around the bush and going through hoops waiting and expecting and hoping That someone is going to do something soon. Or when they are fed Up/ Disgusted and Sick and frustrated enough.

Cuz guess what that point has already been reached But it is so pervasive and so Over the limit that it somehow has nipped itself in the butt , A  form of self-containment, if you will. Kinda like listening to some loud and deafening music and after some time goes by you get used to it!!! that is exactly what we got going here,

JUst walk down any street in Any given city and at any given time and you will see the anger and frustration In people's interaction and their voices and demeanors (Stuff i do not have to remind those of you who have been going back and forth). SO, Pretty much you have all the ingeridients together in order for making something happen. There is enough, More than enough of Every possible element that may possibly be needed to start the fire.  

Long story short, Those of you who are still expecting the perfect time to arrive and see the fireworks, you guys are living in fantasy Island. We are at a point that we are sooo afraid and sooo paranoid that what might be coming in the after math of an attack that we settle for wringing our fingers and Go over various possible scenarios in our heads Until we go dizzy!!! and come full circle back to Square number one of Che konam che konam!!!!

Biting the bullet . That is what needs to be done. Otherwise , Anything else will be a waste of Time.

BTW: You can label me all you want. I love being labled. I think it so sexy and so provocative.

ms. amini, with all due

ms. amini, with all due respect, i agree with you that neither iri nor other countries have the interest of iranian people at heart.  i also agree that a full-scale military attack will have devastating effect on iranian people.  however, the rhetoric of war and actions (e.g. sanctions, sabotage) by the west and israel are natural reactions to rhetoric of war and actions (e.g. material support to terrorists such as hezbollah, assad, hamas,...) of iri.  there you have it, the west and israel are looking out for themselves and not concerened about ordinary iranians.  it doesn't surprise me.

what you don't spell out in the article is the "grand bargain" or the issues that you expect will be discussed at the bargaining table.  does a "grand bargain" include iri abandoning its nuclear program or agreeing to a full cooperation with the west on a joint non-military nuclear program in iri?  does the "grand bargain" include iri abandoning support of terrorist groups?  does the "grand bargain" include the west and israel to commit not to attack iri?  does the "grand bargain" include the west to discontinue their sanctions toward iri?  i'm sure human rights will not part of the discussion since the abuse of human rights is the essence of the velayat faghih.  it would be short of saying regime change will be up for discussion at the bargaining table.  a ludricous idea, don't you think?

the title of your article seems facetious at best.  i don't think that you want any country or allied force to "go all the way and nuke iran."  it sounds like a jilted boyfriend/girlfriend saying "why don't you stick the knife in my heart and twist it?"  having nukes doesn't mean that a country will use it; however, historically we can observe that having nukes means that a country can guarantee its long-term survival and/or continued tyranny.  some countries that come to mind are north korea, israel, pakistan, and india.  if i'm correct that you consider commitment of the west and israel not to attack iran as part of a grand bargain, then iri would achieve its survival strategy at a cheaper cost.  then why wouldn't iri join the bargaining table?  is it because they don't want to abandon their war rhetoric with israel?  is it because they don't want to stop funding terrorists in the middle east?  is it because they actually want to have a military confrontation?  the difficult answers to these questions may be the reason why the specifics of a "grand bargain" was omitted in this article.

furthermore, using the "arab spring" as a model of "do nothing" strategy of the west to be used for iran is mileading or naive.  we all know that gaddafi would not have been ousted without nato and the western military forces.  we all know that egypt was ruled by its military before and after their uprising with the exception of replacing influence of mubarak with that of the "brotherhood."  and we all know what has happened (is happening) in syria, bahrain and yemen.  which one of these countries would you like to use as a model for future iran?

Dear Fariba

Iran is also a potential market for capitalism. 

Is that a bad thing why should Iran not be a market. The argument is the old cold war "Marxist" vs. "Capitalist" stuff. I much rather see a wealthy Iran be a "market" for America. Is it so bad to buy products from America.

The main war is really the war over Iran between China and Russia and the West.  

Why? America is heavily invested in China and vise versa. Most products from China are outsource from America. Therefore there is no competition. The same investors get the profits. Your argument makes more sense with Russia. Particularly on weapons. However if Iran was free they would buy from America. No one in their right mind would buy Russian weapons if they could buy American ones. Therefore again there is no competition. Hence I do not see your point.

I am not sure what the answer is but surely, an attack will destroy Iran; everyone even those who are in prison are against an intervention by outside forces.

I do not support war but also do not agree with your statement. What is the meaning of "destroy". Isn't IRI already destroying Iran? Over 33 years they stole enough to rebuild every building in Iran several times over. Not to mention the brain drain. 

Fariba, many want such wars to "speed up" the process.

I agree with your comment and in many of these arguments one of the points made is usually about "how long" do we have to "wait" for the Islamic Republic to leave or get toppled?

Like W landing on an aircraft carrier and saying "Mission Accomplished" overthrowing a regime via a war is anything but "quick"!  Not to mention the outcome.  Was this the outcome W and company had in mind?

Everything is sacred

two links

//thinkprogress.org/security/2011/12/14/38931...

//www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/us/politics/ging...

reply to massoud

Dear Massoud,

I cherish a good critique. Dialogue is the best way to understand one another and learn from each other.  I am for a regime change much like everyone else but not at any expense, not at the expense of destroying Iran. War is destructive.  Today marks the end of the Iraq war officially.  There are 100,000 Iraqis dead, 4000 Americans dead, 30,000 Americans maimed and injured, millions of Iraqis are refugees. Much of their country destroyed.  If an attack against Iran's nuclear facilities take place, who know what kind of nuclear nightmare we could see (imagine one of these sites being near the city of Isfahan).  of course much of this is blamed on the leaders of the IRI whose ambitions are ruining our country and isolating it more than ever. 

But this program started some 20 years ago ; it didn't start yesterday. why then now and today?  

I am not sure what the U.S. and its allies have in store for Iran but surely it is not all innocent.  Yesterday, they wined and dined with Qaddafi and then they went after him.  The world is a better place without Qaddafi and Saddam but do you honeslty believe that these countries will see the dawn of democray anytime soon?   I am not so sure. 

Iran is also a potential market for capitalism.  The main war is really the war over Iran between China and Russia and the West.  

I am not sure what the answer is but surely, an attack will destroy Iran; everyone even those who are in prison are against an intervention by outside forces.

Finally, the comparison between 1950 and today is not to say that the IRI rulers have anything in common with Dr. Mosaddeq's government ; the point I was making is that there are few sane and wise statesmen these days who rule us in the U.S. and elsewhere. Look at the state of affairs in this country. We are all suffering because a few not so good men have continued policies which have been destructive both at home and abroad.  I do believe Republicans should take most of the blame with both their foreign policy and domestic policy. 

I speak Farsi

perfectly and if that post was an attack on me I got every word of it. The deal is stop insultimg me and I leave EA alone. Otherwise we are back to the pointless "tit for tat" deal.

Regarding Intellectuals ...

I have a question and you are all welcome to respond. What is an Iranian intellectual. In the old days most people were illiterate or had minimal knowledge. Anyone with education specially Western ones were "intellectuals". Now we got much higher literacy and hundreds of thousands with Western degrees. So does the word even have a meaning. 

In my opinion the old style "intellectuals" failed Iran.  They put themselves about ordinary people and came up with hare brained ideas like  "Melli Mazhabi" or "Gharbzadegi". Expecting the rest to follow in their idiotic footsteps. When I rant again "an-tellectuals" these are the people I mean. Of course this does not apply to all intellectuals. There were some Great ones like Kasravi but they were a minority. 

Today these old style intellectuals still demand to be given a bigger voice than others. I don't agree. We got plenty of normal people with much better sense. I rather take the  voice of ordinary educated people more seriously.

Dear Mehrdad; Vildermose and others

I think we got our response to whether Iran can stand by itself here. Vildemose jaan: A simple answer of definite NO

I agree completely  and now let us more on. Given Iran needs others I say don't chose between Russia and USA. Work with all of them and take the best of them. 

Personally I see no benefit in "standing on our two feet" anyway. Because we are a global community and might as well work with others. That does not mean being anyone's bitch. It does mean cooperation to mutual benefit. 

By the way "Gharb Zadegi" aka Westoxification to me is another word for xenophobia. IMHO Al Ahmad did us a great disservice by inventing it. Plus I bet if he were alive he would be living in the West right now :-) 

Compromise Ms Amini?

IRI can easily crush any domestic uprising....

unless there is significant outside assistance (armed, financial, diplomatic). The notion that Iranians can overthrow the Islamist terrorist regime "when they want to" or "when they are ready" (a view promoted by certain elements) is a delusion perfectly suited to the IRI remaining in power indefinitely (i.e. for the foreseeable future). The Libyans and the Syrians have rid themselves of such delusions, and that is why regime change has already been achieved in Libya and is a real possibility in Syria. As long as certain elements promote the idea that "they can do it all on their own" without comprehensive sanctions and without outside pressure and assistance, the IRI will have the last laugh. 

War is inevitable. What is our duty?

Regardless of what we are thinking as a small community on I.C the war with ruling Mullahs in Iran is on progress. That is the first priority agenda for Obama administration after troops returning from Iraq by next 2 weeks.   

We need unity at this time more than anything else in our history. In 1979, shah in state T.V told the nation that he heard the voice of revolution, but he insisted to think of Iran rather than revolution. Iran is important and nothing else.

Now, after 32 year we witnessed shah's vision about Iran's future. Very smart prediction. We all saw all his predictions became reality. We all know what we happened after he left the country. We all know the disaster and the pain our people suffered during those years. Shah left the country despite his inner wishes to stay. He left with his heart full of pain for Iran. In airport, he took part of Iran's soil in a box with him. This historical event rarely mentioned in any literature on I.C.  He burst into tears as the time of departure approached. His true emotion. True patriatic man who loved Iran the same as his father Reza shah the Great did. Something that should have been reminded to all patriatic Iranians.

During last 32 years, no other instutitue other than monarchy has saved Iranian culture from the bloody hands of Arab worshipers mullahs. Iranian culture and traditions were constantly under attack of foreign entity which belong to nomad tribes of desert Arabs in Arabaian Peninsula 1400 years ago.

All patriatic people should be united at this critical moment of our country. We should create a government outside of Iran. A government that can represent the people and interact with people of Iran through cyber-space. We have well educated leader who is lawfully king of our motherland and he is healthy, well educated and well mannered by the name of Reza Pahlavi. So what we are waiting for? All we united under one flag with the most powerful lion and crown on it's face under the leadership of one king defend our land and protecting our thousands years of monarchy history.

Payendeh Iran.  

What is best for advancement of democracy for Iran?

If we look at the struggle of Iranian people for freedom, establishing accountability in government and a better justice system, you will notice that this struggle  have had its up's and downs like everything else in history.

In my opinion, the lull after 1998 coup is simply a short phase and must not be misinterpreted.  People were stunned, and since majority are under the age 30, one can argue that the majority were not exposed/aware of the crimes of the regime against Iranian people particularly the 1988 masacre of political prisoners, and therefore the degree to which this regime is capable of criminal activity with no shame or regard for human life.

 But, both Khamaneh-ee and more importantly the position of Valeeh Fagheeh have been the biggest losers the past 2 years.    Even fans/supporters of Khamaneh-ee/Ahmadi Nejad, can not deny the fact that they have lost so much *credibility* on how the protests were handled.

 The quesiton any sane individual or policy maker dealing with Iranian regime  has to answer is this:

-Has the Iranian regime become more or less popular/credible since 1988 in the eyes of Iranian people?

  Every indication points to a less popular Islamic Regime, so much so that Khamaneh-ee openly calls for the end to the "Republic" just so that they won't have to deal with public opinion, and if he could get rid of Majless too, I don't believe he would hesitate for a second.

 From political front, and freedom, not only things have not improved but by the regime arresting and killing its own old allies it has shown it is even less tolerant now, and obviously less liked by people of Iran.

 From financial view, the mismanagement of Ahmadi Nejad adminstration of now nearing a trillion dollar oil revenue over the past 7 years with very little to show for  has and will make for a lot of unhappy Iranians.

 The question then becomes, not if, but how long before the regime faces massive protest and objection from Iranian people?

-Now would a regime that owe's its survival to the 8 years bloody war, after which it fully consolidated its grip on power,  welcome or try to avoid a war?

-Has the behavior of the regime in international arena softened or become more hardlined due to international pressure and threats of war so far?

Of course in all the warmongering, initiated by Israel and Islamic Regime, we are pretty powerless.   I can stop Israel from bombing Iran as much as I can convince Islamic Regime to be a more tolerant system.

Still, in our desire for a better Iran, we must at least be clear  *for ourselves* on what we want for Iran and how we want it to happen:

 A change of regime in Iran, undertaken by Iranian people *when* they are ready to do so.   Let us not become a voice for military interventionist by trying to echo their sentiment on why a war is inevitable.   Let us instead express  alternatives and ways to avoid such disaster.  Both inside Iran as well as outside.

 If we try to convince ourselves that war is the only option for U.S, then how do we expect that those in charge  and policy makers should think differently?  So at a minimum, *condemn* policy makers or candidates that propose such approach.

Rashid

You said...

همین که یک ملتی همه بدبختی های خود ساخته را به گردن حکومت میاندازد یعنی خودش تبه کار است و میخواهد پنهانش کند

Bravo, made me think before swallowing the bitter truth!

Vildemose jaan: A simple answer of definite NO

IRI obviously has had 33 years and failed at the task, but these are the hopes and wishes of so many Iranians who wish to stand on their own, specially politically rather be the West or East water boy.

 Of course for that to happen, Iranians first need to get rid of IRI but I believe such independence is not possible if the next regime is chosen/installed by the West/US.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

تروریسم سپاه قدس در خارج از کشور

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7G0Op79rcs&feature=share

Does it make any sense to promote policies which would provide BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars year after year to the IRGC?  What would IRGC do with nukes?  Can a fascistic, genocidal, extremist group like the ruling terrorist regime be trusted with nukes?

 But the hope and fight is

 But the hope and fight is to stand on our own two feet and be no body’s bitch once and for all.

Dear Bavafa: do you think the IRI is up to this task??

A state of war only serves
as an excuse for domestic tyranny.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Born December 11, 1918

Faramarz jaan

Faramarz jaan,

Thank you for your kind words.  I agree with you on most issues.  I wish I could write as well as you do.

Best,

Masoud

 Jenabe

 Jenabe Rashid:

p.s. This will be my last response to you. This is very personal issue for me and I mean no offense. Hope you understand.

Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Keep going

Name calling and insults: the last refuge of a failing cult.

VPK and Fascist ideology

VPK, I agree with Bavafa and I hope that you realize that your criticism of all intellectuals in Iran is analogous to how Mussolini and Hitler criticized their intellectuals (Jews and Communists).  Just because the intellectuals lost to Khomeini it doesn't mean they betrayed the country.  They lost because Khomeini took advantage of the Iranian people's naivete when it came to religion.  He came across as a holy grandfather like figure and almost everyone that I know of trusted that he will step aside once the Shah is overthrown.  FYI before you go an label me an IRI supporter, I was 13 at the time and didn't like him or believed him.  The intellectuals had no choice but to yield to him.  He was extremely charismatic and popular.  You have to realize that there is a spectrum of circumstances and events rather than just black and white.  You mean well but you do not weigh the circumstances correctly and instead try to mend different parts of history (vastly different periods) to make your points. 

Mehrdad

Obviously we are not connecting recently. I will try harder in future. 

However the logic of criticizing opponent/enemy of IRI directly translates to support for IRI is flawed.  

I agree with that and have always agreed. However it boils down to the frequency and strength. For example the business about Iran being USA's bitch. Why should we not deal with USA if it is in our mutual interest. Instead deal with Russia. USA never took one inch or Iran but Russia took a lot. Need I remind you of  Golistan and Turkamanchai. Americans did a coup but Russians took our land. We got to deal with someone; might as well be America and Israel; why not.

You know something I knew some of these an-tellectuals. They make me sick as they sold Iran out to the Mollas.

Dear VPK: Your logic is flawed…

 I have not been able to make head ways with you in the past nor expect this time.  However the logic of criticizing opponent/enemy of IRI directly translates to support for IRI is flawed.  This is especially true that while I/we criticize the drive to war by some faction in US, I/we criticize and condemn the policies of IRI that fuels this drive hence no support for IRI.

  Cousin Faramarz:  I agree with you that if Iran must be somebody’s bitch, most of us specially me would prefer it to be the West and US.   But the hope and fight is to stand on our own two feet and be no body’s bitch once and for all.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

One more thing

Cyrus I have given up on all our an-tellectuals they blew it. I think we are better off without them. It is a personal opinion. These guys are all puff and no substance. All of them put together is not half as good as a mediocre engineer.

Cyrus

I don't have a monopoly on anything other than my own self. What I don't like is your tone. Demanding? Who do you think you are? If you start the conversation by demanding you put the other on defensive right away.

Regarding Secular: what do you mean by Secular? I mean religion out of government. Religion in personal life does not go against secular. However I don't want religion in government.

Regarding people: I don't like criminals like Soroush. He purged the universities and in my opinion must stand trial for it. Others who have not committed crimes are fine. But I don't want anything to do with criminals like him,

 جناب  vildemose

تآسف آور است که ما از شناخت روحیه و انواع راه کارهای مبارزه مردم ایران برای حفظ حیات این کشور دور افتاده ایم . اگر به شاهنامه که فرهنگ و شیوه انواع جنگ و صلح و سازش ایرانیان در طی هزاران سال را به تصویر کشیده مراجعه شود میتوان دید در همه مواردی که دفاع از کشور مطرح بود و میدانستند شکست میخورند شجاعانه جنگیدند و کشته شدند . بروید جنگ رستم فرخزاد با سعد وقاس را  و نامه رستم به برادرش را بخوانید تا بدانید چرا با وجود اینکه  میدانست خود و سپاهیانش کشته میشوند و کشور به تصرف اعراب و ایران به ویرانی در خواهد آمد باز جنگید و کشته شد .

این منطق سوداگر غرب  است که آنرا نوعی خودکشی  یا لجاجت میداند ولی نیاکان ما آنرا بعنوان سند پایداری و تسلیم نشدن به دشمنان این سرزمین تحویل نسلهای بعد میدادند که دست مایه توان روحی برای تداوم دفاع از کشور قرار گیرد .
آیا قذافی در این چند سال اخیر کم با غرب و شرق راه آمد ؟ چه شد ؟
آنها میخواهند ایران را بیشتر چپاول کنند و بهانه هم فراوان است ، نباشد هم درستش میکنند .

تآسف آور است که از ایران فقط رژیمش دیده میشود ، فرع و متغیر زیر ذره بین قرار میگیرد نه اصل کشور و ملت  ، و مطابق  این مردم هم به دو دسته رژیمی و ضد رژیمی تقسیم میشوند .

Great Analysis Masoud Khan

Some of the folks here making comments as if the the US and the world community are the responsible adults and the Regime is the delinquent juvenile that does stupid things but he really doesn't mean it and over time he will grow up and will be a productive member of the society!

Well, guess what, the juvenile delinquent has a gun in his hand and is trying to get a bigger gun. He has also taken millions of innocent people hostage and is saying "if you come any closer, the grandma gets it!"

Response to Veiled Prophet of Iran

Given your posting, I take it you believe that you and others who share your thinking have a monopoly on the truth.

To pretend that any Iranian political persuasion in the past century has not committed numerous mistakes is awfully naive. Name me one political persuasion not sullied by numerous tactical mistakes. No sense in any one segment of Iranians pretending they are holier than thou in their thinking. That is precisely what has gotten us into our various pickles over the past century.

You can rest assured I am as secular as anyone you know. However, if secular and religious Iranians can agree that they stand shoulder to shoulder on an issue they should do so.

No one group has a monopoly on the truth - its that simple. To discuss issues with others who do not share your persuasion does not legitimate their view. To the contrary, if you are fickle enough to run from those who see the world in a different light than you, you belittle your self and obviously do not hold firmly to your views. 

Courage is the ability to master your fears, not its absence.

Re: We Must Demand Hambastegi from All Iranians Abroad

Demand? What do you think this is sir; I have no obligation to work with those I don't agree with. I would be dead before I work with "thinkers" like Soroush. He is a part of IRI and belong in jail.

I will work with some others but you don't get anywhere by issuing demands. You make progress by "requesting cooperation". Then maybe people will listen to you. Now keep making demands and get the cold shoulder from people.

As for the "thinkers" half of them are Islamists. To me Islamists "thinkers" is an oxymoron. I do not want to work with and  give them legitimacy. Islamic thinkers got us there. Honestly I rather have them look at the business end of an F15.

هم جلو دشمنان

هم جلو دشمنان ایران خواهد ایستاد ، حتی اگر بداند شکست میخورد.
 So you just confirmed that the regime is ideological and not pragmatic as the Iri lobbies tend to portray. Why would a regime want to slaughter its own people even when it knows it is fighting a losing battle?? To what end? To prove what?? Are you trying to say ordinary Iranian people are suicidal and approve of the foreign policies of IRI at the expense of losing their country and lives???Really?? Can you substantiate your statement that the IRI represents the will of its people???

Didn't we learn from Iran-Iraq war?? Are we still chasing the dreams of Khomeini, The road to jerusalem via Karbala??

 A state of war only serves
as an excuse for domestic tyranny.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Born December 11, 1918