Iranians United in wanting Regime Toppled - BUT do not Support Attack on Nuclear Establishments

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

ayatoilet1
by ayatoilet1
14-Nov-2011
 

Iranians are all united behind Iran's Nuclear programs. Iranians are proud, and competent. Iran is a great nations and the inheritor of a rich history and great civilization that once dominated humanity. If India has nukes, If Russia has Nukes, If Chinese have Nukes, If America has Nukes, If the Europeans have Nukes ...then so should Iran. Plain and simple. But beyond pride, there are many logical reasons to endure all the pain inflicted on Iran to sustain the nuclear program.

Israel's attack on Iran's nuclear establishments is a bad idea. Iranians want the theocracy out. Better to bomb Khamenei's palace or centers of theocratic power (such as Qom) than to bomb Nuclear establishments. If Israel bombs Iran's nuclear establishments Iranians will galvanize arround the current government - as much as they hate them - for the sake if defending Iranian sovereignty and dignity. Israel will lose a potential critical allie; and the Mullahs will become more entrenched. The result will be a more polarized, and paranoid Iran - with the Mullahs digging in further to stay in power for another 30 years.  Its a dumb idea. Iranians are all UNITED in supporting Iran's nuclear program. Consider the followin:

First of all, we all know fossil fuels will run out during our lifetimes. There is no question that Nuclear energy will become the pre-eminent source of energy in the world - just has in fact it has been for millions of years on the Sun's surface. Iran needs to export its oil - not burn it - and a domestic nuclear program will help maintain net exports and extend Iran's income from oil and natural gas. Despite all nuclear accidents - Chernobyl, Japan, etc. - Nuclear power will survive and eventually take over as the leading source of energy throughout the world. Many countries like France already produce over 80% of their energy needs via Nuclear power.

Second: Iran sits at the epi-center between India, China, Russia, Arabia and Europe. 65% of the world's population; and the world's fastest growing economies that will soon also account for 65% of the world's GDP can all be serviced with interconnecting energy and telecommunication grids centered in Iran. Iran is already building a natural gas pipeline to Turkey and Europe as well as Pakistan and India. Iran can also become a major electricity supplier at the center of such a grid and export electricity (as it already does) to neighboring countries. Nuclear power has to be a significant option under any future scenario - and agian much like France not only produce power for domestic needs, but also export significant quantities of energy and establish a major regional distribution system.

Third: Iran has significant Uranium deposits. Not long ago I read a silly article saying Iran has no Uranium to speak of; yet, there is factual evidence that in just one shaft in in one mine in central Iran, there is enough Uranium ore to position Iran within the top 10 producers of Uranium worldwide. Why should Iran base its economy solely on fossil fuel resources, when it has other valuable resources too. And more importantly, why send these resources overseas for processing and then buy it back at inflated values for its nuclear power programs. Iran surely must have its own domestic enrichment capabilities too.  

Fourth: Iran is in a tough neighborhood - with many major Nuclear powers within a 2 hour missile flight from Iran. Russia, India, China, Israel - not to forget US and European missiles stationed in Eastern Europe. Two major invasions have occured on neighboring countries; and Iran was itself invaded only 30 years ago by Saddam Hussein. Major terrorist groups operate arround Iranian borders financed by Israel, aiding sepratist movements designed to destroy Iran as we know it. Iranians have every right to protect their homeland and surely nuclear capability has to be on the cards in such a hostile environment.

Fifth (but most importantly): Israel itself has nuclear establishments and over 400 Nuclear warheads. An attack on Iran for "nuclear non-compliance' would be to say the least very hypocritical. Israel itself is not even a signatory of the NPT (Nuclear non-ploriferation treaty) and Israel is probably the world's most non-compliant nation with respect to numerous U.N. resolutions. ANd beyond all that, Israel itself has an aggressive posture and has invaded virtually every one of its neighbors. (Iran on the other hand has not invaded anyone in hundreds of years). An attack on Iran would be baseless and defy logic - especially from Israel. And in the end, further isolate Israel and even, put the whole country (Israel that is) at serious risk. Israel would be inviting retaliation and the consequences of such action would be very hard to predict.

Unfortunately, the West did not attack Iran when they could have back in the 90's. In fact the mullahs in Iran should have been defeated first, before comitting troops into Iraq. This was a major strategic blunder. And in 2009 when the Iranian public took to the streets, and begged the West for support - none was forthcoming. The West has let the people of Iran down very badly many times. Time and again over the past 100 years - Iranians have been undermined by the West. The West has NEVER MISSED an opportunity to deny Iranians their freedom and democracy....by always supporting dictators and enemies of Iranians into power. If Israel attacks Iran's nuclear establishments, we all know that it will be with America's blessing. Once again, the United States will end up backing force and aggression against the nation of Iran.

Iranians want their freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press ...etc etc. and ultimately free enterprise. Not because it is some divine tenet, but because they want to give their children dignity and prosperity - and it is only through freedom and liberty that a nation can express its pride, tbe free to ake risks in order to achieve, and be enterprising. In the end, freedom translates to economic prosperity. By invading Iran's nuclear establishments, Iran will be thrown back into the dark ages in the energy sphere and Iranians will be condemned to more repression and poverty. I do not think Iranians will stand still and watch it happen. There will be unintended consequences for any aggressor.

Better to topple the regime, and leave the nuclear establishments alone. A new transparent, secular and democratic regime will be the best assurance Israel (indeed anyone) will need to guard regional security. Iranians are actually very natural Israeli allies. It was an Iranian king who freed the Jews from persecution from then Arabs. The Mullahs in Iran are Arabs too (imposing Arab culture and customs on Iranians) ... and All Iranians ask is that Israel helps topple the regime - not topple nuclear establishments and not support terrorists (MEK/MKO/PMOI, Jundallah, Azeri sepratists, Al Ahwaz Sepratists, etc) whose only aim is the destruction of Iran.  Mr. Netenyahu, we agree that the Regime in Iran are Nazi's. You are right about that. So why not deal with the regime? The nuclear issue is a side show - a symptom. Attack the root problem ...please.

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by ayatoilet1CommentsDate
Keep Boycotting BP
14
Dec 01, 2012
The War on Oil – Part 2
3
Nov 30, 2012
The War on Oil – Part 1
1
Nov 30, 2012
more from ayatoilet1
 
Cost-of-Progress

Fesenjoon

by Cost-of-Progress on Wed Nov 16, 2011 04:53 AM PST

The current regime and its goons will never ever evolve into anything but more power hungry and bloodthristy.

Islam needs a renaissance - but it won't happen peacefully. Muslims have their heads too far up Islam's butt to see or hear the need.............

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________


  •  
hamsade ghadimi

if iri develops nukes, it

by hamsade ghadimi on Tue Nov 15, 2011 12:27 PM PST

if iri develops nukes, it would make it nearly impossible for the opposition in iran to get rid of the ayatoilets (as you put it!).  and you claim that u.s. government has conducted polls to iran to gauge their opinion on the nuclear issue?  how democratic of them!  they actually want to make their decisions based on the opinions of people of another country?  was it a telephone survey?  can we have more details on this survey?  rest in peace, sargord pirouz always had survey results to show us how the opinions of iranians are in line with that of the iri regime.


  •  
Truthseeker9

(Not really)

by Truthseeker9 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 12:22 PM PST

But seriously, the thought of IRI (the world's foremost state sponsor of terrorism) having nuclear weapon is the ultimate nightmare. It is a question of the worst evil.

//www.steveemerson.com/6633/iran-nuclear-weapon-to-terrorists 


  •  
Truthseeker9

~~~~~~~~~~~=O

by Truthseeker9 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:59 AM PST

BOMB-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B  the B*st*rds!!!!        :)


  •  
Fesenjoon2

Don't get me wrong

by Fesenjoon2 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:27 AM PST

Don't get me wrong though

I do support nuclear fannaavari for Iran, but only when the current regime either changes or evolves out of a dictatorial religious theocracy. And what are the chances for that happening any time soon?

When a house is falling apart (for example there is a problem of child abuse or domestic violence), you first fix the house's problem, THEN you go buy fancy toys. 

There's no pride in having nuclear capabilities when people are being enslaved by their own fanatic rulers. I don't support it.


  •  
Anahid Hojjati

I am with Parham and Fesenjoon

by Anahid Hojjati on Tue Nov 15, 2011 10:22 AM PST

I don't want drive towards nuclear weapons while IRI is in power.


  •  
KouroshR99

@ayatoliet1

by KouroshR99 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 08:36 AM PST

Polls inside Iran mean nothing to me.

Everything inside the IRI is censored, controlled, and examined in extreme detail. I've seen polls coming out of Iran that were just ridiculous, the idea that just because a poll inside Iran is sponsored by the West is valid is nonsense. Do not trust polls from inside Iran, next we'll see a poll come out of Iran claiming that 90% of Iranians stand by Ahmadinejad or some other nonsense.

Oh and yes, even GALLOP polls can be (and have been) rigged.


  •  
KouroshR99

@Cost-of-Progress

by KouroshR99 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 08:31 AM PST

When Persians were civilizing the East, Palestinians were still living like primitive Bedouins. Only the biggest Arab loving self-hating Persians can support the "liberation" of a people who are utterly antithetical to us. Neither are Palestinians Iranian in culture nor religion. Bah, to imagine there are 20 year old basijis out there who are crying for the same people who raped their families 1400 years ago on that pitiful day when our Sasanid armies lost to the primitive might of the Arab Bedouin.

It's always a happy sight to see Iranians of all backgrounds chant "no to Gaza, no to Lebanon, I'll only give my life for Iran".


  •  
AMIR1973

Nuclear power has been a great success for IRI

by AMIR1973 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 08:28 AM PST

All you have to do is look at the junky Russian-built reactor in Bushehr to see success in action. Everyone repeat after me: "Nirooyeh Hastei Haqq-e Mossalam-e Mast!" Oh yeah!


  •  
KouroshR99

Iranians are united in wanting...

by KouroshR99 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 08:25 AM PST

Iranians are united in wanting nuclear energy, not nuclear weapons. While a strike on Iran at the moment may get everyone happy now, in the long run, Iranians will begin blaming their ills (again) on American imperialism, this time though, instead of it being about Mossadeq and the 53' coup it'll be about the destruction of Iran's nuclear program and how it made the countries progress retart.

A strike on the Mullahs, maybe that would get us excited, after all, we all know nuclear energy is worth more than Arab lovers (Mudslimes).


  •  
Bavafa

A well-argued blog…

by Bavafa on Tue Nov 15, 2011 08:12 AM PST

The reason for nuclear power is not merely because of the pride that may come with it, it is a need as you have argued here.  The oil will run out sooner or later and it will not be long before Iranians find themselves with no source of revenue or a viable, sustainable and home grown technology that can propel them forward.  Nuclear power can be a substitute at least for the time being and hopefully some of Iran’s energy need will come from that source.

  As for the weaponization of nuclear power, while I disagree with it and believe is wrong, we cannot simply ignore all the misguided polices by the West when nuclear power have got rewarded and those who adhered to the law may get punished.  With all the guns that is pointed at Iran with the choice of lay down and roll over or I shoot, Iranians will be foolish not to take steps to defend themselves.

 

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad


  •  
Parham

Even if they were in majority...

by Parham on Tue Nov 15, 2011 08:10 AM PST

... it wouldn't make them right!
Plus, nuke in the hands of the current people at the helm is something else...


  •  
Cost-of-Progress

Anyone

by Cost-of-Progress on Tue Nov 15, 2011 12:32 PM PST

who supports the mullahs and their goons in acquiring nukes supports theocracy and the eventual demise of our beloved motherland.

Wake up and smell the golab in the haram baba. It actually stinks the high heaven!

Who conducted these "surveys" is another matter entirely.

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________


  •  
ayatoilet1

Both Fesenjoon and Parham in a Minority

by ayatoilet1 on Tue Nov 15, 2011 07:40 AM PST

It may seem strange to you, but the U.S. government has actually commissioned polls inside Iran and there is an overwhelming majority of Iranians that SUPPORT nukes.

I personally think it makes logical sense for Iran to pursue Nukes; and both the Shah and the Mullahs seem to agree (even though they are almost polar opposites). That makes me think there really is logical sense to it.

I have tried to elicit the reasons in my blog; and neither Fesenjoon nor Parham can refute the case -- only to say that Nukes in the wrong hands should mean no Nukes at all. The tough part is Iran is actuallly late to the game; and needs to catch up ... but I think in fact the regime is far more fluid and temporary than the 'nuclear option' for Iran. I mean the regime will change, but Iran energy picture and long-term strategic interests are somewhat permanent features of the land. Bottom like Nukes must be pursued and pursued vigorously.

But I can agree to disagree with anyone. I still think any attack on these establishments would be stupid -- and beyond Iran will actually create a monumental economic crisis in the West at a very fragile time for most Western economies. It just doesn't make sense. They should have done it a long time ago instead of pandering to the regime in Tehran; now its too late they have tu pursue other options. There are better (smarter) ways to topple the regime.


  •  
Parham

I don't support...

by Parham on Tue Nov 15, 2011 04:20 AM PST

... the IR's drive toward nukes either.


  •  
Fesenjoon2

No, not everyone is

by Fesenjoon2 on Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:36 PM PST

No, not everyone is united.

I don't support Iran's drive for its nuclear ambitions.

Advanced technology requires a sufficiently mature political infrastructure. Iran is not mature as it currently stands. Kids and the mentally challenged should not have access to knives and guns. Iran is a country whose mullahs can wake up one morning and declare nuclear war on another country, claiming it is a command from Imam zaman. What guarantee does the world have that the likes of Jannati or Hasan Abbasi will behave responsibly once they have nuclear weapons capability? Of course there arent any guarantees! The people running Iran are not only not mature, but they are foolish and mentally deranged. If they had maturity, instead of focusing 24/7 on how to demolish Israel as their main policy, they would be focusing on the thousands of problems and shortcomings they have with their economy, society, and domestic policies, like India, Russia, China, and all other nuclear powers do. Iran is still the same country that climbs up embassy walls and believes in spotting Khomeini's heavenly face in the Moon.

And if destroying iran's nuclear/weaponry infrastructure will rally iranians toward the mullas as you claim, then so be it: perhaps Iranians do indeed deserve their leaders. Freedom is not free. It requires a certain leeyaaqat.

Besides, if Iran had so much ore as you claim, I don't think they'd be after importing Uranium from africa: 

//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaan...

 

 


  •