Musings of a former chicken

Fred doesn;t comprehend geopolitical strategy in Middle East

In his piece, Fred makes a point to show that the Iranian people and Israelis should be at the very least "allies" against the percieved threat from Arab countries in the region. Arab countries that have in the past rallied around Nasser's call for "Arab" unity and in our current times around "protection of Sunnis against Shiite infiltration."

What Fred misses out on are the following:

a. Iranian and Arabs have historically been arch enemies in terms of ideologies and certain beliefs.

b. However. Iran and Israel currently percieve one another as economic threats.

The fight b/w Iran and Israel is far from being about Palestine or any existential threat. It is about dominance in the Middle East. A political dominance that if unchecked will manifest itself in terms of economic clout.

Iran fully realizes that if it makes good with Israelis or reduces the rhetoric against Israel, it wouldn't be long before other Arab nations line up and establish political relations with Israel.

Israel, will little by little makes grounds in those Arab countries. It will start by offering agricultural aid to countries like Sudan, Jordan, Kuwait and Oman. After it is assured that it has won over the good hearts of the Arab masses or atleast their non-chalante attitude to Israel's presence in their lands, Israel will offer its agricultural goods, to be followed by tech goods and so on. It will beat American and European products by offering the good at a very competitive price due to low shipping and handling charges. It will also beat Chinese/Asian gooods by offering goods with a higher quality.

Iranian strategists fully understand that. They also are well aware that Iranian made goods at the present time are not competitive enough in the Middle East market. Nor do they have any tech goods that could be used in Arab people's daily lifes.

Hence, if all is worked out between Iran and Israel, Iran would potentially lose out on the Middle Eastern market and will be squeezed out in the future if it tries make any foray.

Therefore, the situation is not as simple as it is made out to be. On the one hand, Iran is being punished internationally because of its opposition to Israel (and not the nuclear issue as simpletons think) and on the other hand Iran can hardly afford to lose out to Israeli economic "monopoly" if it accepts Israel.

So the real question that should be posed is not whether Iran should ally with Israel against Arabs. Rather, should Iran focus on short term gains (by accepting the peace process) and long term losses or on short term losses and potentially long term gains.

That is the question. I hope Fred sticks with creative writing and leaves politics and strategy to those qualified.

Or to quote Saddam Hussein, I will tell you, " Anta lasta Ahlun laha"

Fred doesn;t comprehend geopolitical strategy in Middle East

In his piece, Fred makes a point to show that the Iranian people and Israelis should be at the very least "allies" against the percieved threat from Arab countries in the region. Arab countries that have in the past rallied around Nasser's call for "Arab" unity and in our current times around "protection of Sunnis against Shiite infiltration."

What Fred misses out on are the following:

a. Iranian and Arabs have historically been arch enemies in terms of ideologies and certain beliefs.

b. However. Iran and Israel currently percieve one another as economic threats.

The fight b/w Iran and Israel is far from being about Palestine or any existential threat. It is about dominance in the Middle East. A political dominance that if unchecked will manifest itself in terms of economic clout.

Iran fully realizes that if it makes good with Israelis or reduces the rhetoric against Israel, it wouldn't be long before other Arab nations line up and establish political relations with Israel.

Israel, will little by little makes grounds in those Arab countries. It will start by offering agricultural aid to countries like Sudan, Jordan, Kuwait and Oman. After it is assured that it has won over the good hearts of the Arab masses or atleast their non-chalante attitude to Israel's presence in their lands, Israel will offer its agricultural goods, to be followed by tech goods and so on. It will beat American and European products by offering the good at a very competitive price due to low shipping and handling charges. It will also beat Chinese/Asian gooods by offering goods with a higher quality.

Iranian strategists fully understand that. They also are well aware that Iranian made goods at the present time are not competitive enough in the Middle East market. Nor do they have any tech goods that could be used in Arab people's daily lifes.

Hence, if all is worked out between Iran and Israel, Iran would potentially lose out on the Middle Eastern market and will be squeezed out in the future if it tries make any foray.

Therefore, the situation is not as simple as it is made out to be. On the one hand, Iran is being punished internationally because of its opposition to Israel (and not the nuclear issue as simpletons think) and on the other hand Iran can hardly afford to lose out to Israeli economic "monopoly" if it accepts Israel.

So the real question that should be posed is not whether Iran should ally with Israel against Arabs. Rather, should Iran focus on short term gains (by accepting the peace process) and long term losses or on short term losses and potentially long term gains.

That is the question. I hope Fred sticks with creative writing and leaves politics and strategy to those qualified.

Houseboys

The problem Iranian Islamists and their Palestinian houseboys have is their opponents can spot them a mile away. Besides being demagogic to a fault, they are generally ill informed bordering on being ignorant.

Keep on trucking.

Samer, you bring up a good

Samer, you bring up a good point.

I keep comparing Fred to Ted Kaczynski, which is unfair to Ted.

Fred has the divaneh in common with Ted, but he's nowhere near as intelligent.

you cannot blame them for

you cannot blame them for that, they look out for their own.

How about you? 

Fred do you enjoy

spending your time emitting meaningless statements just to see what reaction you will provoke??

 1) Iran and Israel are natural allies, wow, very good, Zionism and Theocracy are the perfect match, we should have known! 

2) Michel Aflaq created Baathism - I suppose just like Karl Marx created Communism and Adam Smith, Capitalism. excellent!!

3) Israel destroying Osirak reactor prevented Saddam Hussein from annhilating Iranians. I don´t think Iranians who lost relatives and were sacrificed defending the homeland will appreciate that statement. No points for that one.

"No, the above quote is different than the one Arab Ba’athists champion which dictates two things deserve to be crushed, mosquitoes and Iranians."

Bathism dictates that, really? So Syria, currently Iran's closest ally in the Middle East, has that as a pillar of its foreign policy I suppose??? Inconveniently for you, Syria is also ruled by the Arab Baath party, whose pillar is actually Arab socialism and unity, not the anhilation of Iran, as you are trying to propose by some skewed logic.

And sure, Arabs do put Arab issues ahead of other issues, but you cannot blame them for that, they look out for their own.

@fred

So basically if I disagree with your demagoguery I'm a basiji or from khaneeabad?  If you have nothing else to offer but copy and paste my comments and hurl insults, then we have nothing to discuss.  All the same, I repeat what I said before.  Last I checked this site was called iranian.com.  Not let's advocate Israel in spite of Iran.com  I don't think you'll find too many allies here advocating your position that Iran and Israel are natural allies and all us Iranians should feel honored that Israel is actively and openly planning to strike Iran militarily.  Judging by your posts and the responses to them, it's apparent you're a one man show.  So good luck at whatever it is you do.  

حکیم خانی آباد

حکیم خانی آباد حتی بخودشان زحمت جمله بندی جدید و خارج از متن جوجه بسیجی ها ابراز عقیده کردن را هم نمیدهند  و همان ها را تکرار میکند.

لطف فرموده نقل قول مستقیم از آنجاییکه به زعم و واژگان مخصوص خودشان  " حالا جدا، چرا اینقدر نگارانه اسراییل شدی؟" بیاورند تا خدای ناکرده متهم به دروغگویی هم نشوند.

از قرار کسیه کشیده شده به ایشان ساخته، نوش.

دلاک یوسف آباد:

حکیم خانی آباد

حکیم خانی آباد مینویسد: 

 نوشته این سایت ایرانیه، ولیکن بنظر میاد خایه مالان اسراییل بد جور اینجا در حال فعالیت هستند

به هر صورت زنده باد آزادی،

 پاینده باد ایران

و نابود باد دشمنان ضحاک ایران زمین!

 اول- ایرانی پاک نهاد به زبان اسلامیستها  ابراز عقیده نمیکند تا به این زودی لو برود.

دوم-بجای واژه خ... مال که محبوب جوجه بسیجی ها است، ایرانی پاک نهاد  در صورت اجبار واژه پاچه خوار را به کار میگیرد.

سوم- وقتی میگویید" نابود باد دشمنان ضحاک ایران زمین "  در حقیقت دشمنان حضرت مقام عظیم رهبری را لعن میفرمایید  و نه بالعکس آن.  

چهارم-از قرار با این ادبیات مدارا که در نوشته شما فوران میزند معنی بیت شعری را هم که نوشته اید خوب درک نکرده ا ید شاید بهتر بود مینوشتید

آسایش  دو گیتی تفسیر این دو حرف است

 بعد از ناهار یک جایی، بعد از چایی یه سیگار

Confused Haji

 Leave it to the confused Haji to solve the riddle.

When you have historical proof of one collected party’s enmity and hostile actions against the other in the form of wars it would be:

“A bizarre way of applying the rules of interference and deduction to come up with an uncanny conclusion based on an utter rubbish spoken by a despotic medieval king. “

The logical solution is for the victims to hug their aggressors and shun their allies.

Oh yeah

آسایش دو گیتی تفسیر این دو حرف است با دوستان مروت با دشمنان مدا

به نظر میاد برخی از دوستان که اینجا احضار عقیدهای تند و تیز میکنند اصلا ایرانی نیستند.  اگر هم هستند به ملل دیگری وفادارند.  چه بهتر که ما حرفامونو به فارسی بزنیم، تا زیادی از حد این افراد مزاحم نباشند و پارازیتشونو جای دیگری در کنند.  شاید هم اسمه سایت عوض شده و ما خبر نداریم. نوشته این سایت ایرانیه، ولیکن بنظر میاد خایه مالان اسراییل بد جور اینجا در حال فعالیت هستند.  

A bizarre way of applying the rules of interference and ...

deduction to come up with an uncanny conclusion based on an utter rubbish spoken by a despotic medieval king.

A more logical option to wish for, would be an alliance between the decent Israeli&palestinian citizens and the freedom seeking Iranians to get rid of both the fascist-like IRI and the Nazi-like Israeli regime.

Mien Führer

Few comments below you said:

“Instead of assuming so much about me how about you ask me questions and not talk nonsense?” 

So a question was posed as you asked for it, again mien Führer you made the assertion that:

“In the world of Iranian neocons, the term "natural allies" is the notion that Iran should should give up its independence and its rights to disagree with Israel. It should bend over for Israel at every turn, just like washington and certain european countries.”

 Now logic dictates that either you are one of them “Iranian neocons” or can read their mind, if neither provide citation for your assertion.

  You are too green, do not skip class

Use the word Israel in a blog, post, anywhere

and you are bound to attract a predertmined number of folks on this site who beat their chests about Israel and the palestinian "cause".

Never, ever - have I heard anything from them on the attrocities comitted by the islamic regime in iran AGAINST THEIR OWN PEOPLE.

They claim they have the best intentions for Iran. I say they are full of crap and belong to the same old tired mentality that has brought Iran to this point.

They know who they are (just look at the posts here).

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Ayatollah Ozma Fred

call yourself a iranian liberal zionist, iranian-american neocon, israeli, or whatever you want. You, mahmoudg are the type I'm talking about.

Mien Führer

Mien Führer you do realize when you say:

“In the world of Iranian neocons, the term "natural allies" is the notion that Iran should should give up its independence and its rights to disagree with Israel. It should bend over for Israel at every turn, just like washington and certain european countries.”

It could only mean two things, either you are one of them   “Iranian neocons” rascals or you are a mind reader and can read their mind.

If neither of the two provide the citation for your assertion including the bendover part which seems to be the prism the Islamists look at everyhting through it.

The rest of your babbling is a garden verity Islamist scripted talking point.  

You are too green, do not skip class

Iraniandudee3

Instead of assuming so much about me how about you ask me questions and not talk nonsense?

Moosir below

Instead of worrying about what Isreal is doing to the Palestinians
worry about what the Iri is doing to our own people, and your own poor
people in general.

But you're clearly not even Iranian.

Natural Allies like US is natural allies? No thanks

In the world of Iranian neocons, the term "natural allies" is the notion that Iran should should give up its independence and its rights to disagree with Israel. It should bend over for Israel at every turn, just like washington and certain european countries.

While I welcome friendship with the state of Israel and diplomatic and people-to-people contacts between the two nations, by no means am I going to stop calling for justice to prevail and point out Israel's crimes and the siege mentality that gives rise to those crimes. to ignore Palestinian suffering like we do today and turn a blind eye on Israeli brutality goes against everything Iranians stand for. equally as important, it is in our strategic interest to disagree often with Israel's current policies while encouraging political and people-to-people contact.

And if this offends our zionist cheerleaders on iranian.com so be it.

Delusion of being non-delusional

“However the entire Farsi speaking world knows he never said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map.  It was never said PERIOD!!! 

 Now based on that non-statement, and infamously skewed and unreliably "reliable" intelligence they're threatening to wipe Iran off the map.”

The “never said period” bit is refuted so often with indisputable documentations only a non-delusional would attempt at refuting it, capitalized “PERIOD” or not.

And who exactly has threatened in such words that are in quotation mark to “wipe Iran off the map”?

BTW,the heck with the subject of the blog which does not jive with the non-delusional's world views.

Speaking of delusions

However the entire Farsi speaking world knows he never said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map.  It was never said PERIOD!!!  

AN said it must vanish from the pages of time. Are you happy? This has been a recurring theme of Islamists and "leftish" Fellow Travelers that AN and the IRI are innocent victims of the devilish Westerners & Zionists and haven't said or done anything really objectionable. The constant chants of "Death to (Fill in the Blank)" from the first minute that the IRI came to power should also not be taken at face value, since they don't really wish the deaths of any of those nations they chant against. The holocaust denial conference attended by Neo-Nazis, David Duke, and other such fine folks--it's all a big misunderstanding.

@MahmoudG

I'm all about making the Kaaba a latrine if we can make the Waling Wall the world largest urinal, and the Chapel of Ascension a spittoon...

Delusions....

My hatred for the IRI notwithstanding, I can assure you there will not be a single Iranian thinking of Israel in friendly terms if it should strike Iran militarily.  

As for Osirak, Israel did no favor to Iran by knocking out that installation.  So far as Israel was concerned, they would have liked nothing more than for the Iran-Iraq war to continue in perpetuity, Iranians and arabs killing each other and burning their blood and treasure in the process.  

Ahmadinejad is a tyrant and and an idiot.  In that there is no question. However the entire Farsi speaking world knows he never said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map.  It was never said PERIOD!!!  Now based on that non-statement, and infamously skewed and unreliably "reliable" intelligence they're threatening to wipe Iran off the map.  The same people who promised the rest of the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.  And you're here harping on everyday about how Iran and Israel are natural allies.  Iran and Israel have never been natural allies.  Not even during the Shah's time.  They were simply acquaintances with benefits.  The Shah didn't side with Israel in 1948 because he believed in the principles of Zionism or anything of that sort.  He did it to be a thorn in the sides of the Arabs and gain favor with the west.  But herein lies the crux of the problem.  Historically the enemy of your enemy is almost never your friend.  The United States learned this painful lesson with Mujahedin of Afghanistan who are now the present day Taliban, and of course Saddam Hussein. Don't think Israel is Iran's friend.  Not now, not ever.  Israel, has only one friend, and that's Israel.  

one common enemy doesn't constitute a "healthy"

relationship...

"Any more questions about why Iran & Israel are natural strategic allies? "

Any other reasons apart from the common enemy?

Proper list, please, Fredsy.

"I still have my own teeth. 'Just can't remember where I've put them."

Well said Fred

and why i also believe that once Israel finishes the Islamic Republic by the way of strategic aerial bombardment, the attention of the world should be turned to the worthless Saudis.  I am confident that Saudi Arabia would make the best 51st state the US ever had, and oh yes a public latrine on top of the Kaaba.

What a pity !

The SA tyrant will not be attending 14 July celebrations in Paris !

Because we are not a bunch of whiners

Why don't we publicize the anti-Iranian remark of an Arab King, as much as Israelis do about the infamous (and possibly, mistranslated)remark of an Iranian president?

Do I have to be reminded of Holocaust by my learned friends? I don't think so. Is it time for our Jewish friends to get over it? I am not sure!

visit....//www.tudehpartyiran.org/mardom.asp