Nima Aflaki/Aflaky Beni

Re: Islamists, War and Treason

Jamshid,
Are you hiding again honey? come out of the closet. we need you!!!

Islamists, War and Treason

The Islamist strategy in confronting US (or any other force) is what is called: "Bazdarandegi", or deterrence, as they called it themselves. Deterrence against an enemy, from their point of view, is the ability to withstand punishment from them, similar to their war with Saddam in 1980's. They believe, for example, by inflicting 50000 casualties on a western invading force will be a victory for them. The body count will be too high for any western nation to tolerate, which in turn, will diminish support for the war, or expedite a 'pull-out', from western side. In the process, they allow themselves casualties in the millions, again, just as they did with Saddam.

What they totally ignore is their responsibility toward their nation and population, to safeguard their security from such devastation. This is highest form of treason by any ruling establishment, to offer the blood of their young and the welfare of the population for ideological satisfaction of the ruling gang. To forsake the blood of millions and pretend these millions are theirs to slaughter, or some type of sacrificial offer, is treason and crime of the highest order.

To: Jamshid

I am glad I flushed you out of the "closet" too honey! Next time when I "ghsol", I will keep the dirty water for your mouth wash! It is more pleasant and effective than the garbage you are fed through memership in the "$75 M Club". If you are crying, go to your bosses in the club. They may give you a "raise"!!!!

Re: .?.?

Glad to "force" your "true" side out of the closet. You pro-IRI individuals have a way of hiding in the closet and thereby wasting people's time in useless discussions. But it is easy to flush you out of that closet.

The problem is that once you are out, the stench of your ideology fills the whole room, with a matching stench of your bodily odors, as you Islamists are not used to taking showers. You pefer "ghosl and vozoo" instead.

How pathetic...

To Jamshid

Obviously you are unable to engagae in a civilised, value-content debate.
Now that we are at our name calling business (and you started it first), let me tell you what I think of you: You are a monarchist trash who to acheive his/her goals will prostitute to anyone. Who knows may be now you are an MKO prostitute!!. Not because you are against IRI, but because your rigid mind cannot accept logic, history, evidence, and most importantly CHANGE!

Re: .?.?

As I said before, your beliefs indicate that you have little value for human life, specially Iranian lives. It is more important for you to "teach" others a lesson than to better the lives of your fellow countrymen.

Unfortunately today, Iran is in the hands of people similar to you, those who put a higher value to their "ideology" than the lives of Iranians.

Your likes should be contained to safeguard the future of Iran.

To: Jamshid

I disagree with your simplification of impotant events and even more important consequences of those events. Iran was attacked and the invadrees had to be taught a lesson (by the way isn't that what Americans are saying about Al-Queda now after 9/11? -- what a coincidence!!!). No one could have anticipated the outcome at the time, now we can with the 202/20 hine sight do it -- big deal!. Iran did not lose, but Arabs generally and American/Israeli stooges in particular learnt a lesson. Also not a million died in that war. That is an exaggeration of the numbers also by our enemies (US and ISraelis). Dead on the iran side was about 200,000. Still large, but hey I asked you the question once before: What if saddam had done it again, attacked after that "peace" (very likely given what we know about his mentality) and more families and iranians would have died? Wouldn't you be the first one to say, if these IRI criminals had not taken Arab moneies and have finished saddam this would not have happened? Be logical and serious, and more imporantly be honest. Don't act like an MKO member!! (not that you are one!)

Re: .?.?

In 1982, After Saddam offered peace, we did not have to "defend" our country anymore. We could either end the war and take Saddam's reparation, or continue the war, as we did, for 7 more years, enrching US and Israel.

What you don't understand is the difference between the war ending in 1982 and ending in 1988. The difference was 1 million death. One million who, after 1982, DID NOT have to die to defend Iran. If you think that they should have died to PUNISH Saddam, that is because you value human life very little.

As a thought exercise, I ask you which of these would YOU choose:

1. The war ended in 1988. YOUR child was in that war and he was maimed. He has lost one leg.

2. The war ended in 1982. Your child was in that war and he was spared loss of life or bodily damage.

Note that Iran did not gain anything more against Iraq in 1988 than in 1982. Your child's sacrifice would have been for no gain. Which one do you choose?

To: Jamshid

That is unfortunately the price that any nation has to pay to defend itself, especially when attacked. Sometimes military decision are correct, sometimes they are not. Sometimes one likes the outcome regardless of military victory or defeat and sometimes not. In the case of Iran-Iraq war perhaps all will end for a victoriuos Iran, as all evidence are pointing out. Late, but it is happensing!. What if iranian youth have not sacrificed to defend? Would you be happy if millions more of Iranian families were murdered by Saddam and his stooges (republican guards, MKO members, etc.). I never forget the story that a soldier tell me from his memories of war in Abadan: The 9 year old girl in a house along with her mom were being raped by 19 Iraqi soldiers when he and basigis arrived. The girld had bled to death and they were still raping the dead body. The iranians saved the mother.

Re: .?.?

Saddam's peace offer was true. It had a positive and hopeful impact for those fighting in the war, even among the Basijis and Pasdars. I suggest that you do some research using google.

I agree with you that "any" foreign power who agress against Iran, should be punished. But for one moment be fair and think of the cost: One million deaths. Those who died were our fellow Iranian brothers. They could be ALIVE today, perhaps married and with children and living the good life. But they died young and "naa kaam".

Many in 1982 knew the war will never be won. They advised khomeini against continiuing the war. He did not listen. One million Iranians are not among us as the result. Khomeini is responsible for not saving those lives.

To: Jamshid

Jamshid,
I am happy that unlike those Monarchists and MKO members (not that you are one!) you are accepting the facts of the war with Iraq as I had stated in my comment.
With regards to Khomeini not accepting the offer of money to end the war with Iraq, I have the following to say:
I have heard that statement by some people, but have NEVER seen an evidence (e.g., news article from a reliable source, etc.)pointing to the fact that Arbas or US made an offer to Iran to stop the war. Now suppose that were to be true: If I were a military commander, that oofer would point to the weakness of the enemy, and would encourage me to go forward to victory and remove that blood sucker saddam. May be my wrong calculation, but I think most people would think my way too. Secondly, Khomeini had promised that he will cut the hands of those who invade or agress against Iran. He had to stay with his promise and he did. In fact many would argue that the reason US and other stooges of US government are thinking MANY times about attacking Iran since that war, is exactly what they have had experience about Iran's determination at Khomenini's time about Iran and Iranians. Iranians come together and will fight to victory, so don't mess with them.
Regardless of wether you agree or not, if you appeal to your stupidity of name calling , etc. I will do the same. Why can't you be civilized. You don't even know me idiot.

To: .,.,

I completely agree with everything you said, except one thing: 

You claim that khomeini did not prolong the war. You are wrong. In 1982, Saddam offered peace AND reparation for damages caused by the war. Khomeini had two choices:

1. Accept the peace offer. End the war. Take saddam's reparation and use it.

2. Reject the peace offer and continue with the war.

Many in the mullahs circle advised khomeini to take the peace offer. They knew that the West and the Soviets will NEVER allow Iran to defeat Iraq. But Khomeini, drunk from his victory against the shah, thought he can defeat Saddam too.

Seven years later, after more than one million deaths, two millions with permanent body injuries, millions of homeless, the utter destruction of Iran's oil infrastructure, with no war reparation on the table, after spending 85 bilion dollars on weapons, and with Saddam still in power, khomeini accepted to end the war.

And you say that "Khomeini's approach to bringing Saddam down was a correct one..." What is there to discuss with someone who thinks as you do?

"God willing the flag of

"God willing the flag of monotheism and Muslim glory will be hoisted and the ground will be paved for the expulsion of the enemies from the occupied lands."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
During His Spiritual Pilgrimage to Mecca
December 20, 2007
At the Hajj, Ahmadinejad also professed to what he sees as Islam's goal- a Global Government, via IRNA:

IRI President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Wednesday on Al-Adha Eid Day in Saudi Arabia philosophy of Haj can be defined merely through considering Islam's aim at establishment of a global government...

He said, "If we would delete the ultimate objective of establishing a global system from the Haj rituals, the remainder would be deeds devoid of a soul."
Hmm. You'd think those two lines from Mahmoud might get a few headlines.
support to Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrollah.
Fars News reported:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Thursday said the unyielding resistance of the Palestinian nation promises a strong victory against the Zionist regime.

"We are waiting for the day to witness the flag of arrogance being pulled down," Ahmadinejad told Sheikh Muhammad Yazbek, a member of Hezbollah's High Council, in Mena in Saudi Arabia, where he is performing his hajj rituals as a Muslim.

"God willing the flag of monotheism and Muslim glory will be hoisted and the ground will be paved for the expulsion of the enemies from the occupied lands," he added..

The president further termed Palestine as an "inseparable organ of Islam's body" and expressed regret over the present conditions in Palestine, which he said is experiencing the worst type of situation it has ever faced.

He also reminded that the present conditions in the Palestinian territories necessitate increased Muslim support for the Palestinians.

Ahmadinejad also called Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrollah a brother and a beloved hero to Muslim nations, and requested Yazbek to convey his warmest regards to Nasrollah and all Hezbollah members.
This, of course, follows the Iranian Hajj rally Tuesday where they chanted "Death to America!" and "Death to Israel!"

//www2.irna.com/en/news/view/menu-234/0712207...

"God willing the flag of

"God willing the flag of monotheism and Muslim glory will be hoisted and the ground will be paved for the expulsion of the enemies from the occupied lands."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
During His Spiritual Pilgrimage to Mecca
December 20, 2007
At the Hajj, Ahmadinejad also professed to what he sees as Islam's goal- a Global Government, via IRNA:

IRI President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Wednesday on Al-Adha Eid Day in Saudi Arabia philosophy of Haj can be defined merely through considering Islam's aim at establishment of a global government...

He said, "If we would delete the ultimate objective of establishing a global system from the Haj rituals, the remainder would be deeds devoid of a soul."
Hmm. You'd think those two lines from Mahmoud might get a few headlines.
support to Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrollah.
Fars News reported:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Thursday said the unyielding resistance of the Palestinian nation promises a strong victory against the Zionist regime.

"We are waiting for the day to witness the flag of arrogance being pulled down," Ahmadinejad told Sheikh Muhammad Yazbek, a member of Hezbollah's High Council, in Mena in Saudi Arabia, where he is performing his hajj rituals as a Muslim.

"God willing the flag of monotheism and Muslim glory will be hoisted and the ground will be paved for the expulsion of the enemies from the occupied lands," he added..

The president further termed Palestine as an "inseparable organ of Islam's body" and expressed regret over the present conditions in Palestine, which he said is experiencing the worst type of situation it has ever faced.

He also reminded that the present conditions in the Palestinian territories necessitate increased Muslim support for the Palestinians.

Ahmadinejad also called Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrollah a brother and a beloved hero to Muslim nations, and requested Yazbek to convey his warmest regards to Nasrollah and all Hezbollah members.
This, of course, follows the Iranian Hajj rally Tuesday where they chanted "Death to America!" and "Death to Israel!"

//www2.irna.com/en/news/view/menu-234/0712207...

To: ... How stupid do you

To: ...

How stupid do you think we are? Where are your citations and references and proof`? If anyone is in need of research´, it is you who supports mass murderes and demonic leaders like khomeini.

To Jamshid (Break assignment)Did Khomeini Prolonged .....

Jamshid,
To say that Khomeini prolonged the war for his own survival (as Rosie, and Jamshid have argued without basis) is incorrect. During the war Khomeini saw that in fact demise of saddam was in sight. And he was right. That is why after a few faults and losses of saddam, US government got all its efforts and resources together to stop the fall of saddam from happening; provided WMD (Chemicals) to Saddam (mostly through Europeans) and when he used it against Kurds and Iranians, west did not bother, used AWACS rconisance flighs out of Saudi Arabia to provide military intelligence to Iraqis, and eventually shot down an Iranian passenger plane to make a point to iranians, that either you stop this war or we will do this and worse to Iranians. So I would like to point out that Khomeini's approach to bringing Saddam down was a correct one. I also suggest that if it wasn't for that vision, the Arabs and others would not be encouraging iranians to stop the war, after it became clear to them that saddam was a bout to fall. For example, why was it that King Hossain of Jordan went to Iraq on the first few weeks of the war (when saddam looked victorious) and stood on an Iraqi tank pointing towards iran and said, we see the end of Iran! (He is the same fellow that was "brother" with the then Shah when he visited iran in the 60s -0- calling Iranian nation brother of Jordanian nation!!!). So you can see that in fact the argument you are making againsit IRI is an invalid one. You keep forgetting the main culprits!!!! Now your assignment Jamshid is to write 100 times from what I wrote here so that YOU LEARN , research it and find absolutely any errors in it and point it out with references. This should keep you busy until the Spring Break honey.

To: ..

Take my last post to which you are probably refering to, and find the "illogical" statement that I "spewed". Try to indicate them clearly and without changing the subject and without resorting to insults.

That'll be your homework for the holidays.

To Jamshid (Re: The IRI and ....)

Jamshid,
Sorry to break it to you. Why don't you read others' points and then argue. You keep spewing against IRI with the logic of a sheep. At least educate yourself so that people would say you know something. When are you going to grow?

The IRI and weapon purchase

IRI purchased more weapons after 1982 than the Shah did from the US in his entire reign. I said after 1982, and not 1981, because that's when the "Saddam" imposed war became the "khomeini" imposed war.

I agree with your second point. Iran under the shah had big plans for its nuclear, steel, ship building and petrochemical industries that was just too much for the west to bear. Plus as importantly, the fact that as long as the shah was in power, there would be no war, thereby allowing Iran's progress to continue uninterupted.

For the west, the IRI was the best thing that could happen to Iran. First all the above plans were shelved. Iran remained a consumer and not a producer of anything except oil. Add to that the immensely profitable war with Iraq that enriched the west in the 80s.

No puppet could serve the West as well as khomeini did. Even the incompetent Ghagar kings would have done a better job benefiting Iranians than khomeini did.

Its the old story

For every situation a new analysis is performed, but in fact
it turns out the "military-industrial" follows the same script, they just change the names. Back in 2003, the talking heads were saying all these things about saddam and presidential guards. It was obvious to me that a regime who has been under sanctions for 15 years and during the war with Iran could only
pull a draw with all the help, this guy is no threat. Now if I could see that, I am sure CIA was much much better informed,.
They did that with El Salvador, USSR and .... .

Good article

A nice overview about the historical events based on your
theory. Interesting. Also I like your points Analyst Man. Thanks

I don't think ....

I don't think your analysis is correct. It is sort of "reactionary". In my opinion, the events in the internationa scene (iran's revolution, islamic threat, etc.), are somehwat happening in their own natural course. US and Imperialists are adjusting their course of action accordingly in order to benefit regardless. That is to say, they (the imperialists) are not cause, but when the effect is there, they find a way to benefit from it. It is not to say that they are not causing any events, but certainly some are of their making. For example, there are a lot of suspecion about the US government and Israel being behind 9/11 so that they can create an artifical crisis, for their own benefit. In fact most evidence point to that being the case, including the Irq war, controlling the energy rich caucause, etc. With respect to Iran's NIE report, I think US knew Iran was not developing nukes many years ago (as far back as probably 2003), but neverthless did not want Europens, Russians, and Chinses to resist applying sactions on Iran. So they prevented releasing that information until after it became clear that Russian and Chinese were not going along after 2 sanctions. In fact after Putin went to Iran, US saw the writings on the wall and could not do much except to release the overdue NIE information about the iran's nuke program. In the meantime, the Zionist blood suckers and American tradesmen are benefiting from Iran Sanctions by selling at 10 times the cost (vs normal say 2 times). That is my 2 cents ....

REPLY : ARMS TRADE......

I think all the considerations all these bubble overings are now irrelevant if one wants to acknowlledge the following: Is the NIE Bush's Watergate? I am sure it is.

In early December, an intelligence report served as the instrument to disgrace Bush and Cheney.

Behind this apparently benign act stood the relieved super rich and their government guardian who saw the reckless policies of Bush and Cheney as a threat to their power and fortunes.

In the early 1970s, the Establishment worried about Nixon. He brought a California crowd into the White House who didn't consult the bastions of old power and wealth. Then, "Deep Throat" serendipitously emerged to reveal to Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein details of Nixon's involvement in a criminal break- in at Democratic Party Headquarters in Washington's Watergate complex, and of a subsequent White House cover up.

In August 1974, Nixon ­ facing impeachment -- resigned. The power structure breathed a collective sigh of relief.

In December 2007, intelligence boss Mike McConnell released a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report that humiliated Bush and Cheney. By making facts about the non-functioning of Iran's nuke program public, the NIE removed the Bush zealots' ostensible reason for starting another war.

The "experts" concluded "with high confidence" that Iran had shut down its nuclear weapons program in 2003, thus nullifying the Bush's pretext for bombing that country. The spooks also deduced that Iran might make a weapon by 2015 ­ if it reactivated its dormant program.

Compare that report with Bush's September claim that Iran's nuclear program could ignite World War III; reminiscent of Cheney's 2002 rhetoric to show why Iraq needed invading that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake uranium in Niger to make a nuclear WMD.

Bush and Cheney also scoffed at intelligence reports that cast major doubt on these allegations. Bush still rejects the conclusion that Iran shut down its nuclear weapons production. (He also rejects evolution.)

By making this NIE public, the CIA further weakened Bush's already damaged credibility. He no longer intimidates and stands exposed as a fraud.

The CIA informed Bush in August of its benign findings, but he shrugged off the facts and continued to insist on war as his answer to a non-existent threat. So, McConnell released the report which, for Bush compares with his twins making the centerfold of Playboy--on the humiliation scale.

The intelligence community sucker punched Great Intimidator -- in public. Their NIE averred implicitly that Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had told the truth about Iran not developing nuclear weapons. Conversely, Bush and Cheney, leaders of the World Alliance for God and Good (WAGG) prevaricated through their proverbial teeth.

The NIE derailed the White House policy of bombing of Iran and led to a prolonged scream from neocon heavies like Norman Podhoretz, editor of Commentary, and Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy. They now bleat on TV about "treason" in high places (CIA) and the nation's desperate need to bomb Iran immediately.

Douglas Feith, Bush's former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy from July 2001 until he resigned in August, 2005 spoke to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington in December and defended his own failed policies in Iraq. Some neocons demand a "Team B" report to invalidate the NIE, an equivalent of former CIA Chief William Casey's ploy to resurrect the Soviet threat

In 1980, after US intelligence concluded the USSR posed less of a threat to the West than in previous decades, Casey handpicked another team of "experts" who predictably found the declining Soviet Union more dangerous than ever. Team B thugs backed Reagan's aggressive posture to build more missiles and a Star Wars defense.

Bush and Cheney, like Reagan and Casey, disregard their intelligence services ­ for which taxpayers pay $40 billion per year -- and instead relied on Israel's Mossad, whose spies rejected the CIA findings. Israeli intelligence clings to its claim that Iran will soon build a nuke.

For Israeli Defense [(War)] Minister Ehud Barak publicizing the NIE report meant a "blow to the g***n" of Israel. Will Bush now secretly encourage Israel to use some its own nuclear stockpile to launch a "preemptive strike" against Iran?

For Bush, good nations behave obediently. England and now France, for example, should possess nuclear weapons. Sort-of-good Pakistan still rates approval (obedient by mouth, which is good enough); and of course, beloved Israel ­ with 200 or more nukes.

Iran, the only remaining member of Bush's "axis of evil," began punching the United States in the fist with its face in 1953 when Iranians brazenly elected a democratic government.

The CIA and their British equivalent in the name of anti-communism and in the interest of the oil companies overthrew that government and set up a puppet Shah, who ruled despotically until 1979.

In 1980, Iranians held CIA and other US officials hostage for more than a year ­thus humiliating numero uno.

The President and most presidential aspirants follow the US axiom. To keep its status, Washington without casus belli invades and occupies other countries. Those who dare challenge such blatantly illegal behavior now become Islamofascists.

Acting in the Lord's name, US presidents took revenge for Iran's insolent behavior. After failing to revive the Shah's rule, the US backed the now hated but then useful Saddam Hussein who dutifully, and with US aid, invaded Iran in 1980.

9/11 allowed Bush to declare a permanent and perpetual war against terrorism, thus undermining traditional foreign policy methods for unabashed aggression. His neocon advisers usurped power from the traditional Establishment, much as Nixon did with his California outsiders.

The neocons invaded the intelligence apparatus, much as Nixon's Plumbers assumed FBI and CIA tasks. (Plumbers sealed "leaks" -- to the press.)

CREEP (Committee and Finance Committee to Re-elect the President) allowed Nixon his own private budget as well as a White House intelligence and police operation. Such behavior made the traditional agency heads seriously p****d off.

Bush and Cheney's war-loving intellectuals like Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and Feith manipulated intelligence in order to use 9/11 to generate fear. They pushed the country into war with Iraq ­which had nothing to do with 9/11.

Even after the invasion turned sour, the neocons pursued their plan to attack Iran. Now discredited, these men writhe from the NIE's kick to their cerebral g****s.

The repercussions from the revelation will play out in Europe as well. Bush's plan to place missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic as a defensive shield against Iran's "nuclear threat" has drawn the ire of Russian President Putin. Russia's leader sees Bush repeating Truman and Churchill's Cold War policies of 60 years ago, using a non-existent threat (Iran) as a pretext to militarily encircle Russia.

In 1947, Truman declared the USSR an imminent threat to attack Western Europe while the Soviets still licked their wounds after losing more than 20 million people in World War II.

Repetition of history with a new metaphor! The groin kick ­ an intelligence report to the b***s******s should help abate the "hate Iran" fever that replaced the 2001-2003 "hate Iraq" zeal.

The NIE revealed to the US public that Bush and Cheney were dangerous bullsers who spread malicious lies about Iran. Previously, they had accused Teheran with providing Iraqi insurgents bombs to kill US military personnel, a line that remains in Bush's verbal arsenal.

Sadly, presidential hopefuls from both Parties, excepting Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, still buy into the anti-Iran axiom. They agree with Bush that the United States should not permit other nations to help anti-US insurgents albeit Washington feels duty bound ­ by God? -- to help pro-US insurgents fight bad countries, like the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Sound like b***s***?

The imperial b***s*** level has surpassed the feeble imaginations of Cheney, Bush and even the presidential candidates. It emanates from the $700 billon smelly military budget pile, passed by Congress even though no nation poses a threat.

The NIE served to discredit Bush, which reduces chances of an imminent war with Iran, but don't fool yourself: it doesn't change fundamental US policy.
This INTELIGENT Report is not called inteligent because it is not inteleigent but it is called inteligent because it is intelligent. Anyhow in an american way of intelligence. The Iranians - I mean the ones who live in the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, have founded it and are willing to defend it - have a meaningsfull word for the american kind of intelligence. They call it - so I think - KHAR MARDE RENDI. You got it? Greeting