Observing Iran

No Fear

The key question in all the examples you bring is on what exactly is "national interest"?  What national interest does Iran have in Bosnia or Chechniya or Lebanon?  The only interest we would have there is to create trouble for the US  or anybody else we are engaged in a cat and mouse game with.  This is not national interest, this is the interest of a regime/movement whose survival depends on blaming everything on the US and demonizing them.  If you believe that this is the national interest and the will of the people in Iran, you need to demonstrate that the majority of Iranians are for bad relations with the US and cut ties, which is far from what the evidence suggests.

Otherwise, I agree that we must find ways to move towards secularism which respects and coexists the relgion and beliefs of ALL Iranians, and the first step in that direction is to elevate tolerance above all else in our complicated culture.  That will be a challenge of course.

World War 3!

With all the military might that "No Fear" has described the World War 3 mayjust be around the corner. As we witnessed, though, when Israeli forces bombed Lebanon, Syria and Gaza, the military might that NF talks about with such zeal remained invisible. Why? For the obvious reason that IR'sexaggerated might's usefulness does not extend beyond suppression of dissent against the regime by Iranians. Since day one of its ascent to power the regime has called for the export of the revolution and liberation of Jerusalem. Annihilation of the Zionist state became a major policy of the revolutionary regime and a battle cry during the 8-year war with Iraq. Signposts indicating the distance from each signpost to Jerusalem werealso errected to stir religious sentiments of the Iranian forces. More than three decades on we are still hearing the same slogans and the same nonesense from the paid regime supporters! They would even deny that tens of millions of people hate the regime and millions poured into the streets in defiance of its brutal rule. They resort to blatant lies only to satisfy their bosses in Tehran. No Iranian would defend the brutalities of the murderous regime if it were not for the handouts they receive from Tehran. Handouts from a bunch of lunaticswho have domestically deprived Iranians of the most basic rights and have brought shame to the proud people of Iran, internationally.

Pesarak Tarso Ablah, take away security forces from the streets

and you'll see how direct we'll get to democracy, IR will be overthrown in less than half a day. The only thing propoing up your murdering thugs are the thugs on the corners, we have a feeling they won't last as much as you think.

Remember: you may rule by bayonet, but you can't live on bayonet.

And who the heck  taught you farsi Persian

سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی

Show me the word 'revolutionary ' in this title you idiot. It says Islamic revolution, not revolutionary, moron. You're still smoking something, obviuosly.

Fair,

Whether IRGC policies ( or even IR in general ) is under influences of religious ideologies is open to debate.

In Lebanon , Iraq and Afghanistan we can argue they are strengthening Iran's first line of defense.

In Eastern Europe ( Bosnia ) and Chechnya they are not exporting their ideologies for obvious reasons which can be successfully argued its due to national interests in dealing with Russia ( out of necessities ).

In Pakistan and Europe they are involved in surveillance and elimination of seperatists and counter terrorism. Again it could be successfully argued its due to national interests.

There are shady areas as well which makes me wonder what they were after in South America ( Argentina ) and what are their plans in Sudan ( military training base? possible missile sites? ) and Yemen ( revenge against Saudi arabia? ). But generally a strong arguement can be made for their pragmatic approaches in regards to our national interests.

I agree with the rest of your post and your defence of a more secular Iran.

Every step towards secularism should be supported in Iran ( with keeping the utmost respect towards Islam). If we look at this realistically, the only faction that can implement baby steps towards a more secular society is the current modern rightwing faction with its IRGC backers. I don't expect them to start a coup in Iran, but i expected them to fearlessly push tangible reforms forwards while curbing religious powers. I am satisfied with the outcome so far and believe we should support this faction in every way possible.

There isn't any direct flight towards democracy in Iran. Take this flight now until the halfway point.

//www.jahannews.com/vdcayen6i49nym1.k5k4.html

No Fear

I am glad we can at least agree that evolution is better, and that the previous revolution was the wrong approach, even though change was necessary and essential.  Also, yes, let's agree to disagree about the election being rigged, we both know each others' position on this and there is nothing to add.

I would just say that indeed, just saying you are nationalist does not make you one (your example of MKO is a valid one).  But if you do not even claim to be nationalist in theory, how can you be that in practice.  IRGC fought for the Islamic revolution and to defend the system of Islamic republic, if individuals in the IRGC had nantionalistic tendencies that is a different story.  Stopping Saddam's thugs from holding Iranian territory was one of the few cases that nationalists and islamists' interests coincided.  But make no mistake- IRGC is a political ideological organization which is beyond nationalist and Iran (its logo has a globe, not a map or symbol of Iran).  It does not stand for Iran and does not even claim to.  

Regarding religion and politics being intertwined in Iran, that may be true, but that does not mean that a religious government is called for.  Many political parties in secular democratic countries have religious influences, that is fine.  The important thing is that the final decider of policy is the vote of the people, and the secular laws of the country which should not favor any one religion or interpretation of a religion.  If the people have religious motivations for their vote, the vote will reflect that and should not be shaped or filtered explicitly by religious bodies, like they are in the Islamic republic today.

Your proposed sequence of reduced role of clergy and religion in government sounds good to me.  But I personally do not think it is feasible in the Islamic republic occupying Iran today, the clergy mafia has too much power (more than any Shah ever had), and is willing to commit any crime necessary to retain that power, and controls oil and other riches of the country.  And they have demonstrated this with their brutal suppression and massacre and mass imprisonment of innocent Iranians.  But the scenario you bring would be much preferable to the alternative, which is inevitably violent and costly.  So I hope I am wrong.

VPK:

Thank you!

No Fear:

Let's wait and see! We never know. He may have to go earlier than that. I
predicted a coup in 2007 and it happened last year! Be patient!

No Fear

How could it be a military dictatorship if Ahmadinejad is about to be changed in less than three years?

Very simply. A dictatorship does not mean a single ruler. The ruling gang takes turn in being "President". Besides "President" in Iran is a figurehead. Next time they plan another puppet. The real rulers are a gang of Mollahs and Islamists.

This was the same in many communist nations. The 'Chairman" of the Soviet Union would change but the ruling class remained. There may even be internal struggles. Remember dictatorship is the lack of democracy. It does not require a single dictator.

G.R.

How could it be a military dictatorship if Ahmadinejad is about to be changed in less than three years?

No Fear:

The problem is the mullahs and militarists in power believe their revolutionis still continuing. Also one can't believe in democracy, but supportmilitary dictatorship!!!

Fair,

Thanks for joining in and for giving a new perspective to the debate. Debating with targol gets boring after awhile.

How an organization call itself can not be a good reason to judge its nationalistic credentials. I think fighting at frontlines against our enemy speaks volume about their nationalistic and religious tendencies. In comparison, we had the the MKO who call themselves the " National Resistance" but sided with Saddam. Do you take them as Nationalists since they call themselves that?

Yes, overthrowing the Shah was wrong, not in its essence, but in its methods. This means that shah regime needed to be changed, but revolution was not the solution. Can you distinguish between the two?

Religion and politic are intertwined in our country and it has been like that for centuries. It would be more practical to seperate religious decrees and clergies from administrative arm of the government first. Next should be the soft introduction of civil laws to replace religious penal laws. Disqualification of religious authorities from governmental positions would go a long way.

PS: We debated long and hard about election in Iran before. Lets leave it at that and look at the situation at hand now and present.

No Fear

The IRGC is the ISLAMIC REVOLUTIONARY GUARD CORPS.  Sepahe Pasdarane Enghelabe Eslami.  You don't need to go to Global Security's mistaken website to prove otherwise.  Just read the logo of the IRGC.

In other words, the IRGC does not even CLAIM to have anything to do with Iran, it puts its stupid revolution before Iran anyday, and is an anti Iran stateless terrorist organization.

And you are supporting it.  As long as you do, you are not a nationalist. so PUT  A LID ON IT.

If you are anti revolutionary and for evolution, then overthrowing the Shah was wrong.  Is this correct?

Religion does not belong in politics, end of story. The government of a country should be responsible for protecting that country's interests, and religion is a personal matter and its freedom should be guaranteed without condition by that country's government in adherence with the UNIVERSAL declaration of human rights.

Elections in Iran aren't rigged?  Yeah right, don't make my laugh and puke at the same time.

How long was Iran a

How long was Iran a zoroastrian nation before the invasion of Islamic Armies??

Fearful Khan: DO you think

Fearful Khan: DO you think you will have a position in IRGC when the country become a full fledge military dictatorship?

Here Moron,

//www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/pasdaran.htm

I had enough of you.

Bach Tarso you're so incredibly obtuse ,you even don't know the

correct English translation of your sugar daddies title. The full Persian title is:

 سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی , (در حقیقت  امر  "سپاه پاسداران ارتجاع اسلامی" ) 

based on this , the English translation is

The Gurdians Corps. of the Islamic Revolution ( read Reaction),

 where the heck you get " revolutionary" from, you moron.

No Fear

Comeon now. 

1) There was nothing reformist about Khatami. That was a farce. He is a Mollah. No reform is possible while this gang is in power. And the only way they go in on a stretcher.

2) The GC is totally in bed with AN. In fact AN is Khamenei's puppet. Together they run a military dictatorship named "Islamic Republic". Mark my words: they will go one way. That is by force. With them will got the power of Mollahs.

For: Pesar Bacheh Tarso, aka the Fearful One, #2(& last reponse)

To start with, the donkey is your "Dr", aka, Nasnaas Mozalef. Wonder if you understand what that means in Persian. If you do, you may share it with us.

We're on topic: mullahs since the Islamic invasion have been pimping Iraninas to Arab Muslims, in the past 150 years it has gotten worse. In the past 30 years it has become the worst possible, hence: Islamic Republic of Hell.

So, the issue becomes how are we going to get rid of them: through peaceful reforms or other means. Since IR has "successfuly"  blocked any remote chance of non-violent change in Iran, it has created its grave-diggers in millions and millions, so now we have fire under the ashes, just witing for that wind to blow away the ashes, you know the rest.

Last but not least , since you're such a one-dimensional, religious minded( obeying all authorities, lacking any fresh , non-dogmatic thinking,...)clown, you probably think everyone else also thinks the same way. Even citing Marx, and Lenin as if you know squat about any of them. Well, unlike you (and I) they were original thinkers, free of any dogma and always ready to question their most cherished beliefs, based on facts from the real world.

If there is a miracle and you ever do get to read the Communist Manifesto, you shall see that it has more than 10 introductions, and in each introduction, the authors explain why specific adjustments has to be made to their original text, BECAUSE THE SITUATION HAS CHANGED.

Lenin as well was examplary in his non-dogmatic and open thinking, this is how he saw unfoldings of revolutions:

" History generally, and the history of revolutions in particular, is always richer in content, more varied, more many sided, more lively and "subtle" than even the best parties and the most class-conscious vanguards of the most advanced classes imagine."

So in conclusion you shall keep in mind, not only the real world is much more complex than you could imagine ( basically beyond your ken) also as they say in Persian, dast baly dast besiar ast.

G. Rahmanian,

Yes, the " R" in IRGC stands for "REVOLUTIONARY".

If IRGC really believes in its " revolutionary " standards, it should have staged a coup to topple the reformist government of Khatami when that incompetent clown came to power. Try expanding your horizons beyond what groups are called.

The real revolutionaries are those who didn't accept the results of the same electoral process that had them holding on to power for 25 years. IR elections are not rigged. People vote freely. The problem relies in the " selection " of eligible candidates by the guardian council. People vote for a selected group of candidate in a free election process.

The guardian council  tried to divide Ahmadinejad's votes by introducing a famous former guard in to the race ( Mohsen Rezaie ).  Mohsen Rezaie candidacy had only one reason. Still, Ahmadinejad came on top and the green movement led by Hashemi Rafsanjani displayed their non compromising nature by trying to revolt against this election. This is how i see it.

Targoli,

Yes, if a political system is unable to change and reform itself, and it is facing "structural crisis of the state" , then it will face mass demonstrations which could lead to revolution. ( "structural crisis of state" is such a broad and general expression and you need to be more specific though )

See? I agree with your hypothesis here. Its hard not to when you set the entire gameplan. You start by a set of "assumptions", then you prove your point based on those assumptions and finally you call it the real deal and those who oppose it, stupid. We have to first agree on those "assumptions" . Capiche?

Even if we accept you kiddish way of reasoning as the undeniable truth, there is always North Korea to prove you wrong since it fits all your requirements perfectly and yet, they are not revolting against their absolute dictator.

You leftist marxist  have a habbit of calling the opinion of Marx and lenin as proven science. Its an ideology thats all. Don't blow it out of proportions.

Many people in Iran believe that the current administration led by Dr. Ahmadinejad is the real reformist government. I certainly do as well. There have been more ground breaking changes and taboo breaking actions carried out by this administration more than the entire previous administrations combined.

PS: Stop jumping like a monkey from one topic to another one. A self proclaimed academic like yourself should know how to carry out a discussion by narrowing it down to a conclusion. I can't have a conversation with you when you throw all sorts of topics my way.Stick to the fucking point for the second fucking time, please, with sugar on top. It would be nice if it is related to the original blog. That is our interest to participate, afterall.

Fearful's vision of reform

Fearful's vision of reform is a military dictatorship run by the IRGC thugs.  Remember fearful khan???

Fearful:

Below read the contradictory statements you have made! If you don't believe in revolutions, how can you support IRGC? Do you know what "R" stands for?"I am Anti -revolutionary.""People like me, ( there are many of us ), believe in the reduction and minimization of gaps between the people and government. We look for solutions ( Long term ) and evolutions, Not revolutions.""Sepah and the IRGC , as the main military organization who suffered the most lost during Iran and Iraq war, have the absolute right to governance with their representitive president. Their nationalistic credentials is intact and they have not been shy to express it either."

Reading no fear's words, he said

" The majority of those who died, were devoted muslims who believed they will go to heaven dying for the Islamic Republic of Iran. If you call them brain washed arab worshipers, it shows extreme lack of taste. I, personally, as a nationalist, am deeply in debt to our muslim war heros. Every street in our country should bear the name of one of Iran's fallen men who defended our country with bare nothing. ...."

This is exactly what the anti nationalist government of the turbaned mullahs has said ever since the war. However, most of those who fought did it for IRAN, not Islam --- Get it?..I R A N.....  Even those whom he claims are devout muslims fought for Iran, not Islam.

Yes, it's been 1400 years and yes, the majority are muslim. Unfortunately, that is the very problem that has brought us to this point in the bloody history of our land. A land that everyone of us loves in our own ways.

This character's very essense like his other personality, the fearless Sargord Deerooz, is dependent on the survival of the Islamic Regime and hence all the pro regime mumbo jumbo that he and his alliance spew out on these web pages day after freaking day.

By the way, this blog is absolutely right: The mullahs do not give a rat's ass about Iran, only how much wealth they can steal from Iran and the preservation of the power they so dearly hold sacred...... The idelogy they preach can be summed up from the waist down - It always does with Islam.

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

For: Pesar Bacheh Tarso, aka the Fearful One

reading your "responses' to others, couldn't help but notice how your stupidty and clownishness just reaches new heights.

You mention how you 'oppose' revolutions, and are in favour of other "methods " of social change ( in real life KAHRIZAK: previously known as a torture center, now in its newly inagurated form as a Forced Labor Camp, is your true instrument of change, but we'll come back to that).

Your utter ignorance of real life, and real history, and how real world operates on a daily basis, plus your sick,obtuse imagination makes you think as if you,( or any other individauls or groups of individuals) are able to determine whether they would like "to have"  a revolution or "not to have"  a revolution, as if all this only depends on your stupid individual opinion.

Compeletly ingnoring the historical facts that such social phenomenons are not created by any individuals but are only an expression of STRUCTURAL CRISIS OF THE STATE, (long-term, macro level social transformations)  . Go and read the history of any and all major revolutions of the last two centuries:

 the  American Revolution( 1776),

the great French Revolution (1789),

revolutions of 1848,

the Mexican Revolution (1910),

Constitutional Revolution of Iran ( 1905-11),

October Revolution ( 1917),

Chinese Revolution (1948),

Iranian Revolution ( 1979)

What all these events have in common is the fact that they were all facing STRUCTURAL CRISIS OF THE STATE, in which the government was not able to carry on as usual and was in need of great changes, and althought most if not all those changes could have been done through reform, and non-violent means, once the  ruling classes decided that the path to reform was not open, it left but no other path but mass direct-action, ( industrial strikes, mass street demonstrations, armed struggle,...)

Apply all of the above  to your wrethched Islamic Republic of Hell, it also currently is facing a STRUCTURAL CRISIS, unable to balance its books, hated by the overwhelming majority of the population, with a ruling class as divided and fragmented as ever. Alomost 12 years ago with election of Khatami and his  promises of reform IR had its first real opportunity for reform and it squandered the whole affair misreably. Almost 12 years after that we had the "election" last year, when again IR could have survived its main problem by some adjustements and having "Greens" at the helm.

But this time also the opportunity for "reform" was smashed to pieces by your picture sake (  from hereon refered to with his real name: Nasnas Mozalef).

But  just stealing the election wasn't enough, Nasnas Mozalef killed anyone who dared to raise their voice and ask: "Where the phuck is my vote?" ( now, again this was a compeletly reformsit question, which in a very short time changed to : " Whers' my blood?") 

But, cracking down on people right after the "election" wasn't enough, now Nasnas Mozalef want's to also take away what little bread people have on their table, under the rubric of "goal orientationof subsidies".

But that's not enough either, they resurrect Kahrizak , as a Foced LAbor Camp, just to make sure every one knows who's the Boss: Nasnas Mozalef of course, and all along you're just so worried if people resort to revolution and stay away from reform and non-violent means of change.

Nasnas Mozalef you have left no other choice ,no other option open other than a revolutionary overthrowing of Islamic Republic of Hell. And when it happens, you might as well pray and pray very hard that something could control it, because it has a mind all its own!

Class dismissed.

N.F. All of you shall be in a big court room very,very soon,

The" phuking point," as you so elegantly put, is that all of you , you and your picture sake and all others like you are a bunch of criminals that will be very , very soon prosecuted by Iranian people for crimes against humanity. Now, even you should be able to understand that.

Parthian,

Lets assume (? ) you are right and my nationalism is based on Islam and yours is straight out of Ahura Mazda's ass. So? Whats your point? Can't we both be nationalists?

( I take a devote muslim with a deathwish in a battle field over your proud persian soldier any day. Don't underestimate those you call shi'iteheads, we both know who is the weakest link )

How can you say i am less nationalistic for believing in a religion which has been in Iran for 1400 years?  Can you tell me for how long Zoroasterianism was the official religion of Iran? see my point?

Dr. Mohandes

Yes. I am a rightwing Iranian Joomhouri Khah. I am not a revolutionary who has to topple a regime violently through revolutions, even if i oppose a given regime. I am Anti -revolutionary. I don't believe in revolution's non compromising nature.

People like me, ( there are many of us ), believe in the reduction and minimization of gaps between the people and government. We look for solutions ( Long term ) and evolutions, Not revolutions.

Having said that, I believe the notion that seperates us as " khodi" and " ghir e khodi " , ( Us vs. Them ) , is wrong. We are all Iranians and Iran belongs to us all. ( except those who are involved in armed struggle against Iran or advocate a military strike ).

I have deep respect towards the martyrs of the imposed war against our motherland. The majority of those who died, were devoted muslims who believed they will go to heaven dying for the Islamic Republic of Iran. If you call them brain washed arab worshipers, it shows extreme lack of taste. I, personally, as a nationalist, am deeply in debt to our muslim war heros. Every street in our country should bear the name of one of Iran's fallen men who defended our country with bare nothing.

Sepah and the IRGC , as the main military organization who suffered the most lost during Iran and Iraq war, have the absolute right to governance with their representitive president. Their nationalistic credentials is intact and they have not been shy to express it either.

Targol,

Small time revolutionaries who fought in the mountains and forests can not be considered as figures who single handedly changed the political future of Iran. If you have a point to prove, ( which i highly doubt ) you should argue the impact these people had on a larger scale ( national scale ) and the effect they had on the future struggle. Running and gunning like a hillbilly red neck wannabe trailor trash, through 30 to 40 armed forces wild wild west style can hardly be considered as a turning point in Iran's politics. LoL

PS: Stick to the fucking topic.  If you have a question about my avatar or name, start a new blog and i should reply promptly. Sincerely.

Hashari ayatollah

According to some reports, 80 year old grand ayatollah Nouri Hamedani in Iran has married an 18 year old girl.

Yeh baby, shake that booty, allaaaah-o akbar!  

No fear

My nationalism is based on actual Iranian/Persian culture, identity and so on, while yours is clearly on Islam more or less.  Islam is not Iranian culture, it's anti our culture, infact, it's anti anything that's not Arab, both linguistically and mentally.It might have been more important and active in the lives of the Iranian people 100 or even 30-40 years ago, but thanks to the islamist regime most do not want it anymore cause we've seen it's true face.

Btw, you shiite heads aren't even considered as true muslims, the Arabs consider you all Heretics, lol, so why even bother trying to please them. have some shame and dignity. Revert back to your forfathers religion, zoroasterianism.

Again, if Islam stays as the dominant religion whether that religous population is moderate (Fake muslim) or not, we need to get the arabic language, customs, culture and anything foreign out of our Islam and turn in into a Persian Islam, just like what the Turks did.

 --------------------------------------------------------------

"They are not afraid of the ideology alone, but of the detemination and will of the men behind it"