Misc

Midwesty

"I suspect" this ( I'm not a fortune teller!) because it fits in with:

1. Plans to withdraws from Iraq and freeing up troops

2. Because the nuclear issue can not be delayed to next year as the enrichment issue is being seen as a major threat, and Obama's adminsitration is under pressure from an uncompromising netanyahu lead Government to take action, and the agreement that has been reached with Russia, China, and the persian Gulf Arab states may not last for ever, also the great fear is Iran providing dirty bombs to Hezbollah

3. Logistics of initial engagement of troops is season dependent and bad weather is avoided:

First Gulf war Aug 1990

2nd Gulf war March 2003

Afghanistan war Oct 2001

4. Signs of escalated rhetoric that show an end of settlement on all sides

5. Less coverage of the Green movement in the western News, prep work for demonization of Iran which is common practice before an attack

6. US would want the support of it's major Allie UK and there is a General election soon so it needs to deal with a new Government that needs a month or two to settle

7. Ahmadinejad is going round African countries, giving free money because he needs allies in UN and he know what is coming. A sign that in UN they would likely try to take a vote on using military action so that Obama does not face the same issue as Bush i.e. being branded for an illegal war

So at a calculated guess I would say, we could have at least military brush offs and if no settlement is reached a full blown conflict.

By the way, under such a scenario, U.S. would be concerned about sleeper cells, terrorist attacks and the US Iranian census, and FBI having private conversations with so called Iranian dissent community leaders is another readiness sign.

I will repeat what I said, we know this is coming sooner or later but our opposition leaders need to get off their back side and form a united front to give hope that there could be an alternative and that IRI could fall before it has to be taken care off with military intervention. The world is not going to wait for ever for these middle aged ladies and Gentlement to see if they are willing to eat lunch at the same table or not!

Iran has repeatedly

Iran has repeatedly requested the embargoes to be lifted and its $17B returned in order for the US to show a goodwill towards the talk process.

Those sanction will be lifted when IRAN asked for it. They are talking to IRI for now. 

How funny Mr. Leverett

"Making very difficult strategic decisions" includes war but not lifting the sanction and embargoes. What a bull SHIT!

Iran has repeatedly requested the embargoes to be lifted and its $17B returned in order for the US to show a goodwill towards the talk process.

Writing love letters to Iran when the next day extending the embargo act for another year won't count as a major policy shift towards Iran.

Who are you fooling guys? Either you are the "sange paye ghazvin" or you are nuts and don't know it yet.

Baash to sobhe dolatat bedamad...

Minute 19:27

So we'll see a war with Iran in and around August this year?So pack all your warm cloths. It'll be a long winter.

I hope Obama's administration has enough sense

I hope Obama's administration has enough sense not to engage in a war with Iran.

To a great extend after the madness of the Coupe Government it is the shortcoming of our opposition movement and their inability to show a united front that brings us closer to War.

At this stage I can imagine President Obama is getting frustrated with the Iranian community not showing that much promise in uniting and confronting the regime.

We have seen a lot of heroics from our people, but our opposition leaders need to do a lot more if they want to avoid a War.

Alas, we respond to events rather than think ahead and plan to avoid them.

I suspect that contained military intervention would start late summer or early Autumn this year, perhaps starting with minor clashes near the Iran/Iraq border or in the waters of persian Gulf.

So although I am with Dr Milani on this I have a feeling that the US administration would listen to the likes of Leverett in the debate.

There seems to be a

There seems to be a realistic adjustments in opposition, regarding U.S talks with IRI. We couldn't ask U.S to only focus on human rights and wait the nuclear issue be resolved by itself via Iranian people gaining power. After all, human rights, as sensitive an issue as it may be, never defines the foreign policy of U.S or any country for that matter. It may affect it in some extend, but it never defines a foreign policy.

Emphasizing on support for people struggle for freedom, is and should remain the main focus of the opposition abroad. But as long as this struggle doesn't have an organization, it is reasonable to expect, and even encourage talks between U.S and IRI. If for nothing else, for this simple reason that when talking stops, guns are pulled out.

Opposition just needs time to organize. And hopefully U.S understands that. 

Wow. Milani has sure changed

Wow. Milani has sure changed his tune over Khatami. It wasn't so long ago (pre 2009 election)  that he was very much anti-Khatami, and indirectly responded to some of my material, via a journalist, to the effect that "all the mullahs are pretty much the same."

Milani also got the year wrong for US-China engagement. And his interpretation of the NPT is ill informed and bizarre. He seems to be referring to the safeguards provision, but even then his conclusions are wrong. What's important to note is that the Islamic Republic of Iran has cleared up past issues, and those that remain are related to the "alleged studies," which are most probably fraudulent.

Flynt Leverret makes a good case, especially from the perspective of US interests. It's really unfortunate that this perspective is not accepted by US policy makers in Washington.

Milani is just repeating Trita Parsi

Interesting to see this agreement:

* "I fully agree with unconditional negotiations"
* "US should negotiate on human rights"
* said: "Obama made a mistake" exempting Iran from his nuclear strike doctrine.

I give Milani credit for calling out Leverett on the Green movement.

However, Leverette is right, and he corrected Milani on this. Obama has been completely silent on Iran's offer to do Uranium transfers in various forms. This is not "negotiation without preconditions". It's more about domestic politics, so it's not a surprise.

Terrorist IRI's money-give-away to buy influence

Great answers by Dr. MIlani (as usual) vs the looser Leverett (who
looks lost in this debate). Dr. Milani mentioned an article in
Economist about the free money that IRI is giving away. Perhaps it is
this one:

//www.economist.com/world/middle-east/display...

Please note how  Iran-occupiers (IRI) offers to build refineries in
Africa when
it doesn't have enough refining capacity itself and has to ration
gasoline ! This money is in addition to billions of dollars of Iranian
people's money that Antari and IRI gang give to Palestinian, Hazbollah
and other Muslim terrorists around the world. Everything is done so the IRI terrorists can stay in power few more days.

Well Said Dr. Milani !

Keep Up the Good Work !

NP: Check out the archives

NP: Check out the archives of Iranian.com

This argument has been debated and nauseum by many people in various contexts and topic by those who are much more well versed and articulated than I'm. 

The IRI was founded on lies and deception and violence and defrauding its own people. Those are not the make up of a legitimated leadership unless you approve of organized crimes or the mafia style run oligarchy....that is my brief answer for now..I have to go feed my dog.

shushtari is right

Shushtari is right, he said in his last paragraph "and until we have individuals like yazdi, fardoust, gharebaghi, and the rest of the traitors, Iran will be like this... ". I think that has a lot to do with Iranians not being united. I cannot explain it if this is cultural or lack of education. We may need to ask Dr. Holakoui at 670 radio Iran.

vildemose

why not? can you explain?

NP: what does National mean

NP: what does National mean to you?? IRI may be your "nation" but not ours. Your interest in preserving the IRI's interest not Iran's interest. 

 You must consider IRI a legitimate and reprsentative of Iranian people? You see IRI and Iran as one and the same. That's why none of your arguments makes sense to the opposition. We don't consider the regime as a legitimate or represtative of Iran.

benross

aren't you confusing your own personal interests with national interests?

i admire dr milani....

way to school this idiot!!!!

AIPC

Like always AIPC is winning and we're all losing Iranian and Americans a like.American politations are afraid of Israel to do what is in the best interest of America.Their decesion is greatly influenced by Israel Loby(Money) Jewish vote(Jews are very united in U.S.)And they  fear Israel.Israel can Kill you me and anybody they do not like anywhere in the world as you saw in Dubai.

  For as long as Iran is a weak country militarly and financialy it will always be cut between a rock and a hard place.From one side religous pro plastinians inside Iran and all the moslum and Arab countries From the other side Israel the west and their allies.

  We all remember what happen to the pro west Shah of Iran and we all remember what happen to Sadam pro palastine leader of Iraq.Ther is no win for Iran and Iranians unless they have Power..... And It will not be easy  to run the government in Iran.....     

A part of discussions in

A part of discussions in Niloofar blog might be helpful to understand what I mean by self serving passion (regarding your comment in another blog). About 'trust', I borrow the famous breaking-up line: 'it's not you it's me'. Except that in this case, 'it's you not me'!

We are hopelessly insecure, of nobody's fault but ourselves. Someone who can't trust himself, can't trust anybody. Most of our unfortunate relation with developed countries have -at their roots- OUR incompetence in trusting OURSELVES not the other way around. I may elaborate this some day. But for now, I just ask you to pay attention to a single event.

IRI delegates reached an agreement with U.S and international community about a nuclear fuel settlement. Upon returning to Iran, they dumped the agreement. Now tell me who is more trustworthy in this story? Imperialist or anti-imperialist?

Benross, I just don't trust them after what they have done

and I don't see how you can trust them. They are not idiots, why would they do us any favors?

The US and British will never care about Iranians.

Should they? Do we care about Guatemalans? We may happen to have a remote intellectual curiosity about them. But do we really care about them?

No dear dingo. It's about their interest. What I am talking about is OUR interest. And how to convince them (and ourselves first) the end of IRI is a mutual interest.

Benross

The US and British will never care about Iranians. Would they have left us in this miserable condition if they cared one bit? Would they have betrayed the Shah? That's the honest truth. It is the right decision at all levels.

The current ambiguity of U.S

The current ambiguity of U.S policy toward IRI is exactly the policy U.S should pursue until Iranians organize and decide for themselves what to do with IRI. For now, the rhetoric about military action remains in the air as part of this ambiguity.

U.S is willing to help Iranian people to end this ambiguity but first Iranian people should rid of this anti-imperialism rhetoric of 'left'overs to accept it without feeling insecure and overlooked.

We all remember IC finance campaign and JJ insistence that he didn't want to ask for U.S grants, fearing the independence of IC. That was the right decision. But it could equally be a right decision to ask financial assistance with open arms, if we did not doubt ourselves about who we are and what we stand for

That day will come.

there's this moron....

again.

this levertt character and his wife think they somehow have a clue about Iran and the will of it's people!

this guy is obviously on the payroll of the akhoonds, serving as a mouthpiece in the west to make sure they don't get overthrown.

it makes me sick to my stomach to see loonies like this guy trying to defend 30 years of murder, pillage, lies, and every other sin humanly possible.

baba, this was all about a plan to set iran back 100 years...pure and simple....the akhoonds were brought it to make sure iran would not become an independent superpower in the middle east......carter, russians, chinese, french, and the rest of the vultures could not allow iran, with all it's natural resources be an independent thriving nation....that's all.....

and until we have individuals like yazdi, fardoust, gharebaghi, and the rest of the traitors, iran will be like this...