Sic Semper Tyrannis

The picture of Iraq is incomplete

With all due respect Anonymous Observer, the picture and image that you present of Iraq are awefully incomplete. 

1. The war on Iraq began not in 2003, but in 1991, when its forces were defeated in Kuwait.

2. At least 500,000 children died in the 1990s by malnuitrion that was a result of the sanctions imposed on Iraq.  Recall Madeleine Albright's famous stare into the CBS camera, declaring that getting rid of Saddam was worth killing those children.

3. The whole industrial base of Iraq was destroyed, not just because of the invasion, but also during the 1990s as the result of the sanctions.

4. Just as Iran is experiencing a great brain drain, so also is Iraq. Statistics by Iraqis themselves indicate that of the few million elite Iraqis that left Iraq before and after the invasion, few have returned.

5. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children have permanent psychological and physical war scars.

6. The number of innocent Iraqis killed after the invasion is far larger than 100,000 that you quote. Quite frankly, I trust and respest Lancet, the prestigious medical journal, that put the number up to the end of 2006 at over 500,000.

7. Permant US military bases have been established in Iraq.

8. Control of Iraq's oil is in the hands of US and British corporations.

9. The sectarian animosity between the three major groups was revived. It is there. If US forces ever leave, we will see hopw Iraq will explode again. 

10. Kurdistan is a de-facto independent nation.

11. The jury is still out on Iraq's democracy.

......

I personally do not believe in such comparisons, but if you are going to ask such a question, you should also present a complete picture of what has happened. But, but a lot of what follows after the question is either half-truths, great exaggerations (like tens of thousands of political prisoners was executed in Iran; the most reliable sources put the number at 10,000 - not that this is not a terrible crime), or outright wrong, like Iraq would not have attacked Iran.

Mammad

Revolution

was not unavoidable. It would not have happened Jimmy Carter had not been president. It was that man who made it possible. Of course if Shah was popular and stable it would not have happened. But Jimmy was a necessary part of it. His presidency cost the world a great deal in freedom; and human rights.

Devolutionaries!

One can dump the whole Wikipedia®, and some personal views on this good blog. All, I know is this:

The revolution was, without a doubt,unavoidable. The war was definitely preventable. Neither had an outcome to the respective nation's benefit.

Never late to learn....//davidharvey.org/reading-capital/

The 79 revolution was worse for sure

Without it there would be no Iran Iraq war, no Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, no American liberation of Kuwait and Iraq from Saddam.

I am sure that we would have a better Democracy without the Akhoonds under our Monarchist system. Iran was headed towards a better society without the Akhoonds. The downfall of the communists in USSR would have accelerated our pursuit for more democratic system in Iran. Now we have turban ruled garbage. Very good job IRI supporters!

AO, solid blog topic that has several good points

worth exploring. I do not know if the two are truly comparable despite many 'point of time' similarities & overlaps. Iran is among very few true nation states with historic & geographic consistency while Iraq as it is, was an early 20th century creation despite some ancient parts. It was fully arab/islamicized centuries ago so no schizophrenia there, while Iran is still fighting. The Sunni minority ruled a Shi't majority and an atheist Stalinist with several psychosomatic problems had illusions of grandeur (a similarity ala AN et al)...

They were both brought to where they are driven by same set of 'old suspects' that include Kissinger, Cheney et al. but via different routs. I think one can readily argue which is more miserable and damaged but both nations long for previous systems and regimes that while undemocratic, were secular. They both helped fertilize religious, ethnic & cultural divisions far beyond ME into Central Asia, empowered all the policies that are detrimental to the region's prosperity & peace, and put both countries in a major competitive disadvantage during a period of global expansion and opportunity. The 'dual containment policy' was successful beyond the wildest imagination of its creators. That success fed the kind of power we see in military industrial complex, zionism and ...As joker (Jack Nicholson) said: 'what this country needs is an enem(y)a.

Iraq's nascent democracy can/will break down readily and that outcome depends on dealing with the shi't/islamist plague. From an Iranian perspective, there is no doubt that islamic regime has and will continue to be the darkest point of our history of past 1000 years. From a global perspective, IRR was the most successful invention of the imperialism and benefitted most countries at the expense of Iran, as Iraq did to a lesser extent. So the world governments would have a very different perspective than we might as Iranians. However, the people of the world (not just Iran) have and will suffer because of IRR and the environment it supported for neutralizing Human Rights & civil liberties on a global scale. I touched on that passingly a while ago ( //iranian.com/main/blog/oktaby/iran-vs-world-...) 

CoP: 6- abused as a child  7- MPD  8-Desperate for attention

OKtaby

I just got a chance to look at my blog...

sorry, but it's been a hectic day, and I had to work hard to bring home the fake vegetarian bacon!  That being said, it looks like a good discussion is going on here, and thank everyone for commenting.  I will read the comments in detail later on and will respond accordingly.  

Emotional Pushbuttons

The intent of this clip is just to push your emotional buttons.

Thank you

 for the article and the interesting discussion and especially to you and David for the extraordinarily moving video.

Sorry to put a damper on your day, but from the perspective of a (relatively) neutral non-Iranian observer, after watching the last six minutes of that video, its ending words, 'For all who believe in Revolution in Iran', contain a dark irony. Unintentional, no doubt, but a dark irony nevertheless.

________________

COP, you wrote Abarmard:

 the other blame-everything-on-the-west apologist states: "I have no doubt that the moment the central system weakens, the Jundallah, Al qaedah, Baluchi liberation army, MKO, Arab/Ahvazi nationalists, Kurdish PKK branches...move to gain grounds...." So, is this today's excuse for maintaining status quo? Have you people no shame?

Hasn't Sam written several times about his concerns over the exact same thing?

___________________

Enjoyed your posts very much, Fooladi. Thanks.

Robin

delete

*

Islamic Revolution was worse

because it turned the entire middle east upside down and killed a lot of iranians with war, murder, assasinations, rape and murder.

 the islamic republic maturing means getting a nuke to use on iranians or the world.

once iran is free we will look back at this period as the worse in the history of iran

Supporters anlayzed

Sorry AO to steer away from the topic, but this is important.....
There really is no need to guess why these people support this anti human regime. Reasons cannot be too many. Here's some:
1. They have a financial stake
2. They have an allegiance to Islam, and not their birthplace, Iran (this is a particular case of the Stockholm Syndrom, only it's 14 centuries old!!)
3. Similar to No. 2, they have been brainwashed from childhood and even living in the west has not opened their eyes to the brutality and backwardness of the regime they support
4. They are still holding on to the non-existent eutopic ideology based on books they read when they were younger; primarily anti-western propoganda by the now defunct soviet union and associated doctrine.
5. They were dropped on their heads as a child (very plausible)

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Doctor X

You are making a lot of sense :-) Abarmard is an IRI supporter. His arguments are designed to prop up IRI. No other purpose is there. You; I and many others have relatively open minds. However IRI supporters have one goal: prop up the IRI. Why: I do not know and rather not venture a guess.

Therefore they will argue one minute we should oppose anything USA wants. Next minutes they are using Leverett and Mann as why IRI is great. 

Abarmard

Survival Instincts are all the same everywhere, But the way to manage those instincts are not. That is the difference. You are making an extremely harsh generalization here. There won't even be a case where something like this can happen in England and Germany and particulary in US.

There is nothing called different mentality when it comes to survival. Take water and electricity from any cities in the US, Germany, England, or Iraq and sooner or later, within this three months period, you will see similar reaction.

Again, it's difficult to prove savage mankind mentality to those who are willing to close their eyes at what took place in the past a few centuries.

Nothing needs to be proved.

Having a calm traffic laws, more relaxed social life or things in that nature in no way gives rights or even changes what sits as the cultural backbone of men. 

It sure does. It is called a stable and secure life, One where people see no need to rebel or riot.

And yes, no one will ever deny that there are no terrorists (if you like) or murderers, or separatists or... in the world, but one can argue that given a chance for them to take control or given a voice, they will do as much harm as they can. The issue therefore, specially for a region like Iran is security. Have no doubt that many of the groups from east and west, and internal will be bombing all over the country. Probability is more than less.

 There will be no terrorist, when there is absolutely nothing to terrorize a population about. There is a sense of a collective compromise and understanding in many democratic systems (apart from their shortfalls of course) that creates unity and makes everyone a happy camper.

Of course I agree with You. Unfortunately, This region we call "Iran" has to suffer from the most unnecessary and unfair consequences of lack of a secure and safe lifestyle. One wonders why such groups would harbor such life-devastating thoughts to begin with.

The only objective of US forces in the region and against Iran is based on US interest in the region. Nothing to do with Iranians or their past, future or present. Those who are either indifferent or promote a foreign intervention inside their land, are clearly blind and backward to realize what is sustainable as growing democracy and freedom.

So? To reasonable and constructive-minded Iranians that should not matter one bit. Our concern is to expend our energy and our efforts in bringing prosperity to our country. That is all we care about. the world powers can have all the self-interests in the world that they want ( I hope i don't get nabbed by the guy who comes out with his famous line of "you don't get international politics" or"you are reducing this to street level politics" for saying this)

Of course to my surprise I had seen Iranians promoting sanctions against Iranians inside so the suffering would cause a revolution. The lack of social understandings and historical reading is the core cause of ignorance among Iranians (and Cubans to name another). That is another topic for another time.

The promote sanctions for a reason. Not to boost up iranian people's suffering. Not saying I agree with them though.

For the time being, perhaps you will see your idea (sanction and war) come to life starting with past thirty years of sanction without revolution and a coming war and destruction without democracy rooting in place. On the contrary keep this note for proof, Iran will be harsher, the military/sepah will become stronger than ever. The pressure to silence any opposition voices will increase and grass root movements become none existent, maybe another thirty years. If you think this is not within the scope of US objective, think again. The world has no problem with dictatorship as long as they bow down to their demand.

 I am confused!!! Who is going to exert all this pressure again?? the US or the sepah?

Here is what you can view and balance your ideas if you

have no historical or political background. If Human Rights, Civil Rights, general public (workers, teachers, students) are against sanctions and war, you should be too.

If fanatics (Neo cons, hard core Christians) , Americans, Europeans, or foreigners who have no interest in Iranian culture and life support it, you shouldn't. 

What??? Are you playing games? why should i not have any interest in cultural and Life support! if fanatics hold the same position?? And this is supposed to balance my views How?

Support what Iranians want not what you think they want based on Western foreign policy marketing campaign.

I do. I know.

This is what happened with all those funds from US and European (congress) to overthrow the regime! It worked during 1979 .

Abramard you are 100% wrong

Iranians will not respond like Arab Iraqi. They will respond like Kurds in Iraq. The Kuds have been smart and worked with the Americans. Result: safety and freedom. The Arabs bring the deaths on themselves.

There will be cause heads. They will have to be watched since they will try to generate the same insecurity as Iraq. But the vast majority of Iranians will be like Kurds. After all why should we fight in order to restore an Arab oppressive regime? 

Thanks DK for detailed response

I make sure I read them and take a look at the links, better be good though :)

On the plane link, well what can I say, I think Sadegh agha would agree with you. Given a second chance. He'd stay clear of that damn plane, stay put in USA, and focus on improving his disco dancing skills. 

Enough for now, before I wade into dangerous waters, I think I have behaved myself pretty well so far today...... 

No One was forcing You or Your Family to board the Plane

To Oblivion :

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPpB-r5mMCI

Even if I tend to agree with you that the French dress better particularly when accompanying a demagogue Ayatollah on Air France ... 

Others thought twice before following blindly the author of the Green Book :

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4b8VF_uKXo 

Come to think of it  now they also called it the GREEN BOOK !

My Humble Opinion,

DK

PS: No Offense intended to your Family by the way ... 

Farah khanoom

You might want to take a brief look at my second response to DK, which addressed similar comments as yours.

On designer suits ones,  Just take a trip to harrods or Bond street in london next time you happen to be there and you'll see the agha and agha zadeh's propping up the high end chick UK retail economy. But I kinda agree, french have a better taste in fashion :)

I agree with you on Mr Bakhtiar. I tried to narrow down my definition of the word "role", but I obviously failed.

Now to the point of hijacking: let me try and make an analogy here; How does a terrorist  hijack a plane? He boards it and take ownership of it by becoming it's captain. Then he uses it and all it's innocent passengers as a terrorist weapon. Nothing wrong with the plane or the passengers, just the new "captain"!

In 1979, the plane of the revolution with all it's passengers, the iranian nation was hijacked by khomeini/CIA/MI5. The plane was re directed from it's original destination of freedom for all and social justice, to the new direction of the servitude of the foreign powers under the phoney anti amperialism of the velayate vaghih.

My response to Abarmard

In the new US policy, different than before, a separated Iran might create less hassle than unified powerful Iran.

Despite the presence of U.S. and other foreign troops, Iraq and Afghanistan have maintained their territorial integrity and have not become 3 separate countries, as the same crowd of so-called "progressives" were screaming would happen. Remember those predictions?

US will help Iran become a great country? good for you and Iran. Let's leave it at that. Go sanctions, go war!!

No, Iranians will help Iran become a decent country--just as the Koreans did with South Korea (compare that with the Stalinist North Korea). But for Iran to have any opportunity to become a decent society than the Islamist cancer has to be removed--exactly as Nazism was removed from Germany. Islamism has to be strangulated and then killed; howver, your mumbo jumbo "Third Worldism" will leave Iran to remain the rotten place that it is. On the other hand, you can keep fighting the Great Satan...from the U.S., of course.

Doctor X

There is nothing called different mentality when it comes to survival. Take water and electricity from any cities in the US, Germany, England, or Iraq and sooner or later, within this three months period, you will see similar reaction.

Again, it's difficult to prove savage mankind mentality to those who are willing to close their eyes at what took place in the past a few centuries. 

Having a calm traffic laws, more relaxed social life or things in that nature in no way gives rights or even changes what sits as the cultural backbone of men. 

And yes, no one will ever deny that there are no terrorists (if you like) or murderers, or separatists or... in the world, but one can argue that given a chance for them to take control or given a voice, they will do as much harm as they can. The issue therefore, specially for a region like Iran is security. Have no doubt that many of the groups from east and west, and internal will be bombing all over the country. Probability is more than less.

The only objective of US forces in the region and against Iran is based on US interest in the region. Nothing to do with Iranians or their past, future or present. Those who are either indifferent or promote a foreign intervention inside their land, are clearly blind and backward to realize what is sustainable as growing democracy and freedom.

Of course to my surprise I had seen Iranians promoting sanctions against Iranians inside so the suffering would cause a revolution. The lack of social understandings and historical reading is the core cause of ignorance among Iranians (and Cubans to name another). That is another topic for another time.

For the time being, perhaps you will see your idea (sanction and war) come to life starting with past thirty years of sanction without revolution and a coming war and destruction without democracy rooting in place. On the contrary keep this note for proof, Iran will be harsher, the military/sepah will become stronger than ever. The pressure to silence any opposition voices will increase and grass root movements become none existent, maybe another thirty years. If you think this is not within the scope of US objective, think again. The world has no problem with dictatorship as long as they bow down to their demand.

Here is what you can view and balance your ideas if you have no historical or political background. If Human Rights, Civil Rights, general public (workers, teachers, students) are against sanctions and war, you should be too.

If fanatics (Neo cons, hard core Christians) , Americans, Europeans, or foreigners who have no interest in Iranian culture and life support it, you shouldn't. 

Support what Iranians want not what you think they want based on Western foreign policy marketing campaign.

This is what happened with all those funds from US and European (congress) to overthrow the regime! It worked during 1979 too.

fooladi Jaan I am not saying the contrary Nor accusing you ;0)

But you simply confirmed my point.

You would have been a Constitutionalist and Not a Revolutionary back in '79.

As for the argument that a Monarchy cannot be reformed ... Well History suggests the contrary.

RESTORATION: Britain's 'Glorious Revolution' of 1688 and the 'Bill of Rights'

You are confusing two things in your assessment:

The King ( aka Shah)

And

The Monarchy ( i.e.: The Institution) which as Historian David Starkey would confirm  ( as in his recurrent intros to his Series on the Monarchy) is actually the State:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFsPg3bnlUM 

The Goal of Constitutionalist ( be it in Iran or Elsewhere in human history ) is First and Foremost to achieve democracy Not Convert the King or Queen into believing in those core values. If they do all the better but that is not the point:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWwTshDIfuQ

Constitutionalism is about Pragmatical Imposing the Will of the Nation on the Ruling Body and set the Rules of a Fair and Just Statesmanship. What the King may think personally or Not is Irrelevant what matters is that he respects the Constitution.

I am not claiming that this is the Best approach or that the Constitutional Monarchy is the best system of government in the history of mankind, I am just claiming that this is what it is and to claim the contrary is simply distorting the truth and lying to ourselves.

Iran's Constitutional movement  was precisely inspired equally by the European Rennaissance for it's Secularist Ideas ( Separation of State and Religion, End of Divine Kingship ) as well as the enlightment Philosophers for the modern concepts of Democracy and Universal Human Rights:  

HISTORY FORUM: Nader Naderpour on Iran's Constitutional Revolution and European Rennaissance (1996)

They believed in Republican Ideals embedded in a Royal Framework:

GOOD READ: All You Need to Know About The Enlightment Philosophers

HISTORY FORUM: The Age of Enlightment in France and Europe.

As Such it is not surprising that most Iranian Constitutionalists admired Votaire more than Rousseau because Voltaire was precisely arguing Against Revolution ( during his time his only reference was Cromwells Religious revolution ) and in favor of a Constitutional Monarchy which he got to admire during his exile in Britain.

So the Confusion you make is typical of the current Iranian generation and most Greens partly due to the distorted view that has emerged since the Revolution of 1979 that Democracy Immediately Rhymes with Republic in the history of mankind.

This is simply Not True and there is no shortage of counter examples in this regard:

HISTORY FORUM: How Truly Democratic is The British Monarchy ?

RESTORATION: Belgium King Baudouin takes Oath Amidst Republican Animosity (31st July ,1950)

Monarchy And Democracy - NPR Talk of the Nation Q&A with Listeners ( Dec 2nd, 1998)

MONARCHY OBSOLETE ? ;0)

HISTORY FORUM:The Monarchy with David Starkey (Cambridge University)

Even in a debate between Starkey and an Iranian Communist:

David Starkey's "Last Word" With Maryam Namazie about Iran and the Monarchy (More4 TV April 19th, 2006)

Nation Building requires Symbols, to deny that is again like that Swiss Cukoo Clock Syndrom. What you may risk to inherit is a Cheese with alot of holes ( a metaphore for Separatist movements we all fear and resent as Patriotic Iranians)

The Constitutionalists Were NOT Republicans !

Some may have become Republicans in the long run and it is their right very much like this fellow who is taking his own desires for reality:

Bahram Moshiri

but we cannot distort the historical significance of what that movement was all about in the first place under the disguise of some academic credential.

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY: Mozaffaredin Shah Signs First Draft of the Constitution (1906)

Muzzaferedin Shah's Voice Recorded thanking his Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs-1906/07:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOmyZVw5GcA&feature=related

Constitutionalist believed in Domesticating the Monarchy Not Toppling it. Very much in the same way some Western Europeans did AND achieved this be it in Great Britain or Belgium whose constitutions were used to draft the Persian one.

One cannot claim that the struggle for Democracy dates back to a 100 years whilst overlooking this FACT as it is being done in some Green Circles and Iranian Republicans (aka Jomhurykhah's) ...

That is Why I like to Quote Azar Nafisi (whom I admire even if we may differ slightly in our views but not I think in our common values) Quoting this Canadian Author:

"A Country that Loses it's Poetic Vision is a Country that faces death" -Saul Bellow

Because I Firmly Believe that National Reconciliation and Democracy in Our Country will be finally possible when those who believe in Nafisi's beautiful metaphore of the Republic of Imagination will Join hands with those who share My Metaphor for an Empire of Dreams and VICE VERSA.

But if We Lose this Opportunity :

REZA's CALL: An Iranian Solidarnosc... by DK

RESPONDING TO REZA's CALL: An Iranian Solidarnosc in the Making ... By DK

Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi Q&A With Iranians Inside & Outside Iran

with Divisive Talk and other Megalomaniac Wannabe Presidents Like This one or anyother ... I can Promise You that neither I nor You will EVER See the Advent of a Genuine and Democratic IRan in our lifetimes ... Be it in the form of a Secular Republic or a Constitutional Monarchy for that matter ...

It's NOW OR NEVER !

The rest in my opinion is Wishful thinking at best ...

Fooladi you are being inconsistent

Just look at your statements: 

 "Khomeini was without a doubt a good leader with good political manouvering and timing skills. .... "His organisational officers on the ground in Iran were no other than communists and MKO. His foot soldiers the peasent, workers, students, and yes chador clad women! "

Commies, MKO, peasants, workers, students, and the chadori folk constituted the overwhelming majority of the so-called revolutionaries. Surely when an overwhelming majority is supporting a leader, this movement could'nt have been hijacked!! 

Then you say:

"But it is importnat to note that the masses were on the streets in the first place because of the social injustice and economy."

Nothing is further from the truth. All economic indicators show that te country was at the peak of its economic growth and productivity. Majority of the so-called peasants had moved to the cities because they had become rich and empowered middle classes. This is hardly the Marxian prescription for a revolution - which you claim was hijacked by the Islamists!!

But your punchline must be this one:

"The only thing I can say is that I see great similarities between Bakhtiar's role in 1979 and Mousavi's in 2010."

 No matter how you work your way around the semantics of the word "role" you can't be get off with this one. Bakhtair was working against the Pahlavi monarchy for decades whereas this fellow, Mousavi, has been a founding father of this regime. Are you redefining everything?

Besides, one of them wore Fench designer suits where as the other wears organic products - LOL.

FR

Abarmard

The system that was "externally" manipulated and supposedly destroyed had its own roots in pure Militarism.

There is absolutely no way you can generalize on what happened over there and make an assumption that the same thing would take place Here in USA resulting in Christians Killing Christians. It is a Different system, Different Mentality. People show respect towards one another Livelihood and dignity and the system and It all comes from Within, Not through force.

Ethnic groups have been wanting independence since time immemorial including when saddam was in power so that is not anything new! There is plenty evidence to suggest that the central government is gaining more power and strenght.

My intention was not to attack the monarchy...

Nothing to be gained from that at this stage of our countries history. Besides, the previous generation of my family have taken care of that and were "repaid" by islamic regime nicely!

So I am not going to argue if the monarchy of late shah could have been reformed As I simply do not believe you can reform a regime which is depotic from the core. The only thing I can say is that I see great similarities between Bakhtiar's role in 1979 and Mousavi's in 2010. and I mean just their "roles" and nothing else. Bakhtiar was indeed a true Nationalist and surprisingly honest. He lacked political skills though and paid a high price for it consequently. Mousavi is a pure oppurtunist. However they both play the same role, trying to prevent the inevitable.

The revolution was hijacked because it did not achieve even it's basic objectives, let alone the radical objectives. If the revolution was not hijacked by khomeini and his gang working for CIA/MI5, I and you, despite our political differences, today, would have been working in our beautiful homelenad towards the betterment of our society, instead of arguing about the semantics of the word hijack.

And oh, BTW if the revolution had succeded, the character in uniform on this site would still be in US, maybe still lamenting about that terrible event in June 2009, namely Michael jackson's death :)

Irani Irani

You might see a result similar to S. Korea, where Iran is divided and some parts prosper. In the new US policy, different than before, a separated Iran might create less hassle than unified powerful Iran. There are so many levels of historical and political arguments in your statements that I don't have the patience to go through and argue them. It takes a while to type, however if interested I am writing an article soon.

In any case, It's useless to try to convince people that US plans for Iran is nothing good. US will help Iran become a great country? good for you and Iran. Let's leave it at that. Go sanctions, go war!!

Gentlemen, please!

This blog is not about No Fear (sorry I meant Sargord Pirouz - they are so remarkably identical!!!).  

FR

A Revolution Cannot be Highjacked if it's intention was to

Topple a Regime ...

That was achieved ...

If on the otherhand You were a pragmatist and intended to Reform the Monarchy into becoming a Purely Constitutional Monarchy with a Separation of Powers then you were at Best ... a Reformist even it that could have been seen as a first step into disolving the Monarchy before replacing it by a Secular Republic once calm and order are restored.

Bakhtiar's last interview precisely suggests the possibility ONLY if People Respect the Institutions already in place:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=il4W6NjaU8o

Something which from this point of view was and to a large extent is the essence of the Green Movement expressed in such slogans as "Where is My Vote ? " or "Ahmadinejad is Not My President" caught between it's desire to Reform the existing Constitution into becoming a more democratic one and one of profound change ( which can indeed turn into a Revolutionary expression if frustrations in the system and inner divisions increase).

But a Revolution is Not Highjacked it is simply a course of action that is carried out by the most determined and radical elements in society who take upon themselves to lead it and are not ready to compromise with the Regime they aim to topple.

If your intention was different then you were simply Not a Revolutionary but a Constitutionalist at Best ...

Well, COP, it can be argued

Well, COP, it can be argued that the US regime matured in the 20th century, after the murderous activities against the Cherokees, Navajo, Nez Perce, etc, as well as institutionalized slavery. It took well over 100 years, but it happened.

Of course, if you're a civilian bombing victim of the US during the 20th century, you might argue the point.

But I'm a moderate. I am neither anti-USA nor anti-Iran. I advocate rapprochement.  

The 1979 Reveloution was indeed hijacked by islamists

We fail to understand this important concept at our own peril.

Khomeini portrayed himself as the leader of a "movement" to overthow the despotic regime of the shah. The movement covered a wide spectrum of political beliefes , from extreme left (Maoists) to traditional left to nationalists and islamists. Khomeini was without a doubt a good leader with good political manouvering and timing skills. This was well identified by western intelligence services. whilst he was negotiating with CIA and MI5 through Yazdi and ghotbzadeh and like, he was issuing "revolutionary statements" from his hiding hole in Paris. His organisational officers on the ground in Iran were no other than communists and MKO. His foot soldiers the peasent, workers, students, and yes chador clad women!

 But it is importnat to note that the masses were on the streets in the first place because of the social injustice and economy. Just like last year! Why else Khomeini promissed them free electricity and home in return for their loyalty? Why else did he tell them that all political organistaions are free to operate under islamic regime?

Once in power, of course khomeini paid back the favour to CIA/MI5 by banning  mass execution of any left/marxist leaning organisation. (The entire list of Tudeh party members was supplied to khomeini by MI5  through their double agent in KGB). So the project of sorrounding the southern borders of USSR with green belt of Islam completed. 

Abarmard: You are wrong

Let us compare the experiences and outcomes of occupied South Korea with that of Iraq. South Korea, in particular, was a very poor country prior to U.S. occupation. Now, it is a leading industrial power (the real type, not the fake type promoted by IRI groupies). The South Koreans did not go around cutting off each other's heads and doing suicide bombing after suicide bombing, day after day. There is something fundamentally pathological about Arab and Islamic societies. There is not one of them which can be described as a decent place for most of the peoples who live there. Whether they are pro-American like Egypt and Jordan or anti-American like Syria and Sudan--these are backward and very sick societies. Even when there is "law and order", as there is in Syria, these are dysfunctional and diseased societies. I know that North America, Europe, and East Asia have their problems, but there is no comparison. Arab and Islamic societies contribute almost nothing to the modern science, technology, industry, etc. The ruin of Iraq rests predominantly with the Iraqis themselves and their anti-modern, anti-human Islamist and Arabist political orientations.  

How does a murderous regime mature?

The Islamic regime's defenders often state that the regime has maturing to do...Are you really typing your crap with a staright face? Do you people really believe in the nonsense you spew? Just exactly how does a murderous regime "mature"? How can a rotten entity imporve? The answer is that IT CANNOT! Or the other blame-everything-on-the-west apologist states: "I have no doubt that the moment the central system weakens, the Jundallah, Al qaedah, Baluchi liberation army, MKO, Arab/Ahvazi nationalists, Kurdish PKK branches...move to gain grounds...." So, is this today's excuse for maintaining status quo? Have you people no shame?

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________