Iranian patriots or Vichy traitors

Fred
by Fred
31-Oct-2009
 

The saying goes one man’s junk is another man’s treasure. Does such duality hold true when it comes to patriotism?

The premise  of the question: the IRR, the Islamist Rapist Republic in all its different manifestations, “pragmatic” a la Rafsanjani, “reformist” a la Khatami and unashamed in your face Islamist thuggish, a la Ahmadinejad have all been unquestionably extremely bad for Iran and Iranians, heading for even worse.

The main question: IRR’s two decades of mostly clandestine dual purpose full cycle illegal nuclear program is the subject of sane world’s attention and should all peaceful attempts to rein it in fail could possibly bring untold devastation on Iran, Iranians and the entire region.

Those openly wish and act upon attempts at gaining the dual use nuke capabilities which includes the bomb while IRR is in power bill themselves as true patriots and reject the comparison with Philippe Petain's Vichy collaboratin with the Nazis,  are they right?

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by FredCommentsDate
ادا اطوار اسلامی
5
Dec 05, 2012
مسجد همجنسگرایان
1
Dec 05, 2012
Iranians are legitimate target
10
Dec 04, 2012
more from Fred
 
Farah Rusta

The real and initial collaborators were Jebhe Melli

by Farah Rusta on Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:58 AM PST

I think a more accurate analogy would be between the JM collaborators (Bazargan, Sanjabi, Forouhar, and so on) with the nascent Islamist regime. Khatatami et al. were the home made product.

 

FR


  •  
benross

Ahmadinejad, contrary to

by benross on Sun Nov 01, 2009 08:14 AM PST

Ahmadinejad, contrary to common belief, is no dumb. He once clearly acknowledged that nuclear weapon is a 20 century concept, and it is something of 'passé'. It has no deterrent value whatsoever. Of-course I don't recall his exact wording.

What IRI is looking for, is to sit on the 'edge' of nuclear weapon capability. For internal use, as a nationalistic stand, and for external use, as an ongoing bargaining chip. It has no 'militaristic' objective whatsoever. And I'd say, it has a much more efficient objective! 


  •  
vildemose

Thank you ex-programmer.

by vildemose on Sun Nov 01, 2009 07:26 AM PST

Thank you ex-programmer. That is precisely what I'm afraid of. Unfortunately, myopia and false pride are two afflictions us Iranians have been suffering from for centuries.


  •  
ex programmer craig

vildemose

by ex programmer craig on Sun Nov 01, 2009 05:27 AM PST

According to some hard core Iranian Toudehi leftists and Islamists communists (Shariati followers. i.e. Mr. Mammad), if Iran achieves a 'latent stage of nuclear-weapon readiness', it becomes "unattackable" Is that really a valid argument?

I don't think it can be considered to be true in any way. Does having nukes make the US, China, France, Russia, Britain "unattackable"? Obviously not. And in the case of the US and Russia, we each have more nukes than the rest of the world combined. Some people claim that nuclear powers never engage eachother directly but instead rely on proxies... is that true in the case of India and Pakistan? And speaking of Pakistan, there's a hell of a war brewing there right now, considering they are a nuclear power that is supposed to be insulated against war!

I don't want to get into too much speculation about various potential scenarios if IRI did have a handful of nukes, because that upsets people a lot (not sure why, if IRI does have nukes Iranians better start speculating about what might happen!) but I personally think Iran will be less safe with nukes than without, as long as this regime is in power. Even if IRI only wants the nukes for a bluff, that bluff will be called in the case of serious aggression... and what happens then?


  •  
benross

It is not patriotism. We

by benross on Sat Oct 31, 2009 07:18 PM PDT

It is not patriotism. We agree on this. But maybe you don't believe what I believe, that they know it is not patriotism... which makes it more like a deliberate betrayal. Not quite true regarding Islamist left, but certainly true regarding non Islamist.


  •  
vildemose

Bijan jan: Thank you. I

by vildemose on Sat Oct 31, 2009 06:17 PM PDT

Bijan jan: Thank you. I always enjoy your rare insights. You're one of my very few favorite commenters on this site.


  •  
Bijan A M

vildemose

by Bijan A M on Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:07 AM PDT

You have said it most eloquently:

"... the entire line of thinking among the Iranian left and Islamist communist  is premised upon false sense of patriotism and security."

This is worth repeating over and over again.

Thank you.


  •  
vildemose

Fred: They don't view

by vildemose on Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:41 AM PDT

Fred: They don't view themselves as such; they view themselves as true patriots because obtaining nuclear weapons to them is equivalent to Iran not ever being ever attacked upon.

Here is a response to ex-programmer from your previous blog that I think applies here too.

According to some hard core Iranian Toudehi leftists and Islamists communists (Shariati followers. i.e. Mr. Mammad), if Iran achieves a 'latent stage of nuclear-weapon readiness', it becomes "unattackable"  Is that really a valid argument?

That statement is only true if Iran ceases all of its transnational terrorist activities ( or in the language of Islamist's "true believers", global Shia crescent movement). I hardly think IRI will abandon those "projects" and for that reason it makes the IRI even more vulnerable to deadlier future attacks.

Unfortunately, the entire line of thinking among the Iranian left and Islamist communist  is premised upon false sense of patriotism and security.


 


  •