Cho Iran nabashad, tan-e-man mabad.

I am an Iranian

I am an Iranian and while I don't see any military attack on Iran (without coordination with people and under Iranian advisors) a good option to get rid of the Islamic Republic threat, but I and millions of other Iranians are in full support of any sanctions that would have serious impact on the  Islamic republic even if us the Iranian people suffer a little as long as helps us to overthrow the IR regime.

Islamic rep is 1st a threat to the Iranian people and then a threat to the world because no other nation has suffered as a result of the IR regime actions during the past 31 years than the Iranian people. even Iraq war was the direct result of Khomeini killing our military patriots, the bastard executed our jet pilots (the best in the world) military generals and so on and forced the rest to flee iran, Saddam wouldn't dare to attack Iran if Shah's military was intact.

 Islamic Republic is responsible foe at least a million Iranian lives during the past 31 years and also 10's of million walking dead Iranians with no jobs and drug addicts 

 Iranian bombs are already killing American soldiers ion Iraq & Afghanistan. Beirut and Argentina bombings that killed US and Israelis were planned by Khamenei, Khomeini and Rafsanjani and carried out by the terrorist proxies of the IR.

  مرگ بر جمهوری اسلامی و حامیان اوباش و جنایتکارش

امروز هم که گورهای خودتان را به نمایش کشیدید، پای جمهوری اسلامی لب گور است

wrong reading of the situation

I dont think any iranian wants sanctions or bombing of iran.  if they do, it is an impulsive reaction risen primarily out of the irrational policies of IRI.

when iri does not even treat its own critics fairly like mousavi, karroubi or raf, how do you think the other critics feel they will be treated by iri if they simply give their opinions?  iri has left no room for constructive discussion. any honest critic can be easily labeled as a subversive element and is then mistreated then silenced.

So many feel that if iri is not willing to listen to rational and constructive crticism, and is ready to silence them, then they should fight back the same way.

Let's be honest.  Is Iran in any way more powerful than CHina or India.  No.  Yet in 1989 China was a pariah state with many enemies and sanctions upon it.  China then decided to take steps to join the international civil society.  that opened the door for the US under bill clinton to declare China , most favored nation.

Today China is an economic powerhouse.  awash in wealth and contruction and a leading consumer of energy resources.

Now, ask yourself: if the US was so adamant about being number #1 , then why did it even allow for China to join the community of nations and gave it the opportunity to rehab its image?

The truth is that the US wants nothing but to protect its economic national interests.  It is not interested in preventing Iran from this or that.  Otherwise, why did it permit India and China to become so powerful.

The problem with Iran is not nuclear weapons.  Even AN in his address to the Iranians abroad said that it is not over nukes rather over control of the middle east. 

So how is Iran planning to get control of the middle east?  So far all indications show that countries in the ME hate Iran and are wishing the US attacks Iran. 

If the US wants control of the ME, it is because it wants to open new markets for its goods, which it already has.  Now what exactly will Iran do if it has control over the ME?  Is it in a position to offer products and services to the people in the ME?  Absolutely not!  Its products are in no way competitive against Korean, Chinese or US products.

Whereas countries like Korea and US have established themselves economically and developed high tech products at first, then they go looking for political spheres of influence to create markets for their goods.

Iran, though, is approaching the issue from the wrong way.  It plans to create political influence and then maybe develop its goods and economy to offer to the people in the region.

When the international community looks at Iran's limited economical and industrial power, they are left astonished why it would seek political influence in the region.  It seems very irrational to them.  The only way they can interpret Iran's moves is that it simply wants to create war and terror by gaining political power in the region.  There is no other explanation. 

When countries in the world see IRI helping Hamas and other groups that are against peace, they are again left to question Iran's motives. 

Everyone knows that Iran vs World is  not over nuclear weapons, but rather it's support for Palestinian and other armed groups.  They ask themselves, why would Iran be willing to suffer economic and international isolation just because of its defence of Palestine?  They know that supporting Palestinians is not in Iran's best interests, so why is it doing it?

The only answer they deduct is that IRI is different than all other countries.  All other governments do what is best for their national interests, what is best for their OWN people or in some cases for their OWN ruling party to stay in power.

They see in IRI a country that defies what is considered rational behaviour in our modern nation state concept.  They see in IRI a country that is pursuing an ideology and national interests are subservient to this ideology.

This makes IRI a unique case.  Because it is subjecting all its resources and its national well being in pursuit of an ideology.  What is that ideology: well they hear it often from iranian officials: "wipe out israel", "us will fall", "the promised one will return and bring justice".....etc.

World nations or atleast the advisors in sensitive positions are well aware of these type of pronouncements.  They have heard it before, from Hitler's "Aryan nation" to Saddam's "Arab nationalism"....and the natural course of history has shown that these types of governments sooner or later will be causing trouble and disturbance.  So all the IRI arguments and "rational" and "treat all equal" arguments falls on deaf ears, because they know this government is not doing what is in its best natioanl interests rather blindly following an ideology.

Mr Obama in a very intelligent and calculated move sought to convince the whole world of that issue.  He offered talks and was willling to listen. When IRI rebuffed all moves, the world community was now convinced.  It decided to squarely side with the US and isolate a country that does not follow the international norms for development.

The pronouncements from IRI officials are meant for simple people who are busy 22 hours a day working and earning a living.  So you might hear some that side with IRI from 3rd world nations.  But advisors and analysts whose JOB it is to track and study policies, can clearly see through the dust and discern a rational from an irrational government.  These analysts are the ones formulating policy and convincing the powers to be. 

When IRI comes out and says, "all nations should be treated equal, we don't need no veto powers," to the poor falafel seller that sounds really good and nice.  But the analysts and policy makers know it is bullshit.  This type of argument is like saying Harvard university should be treated like Quinnepec Community College. 

Other IRI pronouncements are just as bizarre, " we need a new world order based on justice, equality,,,,etc" You only hear that type of talk from isolated and failed nations.  Similar to when Muammar Qaddafi slammed FIFA for not hosting the World Cup in 3rd world nations.  This talk is like someone saying, "you don't need to go through 10 years of schooling to be an MD, just go and observe and train in 2 years and you should have the right to be an MD."  Bizarre, irrational, poorly studied statements meant for 3rd world nations that are way behind."

Finally, ask yourself this question: why is it that we trust the Americans, Koreans and Europeans with their technology and we consider a Mercedes to be a solid car.  Well, the technology they created was based upon the scientific method and other things.  We can clearly see that their technology is superior.

Now, the same Europeans, Americans and Koreans have a method that they use in non scienitific fields.  Afterall, they all didn;t become engineers.  The same type of thinking, the same type of brains when put to non scientific use has created a civil society, where freedom, liberty, creativity are all respected and cherished.

Now, these Europeans and Americans are telling the Iranians, hey just like you wish you had our scienific superiority, we are offering our civil society concept to you for free.  You don;t have to go through the Middle and Dark Ages like we did.  Come take it, it will help you get way ahead.  ANd the response from IRI: "No, your methods have failed and our method is Islam and Imam Mahdi."  

So when you're an Iranian and you see and hear all this, you just wish if some of these 7th century retarded people could somehow ceae to exist! 

Get it?

Here is an idea for Java

I hope they drop a nuclear bomb in your pants.

Javadagha,

"If any country is a threat to the world is the USA or Israel. Either country will use nuclear weapon with little regard to its consequences."

Really?

Then, why didn't the US use nuclear weapons in Korea, or Vietnam, or Iraq?

And, could you point to a single instance whereby Israel had used a nuclear weapon?

Perhaps, in your mind, the Japanese citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki-and Tojo's Japan, in general-would have been happier to have those cities fire-bombed and their nation invaded by the Allied forces instead?