Author Topic: Hope for Iran?  (Read 2805 times)

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Hope for Iran?
« on: July 05, 2009, 04:49:12 AM »
I have said, often, that Iran is a complicated place. Unlike the neo-cons, I harbor no illusions that it will ever be part of the west. We settled that issue at Thermoplye. However,it needn't be a foe either. The Guadian Coucil seems to have crossed a bright line in Shia culture, and a wait and see attitude that many have criticisized, seems to be bearing fruit. Its way too ealy to tell, but this seems worth noting. From the NYTimes today:

Leading Clerics Defy Ayatollah on Disputed Iran Election

Published: July 4, 2009
CAIRO — The most important group of religious leaders in Iran called the disputed presidential election and the new government illegitimate on Saturday, an act of defiance against the country’s supreme leader and the most public sign of a major split in the country’s clerical establishment.

A statement by the group, the Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qum, represents a significant, if so far symbolic, setback for the government and especially the authority of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose word is supposed to be final. The government has tried to paint the opposition and its top presidential candidate, Mir Hussein Moussavi, as criminals and traitors, a strategy that now becomes more difficult — if not impossible.

“This crack in the clerical establishment, and the fact they are siding with the people and Moussavi, in my view is the most historic crack in the 30 years of the Islamic republic,” said Abbas Milani, director of the Iranian Studies Program at Stanford University. “Remember, they are going against an election verified and sanctified by Khamenei.”

The announcement came on a day when Mr. Moussavi released documents detailing a campaign of fraud by the current president’s supporters, and as a close associate of the supreme leader called Mr. Moussavi and former President Mohammad Khatami “foreign agents,” saying they should be treated as criminals.

The documents, published on Mr. Moussavi’s Web site, accused supporters of the president of printing more than 20 million extra ballots before the vote and handing out cash bonuses to voters.

Since the election, the bulk of the clerical establishment in the holy city of Qum, an important religious and political center of power, has remained largely silent, leaving many to wonder when, or if, the nation’s most senior religious leaders would jump into the controversy that has posed the most significant challenge to the country’s leadership since the Islamic Revolution.

With its statement Saturday, the association of clerics — formed under the leadership of the revolution’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini — came down squarely on the side of the reform movement.

The association includes reformists, but Iranian political analysts describe it as independent, and it did not support any candidate in the recent election.

The group had earlier asked for the election to be nullified because so many Iranians objected to the results, but it never directly challenged the legitimacy of the government and, by extension, the supreme leader.

The earlier statement also came before the election was certified by the country’s religious leaders, who have since said that opposition to the results must cease.

The clerics’ decision to speak up again is not itself a turning point and could fizzle under pressure from the state, which has continued to threaten its critics. Some seminaries in Qum rely on the government for funds, and Ayatollah Khamenei and the man he has declared the winner of the election, incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, have powerful backers there.

They also retain the support of the powerful security forces and the elite Revolutionary Guards. In addition, the country’s highest-ranking clerics have yet to speak out individually against the election results.

But the association’s latest statement does help Mr. Moussavi, Mr. Khatami and a former speaker of Parliament, Mehdi Karroubi, who have been the most vocal in calling the election illegitimate and who, in their attempts to force change, have been hindered by the jailing of influential backers.

“The significance is that even within the clergy, there are many who refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the election results as announced by the supreme leader,” said an Iranian political analyst who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal.

While the government could continue vilifying the three opposition leaders, analysts say it was highly unlikely that the leadership would use the same tactic against the clerical establishment in Qum.

The backing also came at a sensitive time for Mr. Moussavi, because the accusations that he is a foreign agent ran in a newspaper, Kayhan, that has often been used to build cases against critics of the government.

The editorial was written by Hossein Shariatmadari, who was picked by the supreme leader to run the newspaper.

The clerics’ statement chastised the leadership for failing to adequately study complaints of vote rigging and lashed out at the use of force in crushing huge public protests.

It even directly criticized the Guardian Council, the powerful group of clerics charged with certifying elections.

“Is it possible to consider the results of the election as legitimate by merely the validation of the Guardian Council?” the association said.

Perhaps more threatening to the supreme leader, the committee called on other clerics to join the fight against the government’s refusal to adequately reconsider the charges of voter fraud. The committee invoked powerful imagery, comparing the 20 protesters killed during demonstrations with the martyrs who died in the early days of the revolution and the war with Iraq, asking other clerics to save what it called “the dignity that was earned with the blood of tens of thousands of martyrs.”

The statement was posted on the association’s Web site late Saturday and carried on many other sites, including the Persian BBC, but it was impossible to reach senior clerics in the group to independently confirm its veracity.

The statement was issued after a meeting Mr. Moussavi had with the committee 10 days ago and a decision by the Guardian Council to certify the election and declare that all matters concerning the vote were closed.

But the defiance has not ended.

With heavy security on the streets, there is a forced calm. But each day, slowly, another link falls from the chain of government control. Last week, in what appeared a coordinated thrust, Mr. Moussavi, Mr. Karroubi and Mr. Khatami all called the new government illegitimate. On Saturday, Mr. Milani of Stanford said, former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani met with families of those who had been arrested, another sign that he was working behind the scenes to keep the issue alive.

“I don’t ever remember in the 20 years of Khamenei’s rule where he was clearly and categorically on one side and so many clergy were on the other side,” Mr. Milani said. “This might embolden other clergy to come forward.”

The committee of clergy was formed in the 1960s. Mr. Milani said that for years, Ayatollah Khamenei also belonged to the group, and that it had developed some political clout by backing successful candidates for national office.

Many of the accusations of fraud posted on Mr. Moussavi’s Web site Saturday had been published before, but the report did give some more specific charges.

For instance, although the government had announced that two of the losing presidential contenders had received relatively few votes in their hometowns, the documents stated that some ballot boxes in those towns contained no votes for the two men.

Michael Slackman reported from Cairo, and Nazila Fathi from Toronto.

I don't know what its worth, but I do know this. A genuine homegrown revolution is worth ten times what an externally sponsored overthrow attempt is worth.
FQ13
 

DDMac

  • Proudly Bald On
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2009, 06:25:39 AM »
Good morning FQ.
I agree with your long term opinion in most respects. But Iran will remain a "foe" to the West as long as those in power follow the Rightly Guided path outlined in the Queran. While the country is complicated, as you describe, this political disruption seems to me like a large scale repeat of what happened in Chicago during Prohibition when two CRIMINAL GANGS crossed the bright line boundaries in the gangster world. After much talk and posturing, it was resolved quickly and forcefully, allegedly by Al Capone, who orchestrated the slaughter of seven carefully chosen opponents from a rival gang on Valentine's Day. Problem resolved.
I'm sure The Iranian 7 are even now selected and, if the unpleasantries continue, there will be an ultimate attitude correction to restore the peoples thoughts to a more compliant mindset.

The Queran holds forth no provision for reconciliation. "My way or the die way"-Muhammad.

Mac.
Standing up for your Right to lay down suppressive fire since 1948!

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2009, 11:40:20 AM »
We've been playing the wait and see game for 30 years with these fanatic assholes. You are an ignorant appeaser FQ, that's why they used to steal YOUR lunch money.

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2009, 12:45:51 PM »
We've been playing the wait and see game for 30 years with these fanatic assholes. You are an ignorant appeaser FQ, that's why they used to steal YOUR lunch money.
Appeaser? Honestly, Tom if you had your way we'd be at war with half the world by Wednesday. What's the list? Venezuela, North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and maybe France if they don't shape up? ;D All I'm saying is that there is hope for a homegrown transition in Iran. I honestly don't think that the internal nature of Iran is a vital national security interest of the US. All we need is for them to drop the nuke program and stop supporting terrorism.
FQ13

tfr270

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 229
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2009, 03:59:29 PM »
Mousavi was one of the original architects of Iran's nuke program. I really don't see him dismantling it. Would a new regime stop supporting terrorism? I don't know. If they can keep distracted on their own internal politics that may slow things down. Ahmadinijad would like to develop nukes to bring around the apocalypse to fulfull the extemist end of the world scenario that his brand of religion predicts. He sure isn't going to stop developing them.
At best, if left to their own devices, there may be a bloody change happening there in the future. I'm not confident that it will benefit us. While many want us to get involved in helping the issue along I don't think we have the resources or credibility left to do that.
What are you drinking FQ? Or smoking? It sure seems to brighten the sky in your world. I might want to try some  ;D 

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #5 on: Today at 02:43:16 PM »

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2009, 04:15:51 PM »
Mousavi was one of the original architects of Iran's nuke program. I really don't see him dismantling it. Would a new regime stop supporting terrorism? I don't know. If they can keep distracted on their own internal politics that may slow things down. Ahmadinijad would like to develop nukes to bring around the apocalypse to fulfull the extemist end of the world scenario that his brand of religion predicts. He sure isn't going to stop developing them.
At best, if left to their own devices, there may be a bloody change happening there in the future. I'm not confident that it will benefit us. While many want us to get involved in helping the issue along I don't think we have the resources or credibility left to do that.
What are you drinking FQ? Or smoking? It sure seems to brighten the sky in your world. I might want to try some  ;D 
Just straight reality, mixed with a little cautious optimism. Look, we don't need ideological change in Iran, we just need behavior change. They can hate us all they want. See if I care. What we need is a realist regime who will see that the international isolation as a greater liability than nukes and Hezbollah are assets. We trade with reppressive regimes every day. China and Saudi Arabia for instance. If we can get an Iranian regime that gets that, and many, many Iranians do, then we can have stability.Unlike Carter and W, I don't believe that democracy can flourish anywhere. There has to be a culture that supports it. Democracy in Iran is not the goal, an Iran that pursues its interest through trade not weapons and proxy wars is. The problem isn't the fact that they are a tyrranical state, its that the regime clings to power through instilling a bunker mentailty in it's people, just like Castro and Kim Jong Il. A new leadership that steps out of that bunker, is a possibility though by no means a certaintey.
FQ13 

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2009, 05:07:21 PM »
 FQ, Iran HAS a "realist regime" as you call it. As long as America Govt. keeps saying they want to talk while little shitholes like N Korea thumb their nose at us with out any consequences the smart money in the Iranian Govt. will figure they can do whatever they please because the American administration lacks the manhood to do anything about it except bitch like women.
You may have studied history but you sure didn't LEARN anything from it. jimmy carter talked,and lectured, and blew a limited military action, and all he accomplished was to be humiliated for 444 days. Reagan campaigned on BEATING the crap out of our enemies and the hostages were released as he was inaugurated. Then just to drive the point home, he tried "negotiating for the Beirut hostages with the same people and got screwed for it because history shows that Iran does not negotiate with ANYONE in good faith unless there is a boot on their neck. Don't believe ME, ask Leonidas the Spartan, or Alexander the Macedonian.
As to "Bunker mentality, every despot of the 20th century used the same tactic with Lenin it was the "privileged classes" with Stalin it was "wreckers" Hitler had the Jews.  I would not be surprised to see your boy BO pick a foe (probably Conservitive gun owning Christian Veterans ) to distract the sheeple from the lousy job he is doing.
You teach Political science and History ?  I'm not surprised, you talk a lot of touchy feely bullshit that hasn't worked in 6,000 years and reject as "barbaric" the things that HAVE worked. 2 Thousand years ago Solomon said "spare the rod and spoil the child". That worked out pretty good for 1950 years till genius's like you decided OH no ! Spanking is terrible ! Look how well THATS turned out. Yes you are an ignorant appeaser, Your arguments are just as asinine and meaningless as the paper Chamberain waved as he bragged about "Peace in our time".

NOTE *** For the younger readers who may have been taught history by liberals ****
When Prime Minister of England Neville Chamberlain returned to England from selling out Czechoslovakia to Hitler He stepped off the plane and waved a folded piece of paper before the cameras and bragged that it symbolized his achievement of "Peace in our time" . The pare was in fact a blank sheet, the actual document was in a binder going through the usual diplomatic bureaucracy. It was however more symbolic than he knew, a year later Europe was at war.
Neville Chamberlain resigned in disgrace to be replaced by the more practical Churchill who had previously been dismissed as a war mongering wind bag.

fightingquaker13

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11894
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2009, 05:26:01 PM »
NOTE *** For the younger readers who may have been taught history by liberals ****
When Prime Minister of England Neville Chamberlain returned to England from selling out Czechoslovakia to Hitler He stepped off the plane and waved a folded piece of paper before the cameras and bragged that it symbolized his achievement of "Peace in our time" . The pare was in fact a blank sheet, the actual document was in a binder going through the usual diplomatic bureaucracy. It was however more symbolic than he knew, a year later Europe was at war.
Neville Chamberlain resigned in disgrace to be replaced by the more practical Churchill who had previously been dismissed as a war mongering wind bag.
Churchill, the one who also famously said "Jaw jaw is better than war war"? Look, I have no problem pulling the trigger. Why else would I be on this board? But I do think that when your enemies are throwing grenades at each other, a smart soldier stays in his foxhole. If this thing does peter out there is always time to greenlight the Israeli's (which Bumblin' Joe Biden appeared to do today. Whether this was a message or just foot in mouth disease God only knows.) ::)
FQ13

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: Hope for Iran?
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2009, 05:39:59 PM »
Churchill, the one who also famously said "Jaw jaw is better than war war"? Look, I have no problem pulling the trigger. Why else would I be on this board? But I do think that when your enemies are throwing grenades at each other, a smart soldier stays in his foxhole. If this thing does peter out there is always time to greenlight the Israeli's (which Bumblin' Joe Biden appeared to do today. Whether this was a message or just foot in mouth disease God only knows.) ::)
FQ13

The most important foot feast from Greasy Joe was when he said that within 6 months of the inauguration  the socialist usurping bastard would be tested to see if he had anything besides a big mouth. Biden was right just like EVERYBODY agreed at the time, BO has been tested and found to be an indecisive wind bag. This will cost us badly in the long run. This will result in some thing as significant as 9-11 because those who hate what the American people stand for do not have to fear the American regime.
As for your comment about Churchill it is important to note that it was made During the so called "Phony war" when England was committed to war but was scrambling to get forces in place in Europe.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk