The all encompassing Iran thread - Part 3

then thats their own damn fault.....

 

I doubt you are English.

No English person (who isn't a member of the BNP or possibly Veritas/UKIP) is proud of England's imperialistic past.

Do you even know the Anglo-Iran Oil issue?

 

1) you will lose that bet

2) This English person is....the British gave more to the world than they took....and they took a lot.....

3) No

 

You should inform yourself before making such a stupid comment . Your country is to blame for half of the worlds problems today. Its so hard for me to believe for a country as small as England could create so much problems

 

if an opposition wants to be successful in Iran the first criteria is being independent from West... it is the first rule in the book, in oil reach countries like Iran public trust towards foreigners is just too low to take the risk of using foreign funding!.. again going back to history perhaps the best political movement in Iran's history is Mossadegh's movement and if we are to use it as a role model for future democratic/secular movements then getting help from the West will not make any sense!

I know it is hard to believe but you should know that American secret service is considered amateurish in comparison to the Iranian one when it comes to middle east (don't turn this into a pissing contest, we all know how good they are in Europe or South America but we are talking middle east), specially American secret service active within Iran is almost useless...
Iranian secret service roots back to Savak (created by CIA and Mossad in Shah's time) but it has years of experience and learnt a lot from the areas that Savak failed.. so one should be too naive to think American secret agents can get in touch with Iranian activists without Iranian secret service knowing about it... it has been tried before and failed for more than 26 years now!

no it wouldn't because of 2 main reasons:
1. Iranian public (well again, any public from oil reach countries) don't trust foreigners and ppl who have close ties with Western/foreign powers..
2. US usually goes for the wrong ppl because the right ppl are hard to negotiate with as they are not ready to compromise or work for US interests.. in Iraq's case it was Chalabi that gained Bush's support because it was way easier to get him to do things US wants than getting Jafari to do them... well the problem was that ppl didn't want Chalabi!

I give 0.001% chance that Bush's fund will find the right target without being detected... meanwhile I give 99.999% chance that this fund will indeed go to waste and Iranian government will confront any activist by claiming he is on Bush's payroll... and this time they have the numbers to back it!

NO Clinton era finished before the reformist parliament in Iran came to power (6 years ago).. Clinton had a valid reason for not trusting Khatami because during his time reformist only had the presidency but when Bush became president reformist in Iran had presidency, parliament and full set of reformist ministers in government cabinet... so if Bush actually wanted to he could have saved this $85million then and ease up some of the sanctions leading to economic success of Khatami and ultimately reformist government... then with Iran's help in Afghanistan they could have opened a window for direct talks using parliament support it would have been all downhill from there...

 

some interesting things about Muslim in China (take a break for you guys. )

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/w...tml?ex=1142571600&en=10f8cdce3994c189&ei=5070

Some background here:

The largest group of Chinese Muslim ethnic called Hui. In the north, Hui are most originated from Persia and Central Asia area, and in the south, Hui are most originated from Arabs. One famous Hui is Bai Chongxi (south Hui from Guangxi) was considered the one of the best general and military mind in recent history.

If only those Iraq generals can have 1/10th of his brain ...

 

1) thats typical of the arab/muslim world ....blame every one else for their problems and the fact that they have not developed even ONE legitimate democracy EVER...

2) A small country no doubt....but a BIG player for many centuries on the global stage because they refused to be pushed around like you lot are/have been and always will be...

3) Most British former colonies are democractic these days.... as opposed to the former colonies of the other colonial powers..... USA, Canada, Australia,India, New Zealand and on and on......the British gave much of the world language, rule of law, democrary, transportation and organisation....what the fcuk has any arab/muslim country ever done ???

 

Everybody in the world knows about the mess you British created by your colonization , most of the problems in the Middle East today are as direct result of the British colonization, and today since you guys aren’t a super power anymore you bow down to Uncle Sam every time he asks you guys for a favor. And lastly don’t put me in a category of Muslim/Arab , I am not religious , that’s like me calling you a Christian instead of British , you sound like a mentally retarded red haired step child.

 

there you go again, blaming someone else for your many, many inadequcies...if your forebears where too stupid and backward enough to let the people from an Island off the coast of northern europe thousands of miles away (an Island that would fit three times in the state of Texas) push you around it's your own damn fault....

 

Here is a very interesting article on why Iran is not just Israel's problem:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1139395605629&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
Some of the quotes from the artcile:

Were Iran to "destroy" Israel, at a huge human cost to itself, it would only be realizing the dream of its own mortal enemies.

In 1980 Israel knocked out the French-made Iraqi nuclear weapons center, even though the bomb that Saddam Hussein was making was to be dropped on Teheran.

 

Actually the Mid East problem also have a lot to do with USA. The main screw up work is that British is able to create division between India and Pakistan to create a big fight between them. British is only partially for the fight between India and China. British also misled USA in coup in Iran that eventually breed Islam Revolution. Even though British draw the division for Israel/Palesten but I don't blame them on that one (after the holocaust, many of countries feel that Jews need their own place, but too bad it is at cost of someone else). But if those people still fight with each other, they better blame themself not to figure out a good way to get out the trap. Also that is true, Brtish left things better than French, Spanard, etc. Look the mess in Latin America.

Actually most of great empire started with a small group or country. From historic point, British Empire is rather short. The main failure is that its home base is so small, so even with their own ethnic people spread around big places such as America, Canada, Australia, they "lost" those same people later on.

Only place they screwed up is Hong Kong. They should set that up way before they have to turn over.

 

I learned a while ago not to go to jpost for information but only to get a different view on things. While the article raises "some" interesting and valid points, there are a number of things that are untrue and are making ludicrous assumptions. I would quote and explain but as I'm sure you guessed it...I'm too lazy.

 

Read the book All the Shahs man and then come talk to me , you sound like 16 year old illiterate English gangster

 

Try not to be lazy this once and be so kind and explain what is untrue.

 

I can't understand why Iran gets so much representation on this forum. As an Iranian I have to say we overrate ourselves. There are a lot of countries that are more "important" or shall we say more critical to the world economically, socially, militariliy and what have you. Russia, China, Germany, India, Brazil, Netherlands, Japan, Sweden, UK, Canada, Australia and France just to name a few. I don't see a separate thread about any of them. You guys are so proud to anonymously boast about how great Iran is on the internet, but in real life situation most Iranians that I've met wouldn't even admit that they have Iranian blood. I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss anything about Iran, but I definitely feel like some of you guys are showing your faces a little bit too much around political forum which might explain why people are becoming resentful to you.

 

It would be difficult due to some domestic political considerations in both countries, but I believe Israel could find the means to reach a modus vivendi -- and eventually a very productive strategic relationship -- with Iran, if it pursued its foreign policy independently of the US. In other words, instead of finding levers to push US foreign policy in its directions, it acted independently in seeking an acceptable arrangement with Iran. And then went about using its influence to sell that arrangement to the US.

Iran has no interest seeing the Arab-Israeli dispute settled on American terms, leaving the region under American hegemony, while the Arabs become united and later start looking at Iran's direction with covetous interest. This was the very true in terms of the calculations of regime 'hardliners' in Iran during the Oslo process, and today with American foreign policy taking a more imperialistic and aggressive posture under PNAC premises, even true with regard to broader Iranian interests beyond factional ones.

Domestic considerations, however, would make this a somewhat difficult proposition for both the Israelis and Iran. Still, if the Israelis first decided that they could abide by some 'face saving' formula for Iran's ideologues in establishing some superficial structures that in reality would strengthen Israel's ability to govern Palestine (albeit under a rubric different than the one found in Zionism), I believe they could find a very promising agreement waiting for them in Iran. In doing so, Israel would have to act independently and not further complicate the issues by bringing in American considerations into the equation. Instead, the two countries would basically work towards strengthening each other's hands in their respective immediate neighborhoods instead of Israel working to give the US (albeit under various degrees of Israeli influence) a bigger role than it already enjoys.

An independent Israel, trying to really become a part of the 'region' rather than a foreign outpost, from a strategic standpoint is a natural ally of Iran. On the other hand, as a foreign outpost with intimite relations with an outside power (i.e. the US), Israel and Iran have diametrically opposed interests unless the problems between that 'outside power' and Iran are solved as well.

 

Or Iran can stand by Israel against their Arab foes...

 

just finished reading the article from jpost. Although, the writer's core message is to convince others do the dirty deed and attack Iran, but I must say that I agree with him/her in some of the aftermath benefitors, and I would fuking hate to see that cuz both civilizations have had much to offer not only to the region but much beyond.
After having also read IM's proposition just now, I must say that's a pretty enlightened, and beneficial to both Israel and Iran, approach to the problems. Granted America would not want to give up its hegemony, but the American Jewish community would back up what Israel thinks is her best interest, so that would convince the policy makers to leave Israel's decision making be in the hands of Israeli politicians.

 

Basically it becomes a big pissing contest, myself to blame for it as much as anyone else.

I think that everyone should be proud of where they are from, I do think that some Irani posters around here, IM for example are just way too full of shit for their own good.

Then it becomes about Israel and then the US. But then you have some really good Iranian posters such as Tri who give an honest informed post when they are here.

 

We all want to see some things change and even though Israel would love to stay out of another war, if things continue as they are, what is the alternative, turn a blind eye on Iran?

 

Iran Before/After

http://badraie.com/beforeafter.htm

 

Great propaganda!

 

Thank you. Now all I need is Kami Kakashi's seal of approval.

 

The importance of this report is not its specific comments, but rather in showing the focus of US foreign policy at this juncture.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/16/p...&en=fcc3c73dec0f63f4&ei=5094&partner=homepage

 

Wow what a great site you provided theorator , half of the after pictures aren’t even in Iran , hey btw how is your parsi lessons going?