egafd.com

It's a shitty situation for sure....

Personally I don't like either side. On one side we have evangelical, power hungry Americans who are in an economic war with China. China's busy buying gold and diamond mining companies in Africa, whilst also eyeing up South American oil, and America's panicking and needs power, influence and control of middle eastern oil.

Them we have the fanatical, female suppressing, intolerant, dark aged view around the middle east who basically see every other religious culture as something that needs wiping off the map. (Especially Atheism)

America stood against European imperialism for 200 years, and that's basically what they're now becoming, in everything but name.

Considering these points deeply, what do we do? Iran is on record that they are developing nuclear technology and stated publicly that they'd wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. How would we feel in the west if they actually carried this through and we'd let them develop the weapons to do it? Apart from the British everyone stood back watching Hitler for years letting him get dug in all over Europe when a faster response could have stopped millions of lives been lost on ALL sides. If we idly watch Iran build up a nuclear arsenal, and they kill millions of people using them, no one could say, "it wasn't our fault" or "we never saw it coming".

Then again should Europe let America do what the hell it likes, and what are the consequences?

A lot of American policies stink.....big time, and evangelical power is on the rise over the pond which makes me uneasy. Neither Islamic nor Christian fanaticism is ideal and I think we coming to a situation where 'doing nothing' will be just as bad as a new war itself in the long run.

Bombing uranium facilities seems a real dumb idea, but so is letting fanatical, delusional Muslims get their hands on such awesome weaponry.

It seems Keith and Dibble are both equally correct/incorrect in their own way because fanatics never see sense -that's why they're fanatical- and neither side will back down.

I do think that Iranian nuclear capability doesn't look good for Israel and the surrounding area, and I can also see a strong Iran backing up Pakistan over Kashmir too.

It seems to come down to which devil you side with, and you know the old saying "better the devil you know......"

i wouldn't get to worried about irans russian missile systems,iraq had many russian weapons during both gulf wars and they weren't as good as ours also they were not as well trained as our forces in using them,saying that it would be folly to invade iran with the coalitions commitments around the world iran is a much larger country than iraq.

I always thought the phrase "When you're in a hole stop digging" made sense. But perhaps Dubya thinks it means start digging another one.
It seems like Ahmadinejad was losing popular support in Iran but sabre rattling and threats from the US will rally the Iranians behind him.

Mart

I dont believe he has any real power anyway, that lies with the ayatolloh's (SP) and religious clerics, anyway I,m all for a Islamic state, just not in GB.
fuck me, I,m up early, may as well have a cuppa.

How about "Operation Fuck Persia"?

Sam Slater wrote:

> It's a shitty situation for sure....
>
> Personally I don't like either side. On one side we have
> evangelical, power hungry Americans who are in an economic war
> with China. China's busy buying gold and diamond mining
> companies in Africa, whilst also eyeing up South American oil,
> and America's panicking and needs power, influence and control
> of middle eastern oil.
>
> Them we have the fanatical, female suppressing, intolerant,
> dark aged view around the middle east who basically see every
> other religious culture as something that needs wiping off the
> map. (Especially Atheism)

Sam, you follow the verbiage far better than you do the facts. Religious tolerance is enshrined in Iran's constitution and has been since the birth of the Persian empire about 3,500 years ago. For example, Iran is one of the most hospitable places in the Middle East for Jews and still has a significant Jewish population.

Iran is also the most democratic state in the region after Israel. So although The Sun talks about "mad mullahs", Iran is an ancient, diverse and complex society. It currently has a right wing, hawkish Prime Minister and Bush carries the blame for his election - the liberals were gaining ground in Iran until Bush placed Iran in the "axis of evil" and threatened war.

You're trying to present a one-sided issue as a two-sided case. Nope - the US has wanted to kick the shit out of Iran since 1979 when Iran opted out of the Empire. Just like Vietnam, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Grenada, Iraq and Somalia, this is a case of one-sided American aggression against a regime (with oil) that it doesn't like.

However much you, I or Bush dislike the Iranian government, that is NOT the basis for war. There are far worse regimes in the Middle East, notably Saudi Arabia, but of course Bush's Saudi buddies aren't going to be branded as "evil", even though they certainly are.

Lizard wrote:

> I dont believe he has any real power anyway, that lies with the
> ayatolloh's (SP) and religious clerics

You're wrong. The Iranian parliament is very powerful and a good counterweight to the mullahs. It's a shame that the Prime Minister is such a conservative nutter, but he was elected on the basis of Bush threatening war ever since 9/11.

A well-written rebuttal, Keith. Please excuse me if I don?t post an equally comprehensive and considered one myself, but I?m afraid I don?t have unlimited spare time.

However, I will address one or two points -

?Class?. Well, it is relevant, because it seems to me that it?s only pretentious middleclass people (who like to view themselves as romantic, banner waving, class warriors) who hate America and our western free market society. A society that gives them a very cosy, cosseted, guaranteed pension, lifestyle. The aristocracy doesn?t have a problem with America; neither do the proletariat who are quite fond of Florida, Las Vegas and New York. It?s just the middle classes. Not all of them, for sure. But, it would seem, a large proportion. But if America and our western society is so awful why is it that they don?t fuck off to Tehran, the Gaza Strip, Venezuela or some other such skanky nation that would seem to be more in tune with their idiotic, pretentious, sentiments? Don?t expect me to stop talking about class (and the middle classes in particular) Keith; because it seems to me they are at the epicenter of all social problems afflicting both the UK and wider western society. Hey, I don?t hate them for being middleclass, I hate them for being poncy, privileged, pretentious knob heads who are pleased to look upon themselves as modern day Che Guevaras fighting for the oppressed and underprivileged of the world (whether they like it or not). Well, I?m one of those from an oppressed and underprivileged background, and I say, fuck off! We don?t want your self imbued moral superiority. We don?t want your arrogance and condescension. But most of all we don?t want your poncy bourgeois politics!



?To presume that our society is better than another kind of society is arrogant and ignorant.?

And to make such a statement is monumentally pretentious and middleclass! This is the ?moral equivalence? argument expounded by many a privileged uni-educated middleclass person who thinks it is cool and romantic to make like Che Guevara and spew forth vacuous slogans and leftist sociological claptrap. Well, I say bollocks to that. Western society IS better and more enlightened. We are open to science and technological advancement. We have a social structure that assigns pretty much equal rights and opportunities whether you are a man, woman, gay boy, black or yellow. It may not be perfect, but it seems a sight more equitable than having one section of society (women) treated as virtual chattels of men and far worse treatment for those of a pink persuasion. We have a proper democratic system. We are not subject the edicts and whims of nutty old men with white breads. We are free to practice our religion (if we are daft enough) or no religion at all. Hey, you try telling the Mullahs that you are converting to Christianity or Atheism. It won?t help you telling them that you are a British middleclass person who totally respects their culture. I fully accept that to an Iranian who doesn?t know any different, Iranian culture is better. It all depends on your point of view. But here in the west we have a western point of view and our general view is that, compared with western democracy, Islamic and other third world cultures are backward and, well, crap. We shouldn?t be mealy mouthed and middleclass about this. Let?s get it out in the open. Not all things are equal ? some things are higher, some things are lower, something are faster, some things are slower, some things are better, some things are?Well, you get my point.

Another very silly thing you said was about GWB wanting to steal the Iranians oil. I mean, where?s he going to put it? Surely he can?t have enough 20-gallon drums on his ranch? And why would he need to steal anything - he?s already minted. Of course I?m just being facetious here. I know what you meant. But it is still a very silly thing to say because you know it is not literally true, it is a slogan of the left. A particularly idiotic and hysterical one at that. There is a huge western imperative to keep the oil flowing. It currently underwrites every aspect of our lives - of your life and the comfy western lives of all those pretentious, middleclass, silly bastards who say, ?GWB wants to steal the oil?. There has never been any suggestion of ?stealing oil? the only strategic aim is that it keeps flowing and thereby keeps your wheels turning, keeps your lights on, and keeps bread on your supermarket?s shelves.

Oh, and another thing. I don?t hate yer, Keith. I like yer. But I certainly don?t want to be middleclass myself and have to attend all those silly student demos and ?Save The Whale? marches. I have better things to do.



Officer Dibble

With respect, strictlybb, you're being far too generous in your praise of the Iranian regime.

You're right in saying that the Iranian (Persian) culture is an ancient and diverse one, but dead wrong if you think that the current regime is a true "democracy".

Yes, Iran has a Parliament (the Majlis), to which elections are held every 4 years. But all candidates for these elections first have to be approved by the Council of Guardians headed by the ultra-conservative Ayatollah Khamenei (not to be confused with Ayatollah Khomeini) who are - for the most part - not far removed from being the "Mad Mullahs" that The Sun constantly rails about.

Additionally, the Majlis isn't really much of a counterweight to the Council, serving basically to simply rubber-stamp its decisions.

The Conservatives also exercise direct control of all the main organs of state such as the Interior Ministry, foreign affairs, economics, the military and the Revolutionary Guards, which is a parallel military force whose job it is to (a) protect the "Revolution" internally (in other words slap down the opposition) and (b) export the Iranian brand of "Islamic Revolution" abroad.

So while the "democracy" of the Islamic Republic of Iran might look good on paper, the Mullahs in charge are really only paying lip-service to the concept for the sake of appearances. Basically there's no way in Hell that they are going to be removed from power short of internal revolution or (not that I'm advocating such a venture, mind) invasion from the outside.

You also have to remember that the current Majlis is pretty much chokka with hardliners and conservatives, given that most prospective liberal candidates boycotted the last elections in protest to what they regarded as excessive meddling by the Mullahs in the electoral process and their attempts to undermine still further what little real power the Majlis has (which was a counter-productive move if you ask me, but there you go).

There IS as you say a degree of religious tolerance in Iran - but it is only a degree. Religious minorities (Jews, Christians) are allowed representation in the Majlis from their own communities - but once again, it's representation that's only in proportion to the size of the respective populations so it's never going to pose any sort of threat to the Mullahs' power.

I'll give you another example of such tolerance: In Teheran there is a huge walled complex, which I've driven around the outside of but didn't go inside. My Iranian (Muslim) hosts explained to me that it's basically a large park with facilities for Tehran's (small) Christian minority to go where they can drink alcohol, gamble and do whatever they like - as long as they don't bring it outside: There are severe penalties for Christians caught selling alcohol to Muslims, although it has to be said that there is a thriving black market in all of Iran's major cities (much of it controlled by the Mullahs who, despite their professed Islamic fervor, still aren't averse to making a bob or two!) on which you can get just about anything from booze to dope to pirate DVDs of the latest Hollywood blockbusters to hardcore porn, provided of course that you have the money to pay for it.

It also has to be said, strictlybb, that the Iranian theocratic regime has a truly miserable human rights record, with widespread use of things like torture and imprisonment without trial. I just don't understand where you get this idea that the Iranian Islamic government is such a shining beacon of democracy from.

And I speak from first-hand experience of the country - I married an Iranian, I've been there and seen the place for myself and I know and have met a lot of Iranians, both over here and in Iran - who (it has to be said) are for the most part a thoroughly decent bunch of folk, very hospitable to visitors, cultured and generally have a largely positive view of Westerners and Western culture (as opposed to Western politicians).

It's just a shame that their wonderful country has been taken over by religions fruitcakes - remembering that the Iranian Revolution of the late '70s originally started out as a much more general movement for change (Marxists, liberals, nationalists, intellectuals, students as well as Islamists) before being hijacked by the Islamic radicals.