Freedom in Iran, a realization of Bush's plan for the Middle East

Discussion in 'Iran' started by American Horse, Jun 20, 2009.

  1. American Horse
    Offline

    American Horse AKA "Mustang"

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,741
    Thanks Received:
    892
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    The Hoosier Heartland
    Ratings:
    +938
    Their question is “Where is my vote? This is what the signs they are holding say in both Farsi and English.

    This election has afforded them a world stage to look across the border to the West, towards free Iraq, a people only a border away, a conveniently symbolic direction, and ask: “Why not us too?” It can’t be lost on Iranians that their own country's government did everything it could to discourage or cut short the new political freedom the Iraqi’s are now enjoying. That is a big part of the reason that their signs are also written in English. It's an appeal to the country which has clearly worked for democracy in their region. They are speaking directly to America, as brothers and sisters in in their hope for democracy.

    The desperation of the Mullas and Ahmadinejad is revealed by the fact that some of the "Militia" are Arab speakers, unable to speak Farsi (per WSJ article 19-June-09 "The Fear is Gone"), all the while in Iraq a judge recently found illegal a law that deprived an Iraqi citizen of his legal rights. That is what the rule of law is supposed to do.

    But it could easily be said that what’s happening in Iran right now is a direct result of the freedom in Iraq. We can pretty conclusively say that it would not be happening now, except for that. The change of Iran into a true democracy would also help us in a moral victory in Afghanistan over the Taliban, and everywhere over the Al Qaeda; who knows, even Pakistan would eventually be favorably influenced.

    All at once we’d have a tier of democracies, hopefully, soon stable across the region. The whole region from Turkey to India might be consolidated as democracies. What a remarkable legacy that would be for an American President, starting with President Bush, and fostered to completion by President Obama.

    Map of the region from Turkey to India – Connecting the dots….
    [​IMG]
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Agnapostate
    Offline

    Agnapostate BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,860
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Quake State
    Ratings:
    +344
    I cannot see a sound moral objection to the forcible removal of dictatorships and installment of democratic governments; the military force that would be required to accomplish it would be a less severe authoritarian imposition than the policies of the dictatorship had it remained in place would have been.

    However, there is a critical divergence between the theoretical model of a clean regime change and the actual manifestation of it, not least of which being the fact that the motives of those who favor regime changes are not the purest in nature. Regarding your mention of "democracy" in Iraq, there was most certainly support of the dictator Saddam Hussein when it served the interests of the ruling administration here. John F. Kennedy, perhaps the most radically interventionist president in American history, certainly supported the Baathist revolt in Iraq when military head of state Abd al-Karim Qasim became too "uppity" for his administration's interests.

    The same was true shortly prior, when his government continued the anti-Castro campaign in Cuba initiated by his predecessor, Dwight Eisenhower, through the approval and involvement in the Bay of Pigs invasion and related attempts to assassinate Castro himself, all portions of "Operation Mongoose," or the "Cuban Project." Certain elements of that plan could accurately be called manifestations of state terrorism, no matter how much a nationalistic military veteran like our admin is unwilling to admit it. To his credit, Kennedy did oppose the proposed Operation Northwoods, which would have involved a violent and destructive false-flag operation that entailed the murder of American civilians so as to blame the incident on the Castro government and thus justify an invasion. But the actions of the government at that time are all the more appalling because this campaign did not involve opposition to the full-fledged dictator Fidel Castro, but to a far younger Fidel Castro, who was only a recently declared Marxist-Leninist and had overseen the establishment of more equitable economic policies that involved the provision of greater well-being than his predecessor, the dictator Fulgencio Batista, had ever been able or willing to bring about. Such a campaign was hardly supported by anti-authoritarian sentiment.

    The same is true for the CIA-backed removal of Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz and Chilean president Salvador Allende, only to have the latter replaced by the brutal military dictator Augusto Pinochet, not to mention the support of the Contras, Somoza, Batista, Trujillo, Noriega, etc. These dictatorial regimes were supported by proponents of the same interventionist ideology that George W. Bush was later to put into action yet again. And it's thus only necessary to mention the most obvious manifestation of American government supported regime change that Iranians would well remember: Operation Ajax, which entailed the removal of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq and the parliamentary democracy and empowerment of the monarch Mohammad Rezā Shāh Pahlavi, who subsequently ruled over Iran with an iron fist, terrorizing the citizenry with his brutal SAVAK police until the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the return of Ayataollah Ruhollah Khomeini. It's due to that factor that it's only appropriate for the American head of state and government representatives to refrain from excessively meddlesome actions, lest the "hard-liners" seize on this as justification for their continued rule, which they can then claim is warranted by a need for a powerful defense to resist American intervention...the same mentality empowers the neoconservatives of this country.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. American Horse
    Offline

    American Horse AKA "Mustang"

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    5,741
    Thanks Received:
    892
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    The Hoosier Heartland
    Ratings:
    +938
    It's a cruel world; Eisenhower, Kennedy, Etal. believed that sincerely; the Iraqis, Iranians, and hopefully the Afghanistanis, and even the Pakistanis are all aware of that fact in its current permutation, and they will begin to appreciate what we've tried to do because there is no one else who will even begin to try. If the last two rebuff our noble efforts (Yes we are capable of trying to do the right thing), they will have a long wait for a better world, at least those of their people who are the most enlightened.

    The last two, I believe because of their trible nature lending itself to lawlessness, will have the most change to endure and will resist it most, so change in the middle will be slow. They will be a tough nut to crack, and the turnover of our people does not help us get the job done.
     
  4. Missourian
    Offline

    Missourian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    16,281
    Thanks Received:
    4,799
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +8,124
    I totally agree with this excellent post, with the exception of seven words.

    President Obama's "We won't meddle" doctrine will not cement his name into the history books as a defender of Iranian freedom.
     
  5. Sunni Man
    Offline

    Sunni Man Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    40,001
    Thanks Received:
    5,328
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Patriotic American Muslim
    Ratings:
    +12,444
    Just more naked American Imperialism

    Bomb the unwashed brown people into democracys because we know whats best for them.
     
  6. lcrackel
    Offline

    lcrackel Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Riverside, Ca
    Ratings:
    +1
    I am deeply sorry for the all of the Iranian posters and citizens in the United States that are asking this question, but the truth of the matter is that you never had a vote. Once the hardliners took control of the political arena, the election process was only a piece of fiction to be used to deceive as many as possible. You are living in a fantasy land big time if you think the hardliners will ever give that up and as long as any country maintains a combined of both civil and religious power that is inter-twined - it will remain that way.
     
  7. L.K.Eder
    Offline

    L.K.Eder unbannable non-troll

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    20,337
    Thanks Received:
    3,615
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    theartching thapphireth
    Ratings:
    +6,824
    stupid propaganda.

    i'd like to vomit now
     
  8. lcrackel
    Offline

    lcrackel Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Riverside, Ca
    Ratings:
    +1
    What are you calling propaganda? - your post is vague and incoherent
     
  9. Agnapostate
    Offline

    Agnapostate BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,860
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Quake State
    Ratings:
    +344
    The immorality of the world manifests itself through more elements than merely the cruel and "rough" nature that you believe necessitates decisive military force to secure genuine accomplishments. It also manifests itself through the motivations of those who would support the interventionist program that you do not because of some desire to do good or spread democratic or libertarian mores, but because of genuine imperial ambitions. Support for the imperialism of whatever radically interventionist government happens to be in place here often stems from an interest in financial profit or the accomplishment of less dubious ideological goals than the spread of democracy. There was little "authoritarian" element in Mossadeq's parliamentary democracy to oppose; it was objection to his oil nationalization schemes that formed a basis for opposition to him, because attempts to secure national profit for a national citizenry angered foreign profiteers. Anti-democratic imperialism thus served as their "solution."
     
  10. L.K.Eder
    Offline

    L.K.Eder unbannable non-troll

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    20,337
    Thanks Received:
    3,615
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    theartching thapphireth
    Ratings:
    +6,824
    i am calling the original post of this thread stupid propaganda.

    i can understand your accusation of vagueness, but what was incoherent about my post?
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

iran map img