Mustafa Domanic is an online activist and blogger. He contributes to several blogs on Turkish current affairs as well as global political issues including foreignsight.blogspot.com.
Close.
Mustafa Domanic
Istanbul, Turkey
Mustafa Domanic is an online activist and blogger. He contributes to several blogs on Turkish current affairs as well as global political issues including foreignsight.blogspot.com.
more »
To those who claim that the US has a moral superiority over Iran and therefore the right to do:
When I think of a country in the Middle East, or even in the world that is the true nemesis of a western style liberal democracy, whose state promotes fundamentalism and society breeds extremism, I do not think of Iran, I think of Saudi Arabia; America’s best friend in the Middle East.
Osama Bin Laden is Saudi, and a very rich one as well – purely driven by ideology, not desperation. Al-Qaeda is a Saudi founded organisation. 9/11 was thought of, planned out and mainly carried out by Saudi extremists. Saudi oil money finances and supports Islamic extremism all over the world from the Philippines to England, from the Balkans to Israel.
If you are really talking about a threat – not even to world peace, because I know our definitions of world peace are quite different – but to the American people, you would worry about Saudi Arabia, not Iran.
Oh, but of course, I forgot that Saudi Arabia is a loyal client of the US, providing a constant flow of oil and logistical support when necessary. The Saudi royal family – by far the most corrupt, oppressive, decadent regime in the region – is a good friend of your administration.
Then I guess you have two different moral standards: one that applies to you and your friends, clients, etc., and one that applies to your enemies.
And let us not even begin with America’s “moral” credentials. I don’t have to start with native Americans, I believe fifty years in Central America (Nicaragua, Panama, Chile) and the Middle East (Iran, Iraq, Palestine) are ample evidence of ‘American might makes right’. I will not elaborate.
I know some of you actually believe in this moral superiority illusion. I don’t know what to say to you except that your media and your government has been doing an excellent job of brainwashing you. Open your eyes! Others, though, who are aware of the dilemma, honestly, why don’t you just say what your administration is really after in Iran, and drop the moral crap!
I believe, not only in principle, but also in practice, that nuclear proliferation is not a solution. If climate change doesn't annihilate us, then nuclear weapons will.
However, I think Mustafa has a crucially valid point. I would put it this way: Current Iran policy of the US, coupled with Washington's decades of meddling in that country's internal affairs, is effectively stripping Iran of a feasible alternative to pursuing nuclear ambitions. Therefore, while I believe Iran 'should not' possess nuclear weapons, I think under the present circumstances they are forced to build that capacity.
If the US really wishes a non-nuclear Iran, it should seriously review its own policies and present that country with more alternatives. Threatening to bomb and invade the country leaves them little to choose from.
On the other hand, I disagree with Mustafa that Iran's only deterrent against the US is having nuclear weapons. I believe, in fact, the current American stance only plays into the hands of extreme right wing hardliners in both countries, who wish to manipulate domestic public opinion with an ever present external threat.
American neo-cons probably 'want' Iran to have nuclear ambitions: they know Iranians' premature nuclear operations pose no substantial threat to advance nuclear states like theirs and Israel, while it gives them the excuse to be actively involved in Iran's affairs.
Consequently, there is another deterrent that Iran could employ against US aggression, which Tehran made very little use of so far: world public opinion. The biggest war of our century is the propaganda war. Bush administration has trumped its way into Iraq by convincing its people that Iraq posed a serious threat to their country. Saddam, a failure that he always was from a PR point of view, did poorly in trying to convince the world otherwise.
If Iran can convince the American people (granted, much harder than convincing the rest of the world) that they pose no threat to them at all, it will disarm the American propaganda machine and gain Iran some supporters in the western world. And even the US cannot invade a country (even harder now than before) without the backing of its own people and at least the prentention of an international 'coalition'.
Winning the propaganda war is a difficult endeavour (just look at the fanaticism of some of the comments posted here), but Iran has more chance in this alley than in the nuclear alley. They already scored a big point with the intelligence report (and they know it).
"Iran needs nukes to defend itself against America"?
"North Korea wasn't attacked by America because they have nukes"?
How much longer must we endure hearing such utter nonsense? Does the Left really have no stronger argument to use to buttress their nonsense than these two howlers?
No, nukes are _not_ useful to Iran to defend itself against America. The only country that successfully defended itself against America with nukes was the Soviet Union. But at what a cost! The expense of keeping up with the arms race was a major cause (if not the only cause) of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
And no, North Korean nukes had _nothing_ to do with they weren't attacked. It is the way North Korea holds the South Korean capital, Seoul, hostage that is the reason. For even before they had nukes, when everybody _knew_ they did not have nukes, we could not attack. Why? Because the North Koreans have _huge_ batteries of artillery aimed at Seoul, so that we know that once we attack, they will bombard Seoul causing immense civilian casualties. The South Korean government would not forgive us for this, even though it is really the North's fault if they die.
The only alternative that might prevent this is a _massive_ nuclear strike to take out those batteries. Come to think of it, the resulting nuclear winter might be the best answer to China's refusal to cooperate on global warming;)
Now perhaps Iran would be willing to stoop so low as to imitate North Korea's inhumanity, but then why are there so many _apologists_ for such inhumanity on the Left, especially in the _European_ Left?
I love all these so-called American patriots coming in here and claiming that Iran is destablizing the middle east. Have these people checked their headlines oh for the last 60 years. We just launched a disastrous and unprovoked war in the heart of the middle east that has virtually torn Iraq into three parts, and somehow Iran is destablizing the middle east. Israel our prinicipal ally in the globe has launced attacks against two Arab countries just in the last 8 months, forget about their 60 year history of apartheid and wars of conquest. My personal highlight of Israeli History is the 1956 war in which they tried to steal the Suez Canal and where forced to withdraw by arch Islamist-loving Dwight Eisenhower.
I WILL BET ANY PERSON IN THE WORLD 10,000 DOLLARS IN A BET, WHO IS MORE LIKELY TO FIRE THE FIRST SHOT IN A WAR, ILL PUT MY MONEY ON IRAN AND YOU GUYS PUT YOUR MONEY ON THE WASHINGTON/TEL AVIV UNITY GOVERNMENT.
FOR YOU GAMBLING ODDS MAKERS LETS LOOK AT PAST BETTING PERFORMANCE:
Iran: last time Iran/Persia initiated an invasion was sometime in the middle part of the 19th century when Nader Shah tried to conquer northern India.
AMERICA: HAS FOUGHT ALL OF THE FOLLOWING WARS, BOMBINGS, POLICE ACTIONS JUST SINCE 1980:
1. SHOOTING DOWN OF IRANIAN CIVIL AIRLINER (SEE USS VINCENES)
2. SHELLING OF LEBANON AND BEIRUT, 1980S
3. Grenada: that was a real imminent threat
4. Somalia
5. Bosnia
6. Kosovo
7. Iraq (twice)
8. Afghanistan
9. Panama
10. Haiti
I WONDER WHO YOU WOULD BET ON. The world opinion polls are right, and our own militarist history proves them right, we have launched a war or military invasion or some kind of bombing against some perceived threat, on average every 3 years. IT IS OUR OWN MILITARIST, ZIONIST, AND CORPORATIST GOVERNMENT THAT IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO OUR PEOPLE AND THE PEOPLE OF THE REST OF THE WORLD.
I love all these so-called American patriots coming in here and claiming that Iran is destablizing the middle east. Have these people checked their headlines oh for the last 60 years. We just launched a disastrous and unprovoked war in the heart of the middle east that has virtually torn Iraq into three parts, and somehow Iran is destablizing the middle east. Israel our prinicipal ally in the globe has launced attacks against two Arab countries just in the last 8 months, forget about their 60 year history of apartheid and wars of conquest. My personal highlight of Israeli History is the 1956 war in which they tried to steal the Suez Canal and where forced to withdraw by arch Islamist-loving Dwight Eisenhower.
I WILL BET ANY PERSON IN THE WORLD 10,000 DOLLARS IN A BET, WHO IS MORE LIKELY TO FIRE THE FIRST SHOT IN A WAR, ILL PUT MY MONEY ON IRAN AND YOU GUYS PUT YOUR MONEY ON THE WASHINGTON/TEL AVIV UNITY GOVERNMENT.
FOR YOU GAMBLING ODDS MAKERS LETS LOOK AT PAST BETTING PERFORMANCE:
Iran: last time Iran/Persia initiated an invasion was sometime in the middle part of the 19th century when Nader Shah tried to conquer northern India.
AMERICA: HAS FOUGHT ALL OF THE FOLLOWING WARS, BOMBINGS, POLICE ACTIONS JUST SINCE 1980:
1. SHOOTING DOWN OF IRANIAN CIVIL AIRLINER (SEE USS VINCENES)
2. SHELLING OF LEBANON AND BEIRUT, 1980S
3. Grenada: that was a real imminent threat
4. Somalia
5. Bosnia
6. Kosovo
7. Iraq (twice)
8. Afghanistan
9. Panama
10. Haiti
I WONDER WHO YOU WOULD BET ON. The world opinion polls are right, and our own militarist history proves them right, we have launched a war or military invasion or some kind of bombing against some perceived threat, on average every 3 years. IT IS OUR OWN MILITARIST, ZIONIST, AND CORPORATIST GOVERNMENT THAT IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO OUR PEOPLE AND THE PEOPLE OF THE REST OF THE WORLD.
The Iranian Islamo-thugs seize the US Embassy---an act of war---and hold American citizens hostage for 444 days, but the US is the bully and poor Iran is the victim.
Got it!
Why is it so hard for people to accept the words coming out of a despot's mouth? When a dictator tells you theat they want to wipe a country off the face of the earth, they probably mean it, but nobody wants to believe it. Since they live in denial, we get dreck like this. Appeasment minded bovine droppings disguised as intilectual debate still smells just as sour.
If Iran gets a nuke, they will do exactly what they say the want to do... Use it against Israel. When they do, 50 more go off over Iran, dropped by the Isralies, the middle east will boil over, and we have WWIII, started in the same way the second one started. Appeasment giveing evil time to arm and get ready for the party.
Hitler warned us he wanted to retake lands lost, and destroy the Jewish people with a book before he tried to burn the world. Now that another dictator says he wants to drive the Jews into the sea, and create a new Persian empire, we really want to lay the blame at Americas feet for trying to stop it, and hand them what they need to set their plan in motion?
We have forgotten the lessons of history, and now, it looks like we're going to repeat it. God help us all if this guy gets his way.
No country has anything to fear from America unless that country is run by lunatics who are racist AND actively advocate destroying America or American allies. Mustafa is as intellectually dishonest as possible in his "analysis" of present Iran-USA "relations." Iran's stated aims are to destroy Israel, drive all the Jews out of the middle east, and impose the narrow backwards retarded "mores" of their religion upon non-Muslims everywhere.
Your contribution is a masterpiece! By giving rise to this insane conversation on potential mutual extinction, it indeed points to the only viable alternative to unmitigated madness, i.e. world disarmament and peaceful coexistence.
Once upon a time, in our own lifetime, there existed people, groups, countries even, working toward world disarmament and peaceful coexistence. Even in the media were found human beings who could present and discuss the advantages for humanity to set itself, pursue and achieve those collective goals. In our midst, people could be found, who understood the fundamental changes required, in our way of thinking, in order for us to attain such truly human objectives.
As always, violence is very unlikely to produce the results its promoters expect. Yet those it will produce have been known to us since the early beginnings of mankind. War still ought to be considered and treated as a funeral service.
While I am not surpised that this "author" would condemn America, after all he is a muslim and brit. My question, if Iran is so great, why do you live in the land of cowards (England)? What is really disturbing to me is that some Americans actually beleive this crap the author writes and that Islam is anything other than a sick death cult.
Someone please stop Iran now. And to the posters here who think America is morally equivalent to Iran: Please wise up, before your unique brand of stupidity gets us killed.
It is astounding that an American newspaper would even publish this piece of trash. It is enlightening however how anti-American sentiment is cherished at the Washington Post. Once this guy gets it's way there will be no Washington or Post.
Mr. Domanic with the exception of the coup d'etat you have conveniently managed to neglect decades of British involvement in 20th century Persia/Iran. Be careful of to who exactly it is you point your fingers."
I hate responding to someone named Anon but here goes.
UK was primarily the main instigator/destablizer of the democratic regime in Iran. US joined in with the UK's plan by supplying the funds to the Army General and the Shah for the coup. BP formerly AIOC was the initial firm being nationalized, and this happened when Mossadegh realized that UK was taking more in taxes & profits from Iranian oil through BP than Iran. I know its difficult to put this is perspective, but Iran nationalized the oil industry after repeated efforts to get a just settlement for the Oil-Revenue sharing between UK and Iran.
Secondly, Many US companies were part of the Cartel of 8 that benefited from the Shah's rule.
"You have also managed to neglect, as others have already pointed out, the U.S. numerous humanitarian efforts.
"The US had also sent aid to the USSR after earthquakes. Lets not forget Somalia '92 where the US sent food and aid and was attacked by locals. Yet somehow no one ever decides to remembers these. This is all in spite of the fact that after some of the US's worst natural disasters (Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina, The blizzard of 93, wildfires and earthquakes that have plagued california for ages, etc. etc.) where was the support for the U.S.? To put it bluntly, it wasn't."
Dont be naive to think that the US govt's aid help is 100% humanitarian. Its a known fact in the developing world that the Aid is contingent upon favorable terms for US interests. Also, wrt Katrina, US asked for assistance in the aftermath of Katrina. $854 million was pledged by over 40 countries in the world as aid. of this only about 5% in aid was accepted by the US in order to avoid the obligations this would result in.
In fact, IRAN offered oil assistance to the US in the aftermath of Katrina.
Pure propaganda,and shame on the Post for giving this terrorist a venue. And shame on some posters, suicidal 5th columnists with advanced cases of BDS.
Who cares what this pig licker has to say? How dare we "interfere" with the Iranians' democratic system? Can this dirtbag say Hamas? How about Hezbolla? Lebenon? Can he say Lebenon? Hey England, wake up! Hey western civilization, wake up! Christians, wake up! This guy is the face of the cancer that's spreading around the world, "in Allahs' name". These are the guys who murder little girls for trying to go to school. Like any other cancer they must be cut out of the body. Completely. We suffer them at our own peril.
Claire W. may I ask you and other pseudo-peaceniks on this blog who are commenting that we cannot allow any one else to go nuclear or that nuclear technology is not the answer, would you suggest the same to your american and israeli counterparts? surely if nuclear deterrent is such an evil thing nobody should have it specially the one country known to have used it on a civilian population (and yea i've heard all those disgusting excuses america makes for nuking japan).
Really, if you leave iran alone, it has got nothing to do with you guys. are people really so dumb not to understand that its not Iran thats after US its the other way round. all because of oil. I believe that Ahmedinejad or whoever follows him would be considered the biggest traitors of persian history if they roll back their nuclear programme and turn a blind eye to this impending threat. Once having rid Iran of its WMD's America and NATO in their zest to loot Iran of its oil will make Iran worse than Iraq
It makes sense that Iran should continue to build her nuclear capacity since it looks like the US will one way or another will attack them whether they do or do not.
With their failure in Iraq, US has stumbled in the political arena. 2007 has been a hard year for them also in the economic arena. However, nor the lack of international and local support (or lets say the diminishing support of the Americans) neither the adverse affects of the `war` on US economy seems to have stopped them.
Now that the elections are coming up, I would like to hear more about you interpret the release of this report as a change in US policy or as you have put it where do you place this in that larger game? In other words, how would it get US what it wants?
BTW, I support Iran having nuclear weapons too, as well as nuclear energy capability. I think American arguments are absolutely moot. Every argument of how threatening Iran can be countered that America is more threatening, more demonstratively destructive and designing towards surrendering Iran's sovereignty for America's imperial desires. And Americans are too blind to see that they are a corrupting empire that exploits other people for their corporations' benefits.
Wonder why Russia went authoritarian? Or Venezuala? Or Ecuador? Or why China remains authoritarian rather than just follow America's leadership?
Did you know Australia is pulling out of Iraq? And Britain will be soon? And eventhough Spain had a terrorist attack of its own, it still withdrew out of Iraq. And did you know that the Pentagon wants to set up a new African Command, but the poor, pathetic countries of Africa are reluctant to host such a new American megabase because it will spell the end of their sovereignty and position them in every American venture, ecspecially the bad one? And did you know Russia, China, and some central Asian countries formed a security pact, the SCO, which is being formed to resist American and NATO encroachment into Asia? So it is plausible that Chinese troops could be on the borders of Europe becauase America is using NATO as a pretext for its imperial acquisition of East European nations like Georgia to weaken Russia and gain access to the Caspian sea basin and the surrounding natural resources of oil, gas, and metal ore.
And did you know America has been fomenting war in the Congo through Rwanda and Uganda in order to wrestle control of the resources of the region away from the Kinshasa based, EU tied, govt for American corporate designs?
And did you know America wants the secession of Darfur from Khartoum in order to gain access to the oil rights of Darfur and Eastern Chad?
And did you know that Somalia has oil, and the first American incursion into Somalia in 1991 was designed to bring back stability so America could claim its oil rights which Siad Barre awarded American companies and the starving Somalis was just a pretext?
And today there are American oil companies working to gain access to Somali oil in Puntland and elsewhere.
And the new puppet regime in Mogadishu is positioned to grant Somali oil rights to America.
So you imperialists need to face yourselves. You think you can justify invading any country and that you are above laws and morality? And from your home in suburbia, you think you are threatened by the entire world, so you must conquer the world to bring order and security? That's the language of Empire.
iran is as justified as any other country to have nukes. the problem does not lie in whether there are nukes or not. we can have tons of nukes like there were in the cold war without any of them being used. iran should make itself strong considering what is going on now in the mid-east. making nukes could be a way of doing this but it would be incredibly short-sighted. it would end up just like the former soviet union that went bankrupt in a arms race with the west. iran's best hope is to strengthen itself in all respects, in economics, social issues, scientific progress, blah blah. this is the only way to cut off the west's dirty meddling hands. iran can show al-qaeda & other extremists the way to get even with the satanic enemy, not by violent terrorism but by enlightened progress...
Neo Con imperialism runs thick in the veins of Americans these days. To no surprise, most all Americans accepted Bush's lies that the Iranian regime is trying to build nuclear weapons. The last I saw, nearly 50% of Americans still think Saddam had something to do with 9/11. I suspect most Americans support torture too, ecspecially as long as 24 is in the top 5 shows each season.
America is still an imperialist power (and many of these WaPo comments reflect that). And the Neo Cons, or whomever replaces them in the future, will still desire to conquer Iran NOT because of its THREAT (that's just a pretext, Iran is fairly cooperative on most things), but because of it RICHES: oil, gas, metal ore.
The American Empire hungers to dominates the world's resources in order to retain control over the larger masses which pose future challenges: namely India, China, EU.
Iran is just a stepping stone to the big rock of long term, global, supreme imperialism. That's what the PNAC stands for: Project for a New American Century. How can a century be claimed by any one nation? If it becomes a world empire with longevity.
六四的参与者们他们怀着和我一样的气愤和梦想，采取的是有组织的大集体做战。2百多个主力军在天安门前一个月地下跪，绝食，示威，乞求，几十万支援军在外围摇旗呐喊。他们饱尝辛酸。他们把身体都搞坏了，有的饿成重病。却没有实现他们的梦想。因为他们只会乞求。而我的人生字典里根本没有乞求两个字。他们饿得不行了，情绪失控，从爱国蜕变成害国，引发武装暴乱。他们被抓进监狱，有的患上精神病和其他疾病，他们的人格和名声也被搞臭了。他们会痛哭，后悔一辈子。
我自始至终都能控制自己的情绪，尽力调节自身的状态，平静和微笑一直在心里和脸上。我决不做危害国家的事。明明我们的人也在贪污，我硬是要遮住中国屁股，大力展出洋屁股。 我只是偶尔暴躁。血性男儿都这样。比如，当我身上没一分钱，心衰体弱，害怕紧张地写crime details, clues and evidence and black lists 时。图书馆工作人员和政府派来的人动不动就骂我，向我施压，并且关闭网线。我不知道他们的名字，但我能清楚记住他们的大便脸。我愤怒。这不难理解。他们首先是穷要饭的精神病（经常自言自语或主动骂人），为了生存而去帮助那些官员。那些官员本身就是贪官，神经西西地认为我也会把摧毁他们。
六四参与者除了重创了他们自己，没能丝毫实现他们的梦想和愿望。腐败照样存在，而且愈演愈烈，到达今天的程度。中国和美国的关系反倒更加紧张。世界分为两派更加对立和明争暗斗。他们只不过是可敬又可悲的失败者。
As seems to be the norm in present day political discussions, this columnist presents another heavily biased viewpoint when, as usual, the true answer lies in moderation. Mr. Domanic is correct when he condemns cooperative effort between the United States and Britain to over throw a democratically elected leader in Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953 however; in his bombastic rhetoric, he fails to recognize the volatile domestic political situation that was being played out in the United States during this time period. The early 1950's were a time of intense rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union. A time that included not only the McCarthy Hearings, but also the Eisenhower Doctrine. When Mosaddeq sided with Iran's communist party in an effort to solidify his position, it raised more than a few shackles in Washington. Also, it should be noted that many of Iran's influential ulemas were ardent Mosaddeq detractors, and supported the coup that ultimately lead to his ouster. While this does not excuse the United State’s hypocrisy in thwarting Iran's attempt to instill a democratically elected leader, it does show the inherent bias in Mr. Domanic's argument. It is important to note that the United States, as pointed out by Mr. Domanic, is taking an unrealistic and belligerent stance towards Iran. Making extreme military threats, and labeling a country's defense force as a terrorist organization, is not the proper way to go about establishing peace and deterring nuclear efforts. It seems that the Bush administration is trying to reinstate the policy of Brinkmanship against a much lesser opponent. Unfortunately, this policy, has, and will continue to induce the type of attitude adopted by the Arab states following the 67' Arab-Israeli War. Iran will have no choice but to adopt a policy of belligerence, knowing that it cannot physically repel the U.S. but; in belligerency, it can frustrate U.S. efforts and gain global sympathy by playing the underdog. For both countries to actually gain from this experience, two events must occur: the United States must assume a less physically threatening stance towards Iran; and Iran must cease its nuclear ambitions. Nothing good can come of a volatile state, with such a large and disillusioned young population, possessing nuclear weapons. As the U.S. should have learned through countless past experiences, it cannot continue to try and impose its will on other nations. For beneficial a results, the U.S. truly use force as a last result and Iran must abandon its nuclear objectives.
Agree that we need more creative leadership, both them and us.
Iran is a still an underdeveloped society. The enormous intellectual and economic might of the Persian people is being squandered by misguided mullahs.
The Iranian people are worse off today than at any point under the leadership of Reza Shah.
So much for the ideals of their revolution.
The Iranian people are getting ripped off again, and on a human level, deserve much better than their current government affords them.
I agree with you on the fact that bullying often causes a downward spiral of violence - and I would also agree that the US has much responsibility in causing that violence at a global level. Yet the response can't be 'going nuke' - need more progressive, creative and definitely more peaceful alternatives for deterrence. Maybe it is time we start thinking what these measures could be...
If Mustafa is so willing to accept the cold, geopolitical reality of neccesary deterrance, in the form of nuclear weapons, he must be willing to also accept the geopolitical dominance of America. He cannot have it both ways as he does when advocating accpetance of Iranian nuclear weapons. The actions which America undertook, specifically the coup of 53', was an action which fell squarely within the framework of cold war policy as did many other unsavory American actions which were to a certain extent uncovered during the church committee hearings of the 1970's. The point is that these were realpolitik actions taken by the US to preserve post war dominance and prosperity, but this does not exscuse them on a moral scale. Though the reaction of the Iranian regime to build a detterent against American and Israeli power is justified in this realpolitik sense, we must ask if it is justified in a moral sense. If you pose this question, then the central point of Mustafa's essay is rendered moot. You cannot bemoan American dominance in the world and then justify actions which run along the same lines. Or in today's parlance, "Don't hate the player, hate the game". If you want to take the moral high ground, and I believe that this article was a misguided attempt at doing so, you must take a moral stance against cold realist policies of all nations which inevitably increase the spiral of violence and despair in our world.
Mustafa should put the US way down on the list of those commiting "unending aggression." Pretty much all of Iran's neighbors want the Mullahs taken down, more than the USA does. Face it - besides China, who just wants Iran's oil (sound familiar?), Iran's totally corrupt theocracy doesn't have a single friend in Asia or Europe (gangsters in Lebanon don't count). Hell, even the Iranians themselves hate the Mullahs. Mustafa - how much are they paying you?
Make no mistake about it, Bush will not leave office without letting a few tomahawks fly. The targets have been chosen. We are at the ready.
Bomb Iran, Bomb Iran, ba, ba, ba, bomb Iran.
One the one side, we have a bunch of corrupt Iranian Mullahs. On the other, we have a bunch of corrupt American politicians. We have a village idiot as President, and Iran has one it's own, also president of the nation.
We have all sorts of bold pronouncements made on each side. The truth, however, is to be found somewhere in the middle.
Of course the Iranians are working on a nuclear capability. Who could blame them? Mustafa Dominic brings up a valid point. The Iranians look at a map and what do they see? We have them surrounded, for the love of God! They are next on the war monger wish list, and they know it.
It's only natural to want to defend yourself.
As far as Iran bombing Israel, forget about it. This would be suicide, would result in annihilation for the nation of Iran. The mullahs may be corrupt, but they are not stupid.
President Amen-then-jihad has said a lot of dumb things, but, ultimately, the Iranian regime is interested in advancing it's own economic interests.
The Iranians don't need the U.S.A. They are a nation obsessed with the idea of self reliance.
Mr. Domanic with the exception of the coup d'etat you have conveniently managed to neglect decades of British involvement in 20th century Persia/Iran. Be careful of to who exactly it is you point your fingers.
You have also managed to neglect, as others have already pointed out, the U.S. numerous humanitarian efforts. As I recall both the US AND Great Britain both sent aid to Iran after the Bam earthquake. This of course is just the example of Iran.
The US had also sent aid to the USSR after earthquakes. Lets not forget Somalia '92 where the US sent food and aid and was attacked by locals. Yet somehow no one ever decides to remembers these. This is all in spite of the fact that after some of the US's worst natural disasters (Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina, The blizzard of 93, wildfires and earthquakes that have plagued california for ages, etc. etc.) where was the support for the U.S.? To put it bluntly, it wasn't.
Despite what you want to believe Mr. Domanic, the US is not as narcissistic as the rest of the world would have you believe.
This fool sounds like the leftist nuclear scientists who gave away the atomic bomb to the monster Stalin because "it would be a deterrent to America". As for his absurd rehashing of the Mossadegh plot in 1953 as somehow a justification for the totalitarian regime in Iran bent on reestablishing the caliphate, it is beneath human decency.
This fool sounds like the leftist nuclear scientists who gave away the atomic bomb to the monster Stalin because "it would be a deterrent to America". As for his absurd rehashing of the Mossadegh plot in 1953 as somehow a justification for the totalitarian regime in Iran bent on reestablishing the caliphate, it is beneath human decency.
In a world where America and Iran were moral equivalents, he may have a point.
But that is not the case. Iran is state sponsor of terrorism, a state whose government has endorsed and materially supported genocide in Israel, and a state that brutally treats its own people. The current government in Tehran and this author are complete moral failures.
The cold war between the US and the Soviets worked quite well, for a time, as a deterrent to both sides. The only hope for peace in the Middle East is a NEW cold war, as Israel and the zionistas have made it perfectly clear they're more than willing to do "whatever it takes" to win their 4000 year old Holy War. Listen to Lyin' Joe Lieberman for 56.2 nanoseconds and you'll see what Israel is really all about.
I agree with you poit completely but I also think that there is another point that can be made. If Iran can manufacture their own nucleur fuel then they will have a cheap alternative to oil and can sell the oil they would normally use. This would make it even harder for the west to black mail them.
I fully agree with the views expressed on this very intelligent analyst. Being a expatriate latinmerican professional with a strong interest in contemporary world history, I find this insighfull article totally true and only one isolated example of similar behaviour of USA thoroughout the world. To support this assertion, please spend some time to digest the views of another very intelligent and insightful journalist, who this time, bring us a much more documented and overwhelming set of incriminating evidence against USA abussive interventionist history, this time in Latinmerica.
They mean to drive me crazy. But they fail. I ,only ,as normal man, have a little depression, anxiety and anger when bullied.
They do succeeds in driving me into poverty by shutting down all the possibilities of finding a stable job by means of spawning vicious rumors.
I even cannot afford to buy the cheapest shoes and a cheapest watch….
Doesn’t matter. Their IQ is too low. I can cope.
At the crucial moment when china, America, and the world are having a tough setback， worsening . I did something conducive within my dream and ability.
My contribution must be amply valued and rewarded.
I am now yearning to live and work in America with help of all the reward I deserve.
Yet still I will forward my suggestions for china on such fields as perfection of political pattern and population improvement and for the world peace keeping only if I can be treated fairly under your justice. .
With respect to the nuclear issue , we are all actually looking forward to the payoff by xmas.
I hereby would like to only write a sanguine poem for your refreshment.:
All for the dè jà wo
Big dream and heavy vexation slumbering into the wet woods.
Mist lingers no long
Dust flourishes impossible.
Because the last agile rain,
Glazes the purple and green leaves once rough
Blazes the brown blanches once weak
Moistens the bronze trunks once mash,
Rots the ugly weeds once crazy.
Nourishes the golden soil once desperate,
Singing larks ,blue and red , weave through the woods gaily,
Fresh fragrant breath of nature chimes the eternal moment.
Up the fringe , sshu….
The real dè jà wo homes in on the most acute creativity.
I'm American and don't like the idea of Iran (particularly one led by a nut) with nuclear weapons. At the same time, I realize that the leaders of my own country have no sense about them and have lost a lot of credibility worldwide.
They not only started a war illegally and without just cause, they also conveniently failed to recognize the one benefit of having Saddam in power.
I'm at the point where I'm almost in agreement with the author. Iran with short-range nukes just might be what we need to get the US in shape and possibly out of the Middle East and focus on the crap going on at home.
Nuclear weapons in the hands of IslamoFascist thugs
it totally unacceptable.
"Without America and with its own commodity wealth, the Middle East can still be a prosperous and peaceful region." is the statement of a complete moron.
If I ran a hedge fund and one of my managers made statements like this I would take a second look at his ability for rational analysis.
The Middle East is one big oasis of love, and the only thing this moron has going for him is that he doesn't have to live in it. This is just pathetic. Let's see...the last time the Islamic world did something positive in ANYTHING, literature, government, innovation...ANYTHING, was long before the fall of the Ottoman Empire. They did back then what the IslamoFascists want all Muslims to do today, which is forsake anything Western. We saw how well that worked for them when they became the "sick man of Europe"...now, we will be lucky if it isn't a mushroom cloud somewhere.
It's hard to take someone seriously when they come from a country that is named after a bird that we eat on Thanksgiving.
But no, seriously. This turkish guy is all PO'd because by the American invasion, it's going to cause the kurdish people all across the region to rise up and demand independence from Iraq, and... you guessed it, Turkey.
So he's basically a turkish national who doesn't like that idea.
As to his other ideas, just utter nonsense. Iran doesn't have any support in the international community primarily because the country is run by a bunch of flaming religious nuts. In case you didn't catch the name it's the "ISLAMIC Republic of Iran".
You remember those guys, the ones who treat women like dogs, run airplanes into buildings, arrest women who name teddy bears "Mohammet" and turn themselves into bombs.
If Mr. Domanic feels that American "aggression" is the principal cause of violence in the "peaceful" Middle East then I humbly suggest he open a history book or two. The predations of what is now named "Iran" began some four millennia before the United States existed and have continued without a break since. And if he feels that nuclear arms in the hands of the mullahs there is a stabilizing influence then he is delusional indeed.
Mustafa=idiot. I suppose WaPo needs eyeballs to drive ad sales, so they send in a bunch of clowns to make outlandish statements based on their "sophisticated geo-political understanding" of the world based on what? What a clown.
This has to be the greatest statement of all time:
Our Lord made man in his own image and the man he created was flawed. In the 1930`s he saw perfection and will create man once again with the perfection he saw as his model. First all the less than perfect men have to be destroyed and he set that in motion by giving man "The Bomb".
I am far to modest to tell you who it was the Lord saw in the 1930`s.
Yes the Lord will take a rib, as needed, from me.
Mr. Mustafa makes some valid points. Certainly the foreign policy of the US under the Bush adminstration has been appalling. I think Mustafa understates the importance of the NIE on Iran however. I think it is a turning point, internally in this country -- a coup of sorts, and that it might well have changed the course of history.
Bush has been derailed - a huge thing. I hope the world gives America another chance.... There is an opportunity, in light of this mess that has been created, for US foreign policy to emerge as better than ever. The vast majority of Americans were complacent about foreign policy before Bush...I don't think that will ever be the case again. Our foreign policy has never lived up to the ideals of the average American....perhaps, in order to redeem ourselves, we'll actually become the leader we've always been alledged to be. I don't think an Iranian nuke will solve anything - ok...so long as we don't elect Giuliani....if that's the case...ok...I concede...
"October 23, 1983 - A suicide car bomb attack against the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut kills 241 servicemen. A simultaneous attack on a French base kills 58 paratroopers.
In response, President Ronald Reagan ordered the battleship USS New Jersey, stationed off the coast of Lebanon, to shell the hills near Beirut. "
You forgot about when Reagan retreated from Beirut, thereby encouraging terrorists for generations.
Still, though, you have a very impressive recall of history.
Actually, come to think of it, what were we doing in Beirut, anyway? Or any of the other places you mention, aside from on Sept. 11? What were we doing there?
I hope the first nuke detonated by Iranian-sponsored terrorists is "at the London office of a global hedge fund." And I hope this jerk's family live within walking distance of his office.
All Comments (185)
To those who claim that the US has a moral superiority over Iran and therefore the right to do:
When I think of a country in the Middle East, or even in the world that is the true nemesis of a western style liberal democracy, whose state promotes fundamentalism and society breeds extremism, I do not think of Iran, I think of Saudi Arabia; America’s best friend in the Middle East.
Osama Bin Laden is Saudi, and a very rich one as well – purely driven by ideology, not desperation. Al-Qaeda is a Saudi founded organisation. 9/11 was thought of, planned out and mainly carried out by Saudi extremists. Saudi oil money finances and supports Islamic extremism all over the world from the Philippines to England, from the Balkans to Israel.
If you are really talking about a threat – not even to world peace, because I know our definitions of world peace are quite different – but to the American people, you would worry about Saudi Arabia, not Iran.
Oh, but of course, I forgot that Saudi Arabia is a loyal client of the US, providing a constant flow of oil and logistical support when necessary. The Saudi royal family – by far the most corrupt, oppressive, decadent regime in the region – is a good friend of your administration.
Then I guess you have two different moral standards: one that applies to you and your friends, clients, etc., and one that applies to your enemies.
And let us not even begin with America’s “moral” credentials. I don’t have to start with native Americans, I believe fifty years in Central America (Nicaragua, Panama, Chile) and the Middle East (Iran, Iraq, Palestine) are ample evidence of ‘American might makes right’. I will not elaborate.
I know some of you actually believe in this moral superiority illusion. I don’t know what to say to you except that your media and your government has been doing an excellent job of brainwashing you. Open your eyes! Others, though, who are aware of the dilemma, honestly, why don’t you just say what your administration is really after in Iran, and drop the moral crap!
December 12, 2007 7:06 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 12, 2007 07:06
I believe, not only in principle, but also in practice, that nuclear proliferation is not a solution. If climate change doesn't annihilate us, then nuclear weapons will.
However, I think Mustafa has a crucially valid point. I would put it this way: Current Iran policy of the US, coupled with Washington's decades of meddling in that country's internal affairs, is effectively stripping Iran of a feasible alternative to pursuing nuclear ambitions. Therefore, while I believe Iran 'should not' possess nuclear weapons, I think under the present circumstances they are forced to build that capacity.
If the US really wishes a non-nuclear Iran, it should seriously review its own policies and present that country with more alternatives. Threatening to bomb and invade the country leaves them little to choose from.
On the other hand, I disagree with Mustafa that Iran's only deterrent against the US is having nuclear weapons. I believe, in fact, the current American stance only plays into the hands of extreme right wing hardliners in both countries, who wish to manipulate domestic public opinion with an ever present external threat.
American neo-cons probably 'want' Iran to have nuclear ambitions: they know Iranians' premature nuclear operations pose no substantial threat to advance nuclear states like theirs and Israel, while it gives them the excuse to be actively involved in Iran's affairs.
Consequently, there is another deterrent that Iran could employ against US aggression, which Tehran made very little use of so far: world public opinion. The biggest war of our century is the propaganda war. Bush administration has trumped its way into Iraq by convincing its people that Iraq posed a serious threat to their country. Saddam, a failure that he always was from a PR point of view, did poorly in trying to convince the world otherwise.
If Iran can convince the American people (granted, much harder than convincing the rest of the world) that they pose no threat to them at all, it will disarm the American propaganda machine and gain Iran some supporters in the western world. And even the US cannot invade a country (even harder now than before) without the backing of its own people and at least the prentention of an international 'coalition'.
Winning the propaganda war is a difficult endeavour (just look at the fanaticism of some of the comments posted here), but Iran has more chance in this alley than in the nuclear alley. They already scored a big point with the intelligence report (and they know it).
December 12, 2007 5:46 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 12, 2007 05:46
"Iran needs nukes to defend itself against America"?
"North Korea wasn't attacked by America because they have nukes"?
How much longer must we endure hearing such utter nonsense? Does the Left really have no stronger argument to use to buttress their nonsense than these two howlers?
No, nukes are _not_ useful to Iran to defend itself against America. The only country that successfully defended itself against America with nukes was the Soviet Union. But at what a cost! The expense of keeping up with the arms race was a major cause (if not the only cause) of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
And no, North Korean nukes had _nothing_ to do with they weren't attacked. It is the way North Korea holds the South Korean capital, Seoul, hostage that is the reason. For even before they had nukes, when everybody _knew_ they did not have nukes, we could not attack. Why? Because the North Koreans have _huge_ batteries of artillery aimed at Seoul, so that we know that once we attack, they will bombard Seoul causing immense civilian casualties. The South Korean government would not forgive us for this, even though it is really the North's fault if they die.
The only alternative that might prevent this is a _massive_ nuclear strike to take out those batteries. Come to think of it, the resulting nuclear winter might be the best answer to China's refusal to cooperate on global warming;)
Now perhaps Iran would be willing to stoop so low as to imitate North Korea's inhumanity, but then why are there so many _apologists_ for such inhumanity on the Left, especially in the _European_ Left?
December 11, 2007 8:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 20:44
I love all these so-called American patriots coming in here and claiming that Iran is destablizing the middle east. Have these people checked their headlines oh for the last 60 years. We just launched a disastrous and unprovoked war in the heart of the middle east that has virtually torn Iraq into three parts, and somehow Iran is destablizing the middle east. Israel our prinicipal ally in the globe has launced attacks against two Arab countries just in the last 8 months, forget about their 60 year history of apartheid and wars of conquest. My personal highlight of Israeli History is the 1956 war in which they tried to steal the Suez Canal and where forced to withdraw by arch Islamist-loving Dwight Eisenhower.
I WILL BET ANY PERSON IN THE WORLD 10,000 DOLLARS IN A BET, WHO IS MORE LIKELY TO FIRE THE FIRST SHOT IN A WAR, ILL PUT MY MONEY ON IRAN AND YOU GUYS PUT YOUR MONEY ON THE WASHINGTON/TEL AVIV UNITY GOVERNMENT.
FOR YOU GAMBLING ODDS MAKERS LETS LOOK AT PAST BETTING PERFORMANCE:
Iran: last time Iran/Persia initiated an invasion was sometime in the middle part of the 19th century when Nader Shah tried to conquer northern India.
AMERICA: HAS FOUGHT ALL OF THE FOLLOWING WARS, BOMBINGS, POLICE ACTIONS JUST SINCE 1980:
1. SHOOTING DOWN OF IRANIAN CIVIL AIRLINER (SEE USS VINCENES)
2. SHELLING OF LEBANON AND BEIRUT, 1980S
3. Grenada: that was a real imminent threat
4. Somalia
5. Bosnia
6. Kosovo
7. Iraq (twice)
8. Afghanistan
9. Panama
10. Haiti
I WONDER WHO YOU WOULD BET ON. The world opinion polls are right, and our own militarist history proves them right, we have launched a war or military invasion or some kind of bombing against some perceived threat, on average every 3 years. IT IS OUR OWN MILITARIST, ZIONIST, AND CORPORATIST GOVERNMENT THAT IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO OUR PEOPLE AND THE PEOPLE OF THE REST OF THE WORLD.
December 11, 2007 1:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 13:52
I love all these so-called American patriots coming in here and claiming that Iran is destablizing the middle east. Have these people checked their headlines oh for the last 60 years. We just launched a disastrous and unprovoked war in the heart of the middle east that has virtually torn Iraq into three parts, and somehow Iran is destablizing the middle east. Israel our prinicipal ally in the globe has launced attacks against two Arab countries just in the last 8 months, forget about their 60 year history of apartheid and wars of conquest. My personal highlight of Israeli History is the 1956 war in which they tried to steal the Suez Canal and where forced to withdraw by arch Islamist-loving Dwight Eisenhower.
I WILL BET ANY PERSON IN THE WORLD 10,000 DOLLARS IN A BET, WHO IS MORE LIKELY TO FIRE THE FIRST SHOT IN A WAR, ILL PUT MY MONEY ON IRAN AND YOU GUYS PUT YOUR MONEY ON THE WASHINGTON/TEL AVIV UNITY GOVERNMENT.
FOR YOU GAMBLING ODDS MAKERS LETS LOOK AT PAST BETTING PERFORMANCE:
Iran: last time Iran/Persia initiated an invasion was sometime in the middle part of the 19th century when Nader Shah tried to conquer northern India.
AMERICA: HAS FOUGHT ALL OF THE FOLLOWING WARS, BOMBINGS, POLICE ACTIONS JUST SINCE 1980:
1. SHOOTING DOWN OF IRANIAN CIVIL AIRLINER (SEE USS VINCENES)
2. SHELLING OF LEBANON AND BEIRUT, 1980S
3. Grenada: that was a real imminent threat
4. Somalia
5. Bosnia
6. Kosovo
7. Iraq (twice)
8. Afghanistan
9. Panama
10. Haiti
I WONDER WHO YOU WOULD BET ON. The world opinion polls are right, and our own militarist history proves them right, we have launched a war or military invasion or some kind of bombing against some perceived threat, on average every 3 years. IT IS OUR OWN MILITARIST, ZIONIST, AND CORPORATIST GOVERNMENT THAT IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO OUR PEOPLE AND THE PEOPLE OF THE REST OF THE WORLD.
December 11, 2007 1:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 13:52
The Iranian Islamo-thugs seize the US Embassy---an act of war---and hold American citizens hostage for 444 days, but the US is the bully and poor Iran is the victim.
Got it!
December 11, 2007 1:03 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 13:03
Why is it so hard for people to accept the words coming out of a despot's mouth? When a dictator tells you theat they want to wipe a country off the face of the earth, they probably mean it, but nobody wants to believe it. Since they live in denial, we get dreck like this. Appeasment minded bovine droppings disguised as intilectual debate still smells just as sour.
If Iran gets a nuke, they will do exactly what they say the want to do... Use it against Israel. When they do, 50 more go off over Iran, dropped by the Isralies, the middle east will boil over, and we have WWIII, started in the same way the second one started. Appeasment giveing evil time to arm and get ready for the party.
Hitler warned us he wanted to retake lands lost, and destroy the Jewish people with a book before he tried to burn the world. Now that another dictator says he wants to drive the Jews into the sea, and create a new Persian empire, we really want to lay the blame at Americas feet for trying to stop it, and hand them what they need to set their plan in motion?
We have forgotten the lessons of history, and now, it looks like we're going to repeat it. God help us all if this guy gets his way.
December 11, 2007 12:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 12:44
So if the US is ( as usual ) the root of all evil, why then do our Persian cousins rant on about "death to Israel"?
Is it really a rational position to hold that fanatical theocrats can be entrusted with nukes?
Who is it amongst your readership would prefer to live under the Mullahs than in the nasty old USA?
In NYC our gays may be hung but not hanged.
December 11, 2007 12:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 12:41
No country has anything to fear from America unless that country is run by lunatics who are racist AND actively advocate destroying America or American allies. Mustafa is as intellectually dishonest as possible in his "analysis" of present Iran-USA "relations." Iran's stated aims are to destroy Israel, drive all the Jews out of the middle east, and impose the narrow backwards retarded "mores" of their religion upon non-Muslims everywhere.
December 11, 2007 12:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 12:34
The veracity of your article is further confirmed by the comments. Apparently, you hit the spot.
December 11, 2007 11:09 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 11:09
Thank you, Mustafa Domanic.
Your contribution is a masterpiece! By giving rise to this insane conversation on potential mutual extinction, it indeed points to the only viable alternative to unmitigated madness, i.e. world disarmament and peaceful coexistence.
Once upon a time, in our own lifetime, there existed people, groups, countries even, working toward world disarmament and peaceful coexistence. Even in the media were found human beings who could present and discuss the advantages for humanity to set itself, pursue and achieve those collective goals. In our midst, people could be found, who understood the fundamental changes required, in our way of thinking, in order for us to attain such truly human objectives.
As always, violence is very unlikely to produce the results its promoters expect. Yet those it will produce have been known to us since the early beginnings of mankind. War still ought to be considered and treated as a funeral service.
Even victory is a funeral.
December 11, 2007 10:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 10:26
While I am not surpised that this "author" would condemn America, after all he is a muslim and brit. My question, if Iran is so great, why do you live in the land of cowards (England)? What is really disturbing to me is that some Americans actually beleive this crap the author writes and that Islam is anything other than a sick death cult.
Mohammed was a PIG!!!
December 11, 2007 9:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 09:31
Someone please stop Iran now. And to the posters here who think America is morally equivalent to Iran: Please wise up, before your unique brand of stupidity gets us killed.
December 11, 2007 9:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 09:27
It is astounding that an American newspaper would even publish this piece of trash. It is enlightening however how anti-American sentiment is cherished at the Washington Post. Once this guy gets it's way there will be no Washington or Post.
December 11, 2007 8:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 08:52
"Anon.:
Mr. Domanic with the exception of the coup d'etat you have conveniently managed to neglect decades of British involvement in 20th century Persia/Iran. Be careful of to who exactly it is you point your fingers."
I hate responding to someone named Anon but here goes.
UK was primarily the main instigator/destablizer of the democratic regime in Iran. US joined in with the UK's plan by supplying the funds to the Army General and the Shah for the coup. BP formerly AIOC was the initial firm being nationalized, and this happened when Mossadegh realized that UK was taking more in taxes & profits from Iranian oil through BP than Iran. I know its difficult to put this is perspective, but Iran nationalized the oil industry after repeated efforts to get a just settlement for the Oil-Revenue sharing between UK and Iran.
Secondly, Many US companies were part of the Cartel of 8 that benefited from the Shah's rule.
"You have also managed to neglect, as others have already pointed out, the U.S. numerous humanitarian efforts.
"The US had also sent aid to the USSR after earthquakes. Lets not forget Somalia '92 where the US sent food and aid and was attacked by locals. Yet somehow no one ever decides to remembers these. This is all in spite of the fact that after some of the US's worst natural disasters (Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina, The blizzard of 93, wildfires and earthquakes that have plagued california for ages, etc. etc.) where was the support for the U.S.? To put it bluntly, it wasn't."
Dont be naive to think that the US govt's aid help is 100% humanitarian. Its a known fact in the developing world that the Aid is contingent upon favorable terms for US interests. Also, wrt Katrina, US asked for assistance in the aftermath of Katrina. $854 million was pledged by over 40 countries in the world as aid. of this only about 5% in aid was accepted by the US in order to avoid the obligations this would result in.
In fact, IRAN offered oil assistance to the US in the aftermath of Katrina.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina
Do not bother reading up that link as it would actually enable you to know about something before you open your dumb mouth.
December 11, 2007 8:42 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 08:42
Timothy L. Pennell, you are so sick. it is utterly disgusting.
December 11, 2007 8:05 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 08:05
Pure propaganda,and shame on the Post for giving this terrorist a venue. And shame on some posters, suicidal 5th columnists with advanced cases of BDS.
December 11, 2007 7:51 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 07:51
Who cares what this pig licker has to say? How dare we "interfere" with the Iranians' democratic system? Can this dirtbag say Hamas? How about Hezbolla? Lebenon? Can he say Lebenon? Hey England, wake up! Hey western civilization, wake up! Christians, wake up! This guy is the face of the cancer that's spreading around the world, "in Allahs' name". These are the guys who murder little girls for trying to go to school. Like any other cancer they must be cut out of the body. Completely. We suffer them at our own peril.
December 11, 2007 7:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 07:32
Claire W. may I ask you and other pseudo-peaceniks on this blog who are commenting that we cannot allow any one else to go nuclear or that nuclear technology is not the answer, would you suggest the same to your american and israeli counterparts? surely if nuclear deterrent is such an evil thing nobody should have it specially the one country known to have used it on a civilian population (and yea i've heard all those disgusting excuses america makes for nuking japan).
Really, if you leave iran alone, it has got nothing to do with you guys. are people really so dumb not to understand that its not Iran thats after US its the other way round. all because of oil. I believe that Ahmedinejad or whoever follows him would be considered the biggest traitors of persian history if they roll back their nuclear programme and turn a blind eye to this impending threat. Once having rid Iran of its WMD's America and NATO in their zest to loot Iran of its oil will make Iran worse than Iraq
December 11, 2007 6:53 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 06:53
It makes sense that Iran should continue to build her nuclear capacity since it looks like the US will one way or another will attack them whether they do or do not.
With their failure in Iraq, US has stumbled in the political arena. 2007 has been a hard year for them also in the economic arena. However, nor the lack of international and local support (or lets say the diminishing support of the Americans) neither the adverse affects of the `war` on US economy seems to have stopped them.
Now that the elections are coming up, I would like to hear more about you interpret the release of this report as a change in US policy or as you have put it where do you place this in that larger game? In other words, how would it get US what it wants?
December 11, 2007 6:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 06:30
BTW, I support Iran having nuclear weapons too, as well as nuclear energy capability. I think American arguments are absolutely moot. Every argument of how threatening Iran can be countered that America is more threatening, more demonstratively destructive and designing towards surrendering Iran's sovereignty for America's imperial desires. And Americans are too blind to see that they are a corrupting empire that exploits other people for their corporations' benefits.
Wonder why Russia went authoritarian? Or Venezuala? Or Ecuador? Or why China remains authoritarian rather than just follow America's leadership?
Did you know Australia is pulling out of Iraq? And Britain will be soon? And eventhough Spain had a terrorist attack of its own, it still withdrew out of Iraq. And did you know that the Pentagon wants to set up a new African Command, but the poor, pathetic countries of Africa are reluctant to host such a new American megabase because it will spell the end of their sovereignty and position them in every American venture, ecspecially the bad one? And did you know Russia, China, and some central Asian countries formed a security pact, the SCO, which is being formed to resist American and NATO encroachment into Asia? So it is plausible that Chinese troops could be on the borders of Europe becauase America is using NATO as a pretext for its imperial acquisition of East European nations like Georgia to weaken Russia and gain access to the Caspian sea basin and the surrounding natural resources of oil, gas, and metal ore.
And did you know America has been fomenting war in the Congo through Rwanda and Uganda in order to wrestle control of the resources of the region away from the Kinshasa based, EU tied, govt for American corporate designs?
And did you know America wants the secession of Darfur from Khartoum in order to gain access to the oil rights of Darfur and Eastern Chad?
And did you know that Somalia has oil, and the first American incursion into Somalia in 1991 was designed to bring back stability so America could claim its oil rights which Siad Barre awarded American companies and the starving Somalis was just a pretext?
And today there are American oil companies working to gain access to Somali oil in Puntland and elsewhere.
And the new puppet regime in Mogadishu is positioned to grant Somali oil rights to America.
So you imperialists need to face yourselves. You think you can justify invading any country and that you are above laws and morality? And from your home in suburbia, you think you are threatened by the entire world, so you must conquer the world to bring order and security? That's the language of Empire.
December 11, 2007 5:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 05:18
iran is as justified as any other country to have nukes. the problem does not lie in whether there are nukes or not. we can have tons of nukes like there were in the cold war without any of them being used. iran should make itself strong considering what is going on now in the mid-east. making nukes could be a way of doing this but it would be incredibly short-sighted. it would end up just like the former soviet union that went bankrupt in a arms race with the west. iran's best hope is to strengthen itself in all respects, in economics, social issues, scientific progress, blah blah. this is the only way to cut off the west's dirty meddling hands. iran can show al-qaeda & other extremists the way to get even with the satanic enemy, not by violent terrorism but by enlightened progress...
December 11, 2007 4:56 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 04:56
Neo Con imperialism runs thick in the veins of Americans these days. To no surprise, most all Americans accepted Bush's lies that the Iranian regime is trying to build nuclear weapons. The last I saw, nearly 50% of Americans still think Saddam had something to do with 9/11. I suspect most Americans support torture too, ecspecially as long as 24 is in the top 5 shows each season.
America is still an imperialist power (and many of these WaPo comments reflect that). And the Neo Cons, or whomever replaces them in the future, will still desire to conquer Iran NOT because of its THREAT (that's just a pretext, Iran is fairly cooperative on most things), but because of it RICHES: oil, gas, metal ore.
The American Empire hungers to dominates the world's resources in order to retain control over the larger masses which pose future challenges: namely India, China, EU.
Iran is just a stepping stone to the big rock of long term, global, supreme imperialism. That's what the PNAC stands for: Project for a New American Century. How can a century be claimed by any one nation? If it becomes a world empire with longevity.
December 11, 2007 4:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 04:55
检察长：
您好！
无锡人以刁著称。他们对我采取的策略是把我逼成坏人和神经病。他们的具体伎俩是一边大肆造谣说我也是贼和精神病，另一边破坏我的所有工作机会。我总是轻尔易举就能找到工作，在北京我已用行动证明了这一点。他们的策略是正确的，因为人没有钱的时候被逼只能去做坏事和苦恼患上精神病，这样他们的诡计就实现了。可他们是失败的！我身上只要有一点钱就能过很长一段时间（这和一年前的情况正好相反，身上有很多钱，却只能用一，两天），我从没想过去偷一分钱，我也发精神病，我能克制住男子汉的怒火，最理想地调节幅面情绪，同时发起最凶残的反击。他们造谣说我经常对女同事进行性骚扰，我打反击，叫领导向她们核实。事实竟是造谣的人自己脑子坏了，一见女人路过就扑上去抱，摸，捏，我一直都很文静，老老实实工作，从未非礼她们过。结果他们自己倒霉。 任何身体强壮的男人都有性欲，我的一惯做法是善待保险系数最高的女孩，得到她的完全同意后去开房间整夜做爱，粗野和偷摸不是我的性行为特征。
一计不 成，他们接下来造谣说我是神经病。绝大多数人患此病是终生的。但极少数坚强，理性的人是可以完全恢复的。我的症状只有在巨大压力面前出现轻度的抑郁焦虑，没有任何其他症状。被欺负时，我确实有强硬的反应，任何一个人都会有反应，不然要么是死人要么是真正的精神病。下一步，我会抓住造谣人的尾巴和弱点（那种人品质恶劣，混身是错）发起十倍的攻击，在压力下，他们的精神病症状全现来了，燥动，自语，发作，，经同事证实他们是糟巴神经病。玩了老半天，造谣的人自己是精神病患者。我总是向害我的恶人发起最猛烈的攻击，之前，我还把一些患精神病的罪犯送进监牢。我是不可以侵犯的，害我一点点，我会授予最凶残的十倍的反击。
我在上海工作时，办公室里6个人中5个精神病，其实我也是，只是症状最轻，没被发现而已。我工作过的无锡农业园区，现被改名为珊湖礁宠物乐园，32名员工中7人患有精神病，董事长和经理就是重度的精神病。我在北京的东四饭店绝大多数人是精神病人，那饭店更象是精神病医院。上帝，到处是精神病！
工资要等到20日才能领到，我现身上只剩一点钱。我又穷困了倒。这难倒是对兢兢业业工作，竭尽全力为国家和我最佩服的美国和我最关心的世界做好事的奖励吗？天哪！
为什么病婊子，屁眼虫能过上开心稳定的生活，偏偏我不能。
没关系。我能给自己一条生路：我正用英语写一本小说，向美国的迈克米兰出版社投稿。书中详细描述大到17大之前中国真实的投资环境和小到渗透到国人血液里的文化基因。另外，我一定靠我自己的力量争取到去美国和挪威的机会。
我已经想通了，我是应该得到世界的奖励的。害羞是真正的神经病。
我始终认为困境的重压是坚强自我，完善自我的时机，也是反击，重创邪恶的良机；我要做坚定，明智的胜利者，而不是可悲的失败者。
过去的一年，我只有智慧，勇气，冲动和年轻人的傻气和时不时的畏缩，是天生的毅力将全部串成一线。
我感觉那样做太疯狂，所以畏缩。感觉我能行，所以付出全部。事实是，那样做确实是疯狂的，但全都变成了de ja wo ( 梦中看到的，全都变成了现实)！
先是重创离我最近的重大腐败贪污团体—曼内斯曼石油天然气公司，我知道应该利用这起事件，逼迫祖国重创铺天盖地的腐败并修改共产党的党章和政治体制，还应尽全力拉近中国和我最热爱的美国之间的距离，去共同修补伤痕累累的地球，维护世界的真正和平和共同繁荣。
事实上，我还想为这两个我最爱的国家和世界，做的更多。我能，因为我能学习，思考，创造。。。向过去的一年那样。
我对比了我的方法和六四事件做法的区别：
我始终是单兵做战，没有一个人鼓励我，帮助我。我完全靠自己想办法。有时，狡猾，学习诸葛亮弹镇静曲，唱空城记，虚装声势，或装傻让对手产生错误判断。我必须充分利用各个实体之间的职能作用关系，和怀疑对抗关系。我只顾观察和等待。我尽全力维护自己的生命安全和身体健康。期间饱览祖国的大好江山，顶多患上了贫血和重感冒，以及连续一星期吃大量的多虑平和持续的紧张和害怕和贫穷。但今天，我一点都不害怕，今天明天一切都是美好的，每天充满喜悦，机遇，趣味和成功。我能理性，坚强地克服困难，信仰的力量可以克服瞬间的畏缩，抑郁和恐惧，我活力充沛，精神饱满地愿意面对任何挑战。我身体健康，没有任何疾病，上星期我领到了体检健康证明。健康证的编号是320204200711280080，发证日期是2007年12月2日。请你们去审查，核实一下。我是自豪的胜利者。
六四的参与者们他们怀着和我一样的气愤和梦想，采取的是有组织的大集体做战。2百多个主力军在天安门前一个月地下跪，绝食，示威，乞求，几十万支援军在外围摇旗呐喊。他们饱尝辛酸。他们把身体都搞坏了，有的饿成重病。却没有实现他们的梦想。因为他们只会乞求。而我的人生字典里根本没有乞求两个字。他们饿得不行了，情绪失控，从爱国蜕变成害国，引发武装暴乱。他们被抓进监狱，有的患上精神病和其他疾病，他们的人格和名声也被搞臭了。他们会痛哭，后悔一辈子。
我自始至终都能控制自己的情绪，尽力调节自身的状态，平静和微笑一直在心里和脸上。我决不做危害国家的事。明明我们的人也在贪污，我硬是要遮住中国屁股，大力展出洋屁股。 我只是偶尔暴躁。血性男儿都这样。比如，当我身上没一分钱，心衰体弱，害怕紧张地写crime details, clues and evidence and black lists 时。图书馆工作人员和政府派来的人动不动就骂我，向我施压，并且关闭网线。我不知道他们的名字，但我能清楚记住他们的大便脸。我愤怒。这不难理解。他们首先是穷要饭的精神病（经常自言自语或主动骂人），为了生存而去帮助那些官员。那些官员本身就是贪官，神经西西地认为我也会把摧毁他们。
六四参与者除了重创了他们自己，没能丝毫实现他们的梦想和愿望。腐败照样存在，而且愈演愈烈，到达今天的程度。中国和美国的关系反倒更加紧张。世界分为两派更加对立和明争暗斗。他们只不过是可敬又可悲的失败者。
我要得到诺贝尔和平奖，得到哈姆雷克的奖励，得到中国的奖励，联合国的奖励，得到所有有良知的人的肯定。
December 11, 2007 3:21 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 03:21
As seems to be the norm in present day political discussions, this columnist presents another heavily biased viewpoint when, as usual, the true answer lies in moderation. Mr. Domanic is correct when he condemns cooperative effort between the United States and Britain to over throw a democratically elected leader in Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953 however; in his bombastic rhetoric, he fails to recognize the volatile domestic political situation that was being played out in the United States during this time period. The early 1950's were a time of intense rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union. A time that included not only the McCarthy Hearings, but also the Eisenhower Doctrine. When Mosaddeq sided with Iran's communist party in an effort to solidify his position, it raised more than a few shackles in Washington. Also, it should be noted that many of Iran's influential ulemas were ardent Mosaddeq detractors, and supported the coup that ultimately lead to his ouster. While this does not excuse the United State’s hypocrisy in thwarting Iran's attempt to instill a democratically elected leader, it does show the inherent bias in Mr. Domanic's argument. It is important to note that the United States, as pointed out by Mr. Domanic, is taking an unrealistic and belligerent stance towards Iran. Making extreme military threats, and labeling a country's defense force as a terrorist organization, is not the proper way to go about establishing peace and deterring nuclear efforts. It seems that the Bush administration is trying to reinstate the policy of Brinkmanship against a much lesser opponent. Unfortunately, this policy, has, and will continue to induce the type of attitude adopted by the Arab states following the 67' Arab-Israeli War. Iran will have no choice but to adopt a policy of belligerence, knowing that it cannot physically repel the U.S. but; in belligerency, it can frustrate U.S. efforts and gain global sympathy by playing the underdog. For both countries to actually gain from this experience, two events must occur: the United States must assume a less physically threatening stance towards Iran; and Iran must cease its nuclear ambitions. Nothing good can come of a volatile state, with such a large and disillusioned young population, possessing nuclear weapons. As the U.S. should have learned through countless past experiences, it cannot continue to try and impose its will on other nations. For beneficial a results, the U.S. truly use force as a last result and Iran must abandon its nuclear objectives.
December 11, 2007 12:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:55
Agree that we need more creative leadership, both them and us.
Iran is a still an underdeveloped society. The enormous intellectual and economic might of the Persian people is being squandered by misguided mullahs.
The Iranian people are worse off today than at any point under the leadership of Reza Shah.
So much for the ideals of their revolution.
The Iranian people are getting ripped off again, and on a human level, deserve much better than their current government affords them.
The same can be said for us Americans.
December 11, 2007 12:36 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:36
I agree with you on the fact that bullying often causes a downward spiral of violence - and I would also agree that the US has much responsibility in causing that violence at a global level. Yet the response can't be 'going nuke' - need more progressive, creative and definitely more peaceful alternatives for deterrence. Maybe it is time we start thinking what these measures could be...
December 11, 2007 12:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:23
If Mustafa is so willing to accept the cold, geopolitical reality of neccesary deterrance, in the form of nuclear weapons, he must be willing to also accept the geopolitical dominance of America. He cannot have it both ways as he does when advocating accpetance of Iranian nuclear weapons. The actions which America undertook, specifically the coup of 53', was an action which fell squarely within the framework of cold war policy as did many other unsavory American actions which were to a certain extent uncovered during the church committee hearings of the 1970's. The point is that these were realpolitik actions taken by the US to preserve post war dominance and prosperity, but this does not exscuse them on a moral scale. Though the reaction of the Iranian regime to build a detterent against American and Israeli power is justified in this realpolitik sense, we must ask if it is justified in a moral sense. If you pose this question, then the central point of Mustafa's essay is rendered moot. You cannot bemoan American dominance in the world and then justify actions which run along the same lines. Or in today's parlance, "Don't hate the player, hate the game". If you want to take the moral high ground, and I believe that this article was a misguided attempt at doing so, you must take a moral stance against cold realist policies of all nations which inevitably increase the spiral of violence and despair in our world.
December 11, 2007 12:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:23
Mustafa should put the US way down on the list of those commiting "unending aggression." Pretty much all of Iran's neighbors want the Mullahs taken down, more than the USA does. Face it - besides China, who just wants Iran's oil (sound familiar?), Iran's totally corrupt theocracy doesn't have a single friend in Asia or Europe (gangsters in Lebanon don't count). Hell, even the Iranians themselves hate the Mullahs. Mustafa - how much are they paying you?
December 11, 2007 12:20 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:20
Make no mistake about it, Bush will not leave office without letting a few tomahawks fly. The targets have been chosen. We are at the ready.
Bomb Iran, Bomb Iran, ba, ba, ba, bomb Iran.
One the one side, we have a bunch of corrupt Iranian Mullahs. On the other, we have a bunch of corrupt American politicians. We have a village idiot as President, and Iran has one it's own, also president of the nation.
We have all sorts of bold pronouncements made on each side. The truth, however, is to be found somewhere in the middle.
Of course the Iranians are working on a nuclear capability. Who could blame them? Mustafa Dominic brings up a valid point. The Iranians look at a map and what do they see? We have them surrounded, for the love of God! They are next on the war monger wish list, and they know it.
It's only natural to want to defend yourself.
As far as Iran bombing Israel, forget about it. This would be suicide, would result in annihilation for the nation of Iran. The mullahs may be corrupt, but they are not stupid.
President Amen-then-jihad has said a lot of dumb things, but, ultimately, the Iranian regime is interested in advancing it's own economic interests.
The Iranians don't need the U.S.A. They are a nation obsessed with the idea of self reliance.
Get it?
December 11, 2007 12:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:15
Mr. Domanic with the exception of the coup d'etat you have conveniently managed to neglect decades of British involvement in 20th century Persia/Iran. Be careful of to who exactly it is you point your fingers.
You have also managed to neglect, as others have already pointed out, the U.S. numerous humanitarian efforts. As I recall both the US AND Great Britain both sent aid to Iran after the Bam earthquake. This of course is just the example of Iran.
The US had also sent aid to the USSR after earthquakes. Lets not forget Somalia '92 where the US sent food and aid and was attacked by locals. Yet somehow no one ever decides to remembers these. This is all in spite of the fact that after some of the US's worst natural disasters (Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina, The blizzard of 93, wildfires and earthquakes that have plagued california for ages, etc. etc.) where was the support for the U.S.? To put it bluntly, it wasn't.
Despite what you want to believe Mr. Domanic, the US is not as narcissistic as the rest of the world would have you believe.
December 11, 2007 12:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:15
This fool sounds like the leftist nuclear scientists who gave away the atomic bomb to the monster Stalin because "it would be a deterrent to America". As for his absurd rehashing of the Mossadegh plot in 1953 as somehow a justification for the totalitarian regime in Iran bent on reestablishing the caliphate, it is beneath human decency.
December 11, 2007 12:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:01
This fool sounds like the leftist nuclear scientists who gave away the atomic bomb to the monster Stalin because "it would be a deterrent to America". As for his absurd rehashing of the Mossadegh plot in 1953 as somehow a justification for the totalitarian regime in Iran bent on reestablishing the caliphate, it is beneath human decency.
December 11, 2007 12:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 11, 2007 00:01
I just read your article about America's policy toward Iran. It is well understood that the Bush policy is to get control of Iran
It is unfortunate, but true. It is so sad.
December 10, 2007 11:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 23:58
In a world where America and Iran were moral equivalents, he may have a point.
But that is not the case. Iran is state sponsor of terrorism, a state whose government has endorsed and materially supported genocide in Israel, and a state that brutally treats its own people. The current government in Tehran and this author are complete moral failures.
December 10, 2007 11:43 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 23:43
The cold war between the US and the Soviets worked quite well, for a time, as a deterrent to both sides. The only hope for peace in the Middle East is a NEW cold war, as Israel and the zionistas have made it perfectly clear they're more than willing to do "whatever it takes" to win their 4000 year old Holy War. Listen to Lyin' Joe Lieberman for 56.2 nanoseconds and you'll see what Israel is really all about.
December 10, 2007 11:40 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 23:40
I agree with you poit completely but I also think that there is another point that can be made. If Iran can manufacture their own nucleur fuel then they will have a cheap alternative to oil and can sell the oil they would normally use. This would make it even harder for the west to black mail them.
December 10, 2007 11:35 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 23:35
Never trust a guy named Mustafa.
December 10, 2007 11:20 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 23:20
I fully agree with the views expressed on this very intelligent analyst. Being a expatriate latinmerican professional with a strong interest in contemporary world history, I find this insighfull article totally true and only one isolated example of similar behaviour of USA thoroughout the world. To support this assertion, please spend some time to digest the views of another very intelligent and insightful journalist, who this time, bring us a much more documented and overwhelming set of incriminating evidence against USA abussive interventionist history, this time in Latinmerica.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=to6uNUTf8g4
December 10, 2007 11:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 23:17
Well said.
It is sad to read some of these ignorant comments, but not surprising, after all, they did elect an idiot as their president.
December 10, 2007 10:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:58
They mean to drive me crazy. But they fail. I ,only ,as normal man, have a little depression, anxiety and anger when bullied.
They do succeeds in driving me into poverty by shutting down all the possibilities of finding a stable job by means of spawning vicious rumors.
I even cannot afford to buy the cheapest shoes and a cheapest watch….
Doesn’t matter. Their IQ is too low. I can cope.
At the crucial moment when china, America, and the world are having a tough setback， worsening . I did something conducive within my dream and ability.
My contribution must be amply valued and rewarded.
I am now yearning to live and work in America with help of all the reward I deserve.
Yet still I will forward my suggestions for china on such fields as perfection of political pattern and population improvement and for the world peace keeping only if I can be treated fairly under your justice. .
With respect to the nuclear issue , we are all actually looking forward to the payoff by xmas.
I hereby would like to only write a sanguine poem for your refreshment.:
All for the dè jà wo
Big dream and heavy vexation slumbering into the wet woods.
Mist lingers no long
Dust flourishes impossible.
Because the last agile rain,
Glazes the purple and green leaves once rough
Blazes the brown blanches once weak
Moistens the bronze trunks once mash,
Rots the ugly weeds once crazy.
Nourishes the golden soil once desperate,
Singing larks ,blue and red , weave through the woods gaily,
Fresh fragrant breath of nature chimes the eternal moment.
Up the fringe , sshu….
The real dè jà wo homes in on the most acute creativity.
Marry chrismas!
December 10, 2007 10:55 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:55
I'm American and don't like the idea of Iran (particularly one led by a nut) with nuclear weapons. At the same time, I realize that the leaders of my own country have no sense about them and have lost a lot of credibility worldwide.
They not only started a war illegally and without just cause, they also conveniently failed to recognize the one benefit of having Saddam in power.
I'm at the point where I'm almost in agreement with the author. Iran with short-range nukes just might be what we need to get the US in shape and possibly out of the Middle East and focus on the crap going on at home.
Welcome Pax Iranica!
December 10, 2007 10:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:53
Nuclear weapons in the hands of IslamoFascist thugs
it totally unacceptable.
"Without America and with its own commodity wealth, the Middle East can still be a prosperous and peaceful region." is the statement of a complete moron.
If I ran a hedge fund and one of my managers made statements like this I would take a second look at his ability for rational analysis.
The Middle East is one big oasis of love, and the only thing this moron has going for him is that he doesn't have to live in it. This is just pathetic. Let's see...the last time the Islamic world did something positive in ANYTHING, literature, government, innovation...ANYTHING, was long before the fall of the Ottoman Empire. They did back then what the IslamoFascists want all Muslims to do today, which is forsake anything Western. We saw how well that worked for them when they became the "sick man of Europe"...now, we will be lucky if it isn't a mushroom cloud somewhere.
Fool!!!
December 10, 2007 10:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:52
It's hard to take someone seriously when they come from a country that is named after a bird that we eat on Thanksgiving.
But no, seriously. This turkish guy is all PO'd because by the American invasion, it's going to cause the kurdish people all across the region to rise up and demand independence from Iraq, and... you guessed it, Turkey.
So he's basically a turkish national who doesn't like that idea.
As to his other ideas, just utter nonsense. Iran doesn't have any support in the international community primarily because the country is run by a bunch of flaming religious nuts. In case you didn't catch the name it's the "ISLAMIC Republic of Iran".
You remember those guys, the ones who treat women like dogs, run airplanes into buildings, arrest women who name teddy bears "Mohammet" and turn themselves into bombs.
Then you say "Why does Iran not get respect".
The answer is obvious: "They don't deserve it".
December 10, 2007 10:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:41
is that short for Mitten Romney? That's a weird name.
December 10, 2007 10:39 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:39
If Mr. Domanic feels that American "aggression" is the principal cause of violence in the "peaceful" Middle East then I humbly suggest he open a history book or two. The predations of what is now named "Iran" began some four millennia before the United States existed and have continued without a break since. And if he feels that nuclear arms in the hands of the mullahs there is a stabilizing influence then he is delusional indeed.
December 10, 2007 10:30 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:30
Mustafa=idiot. I suppose WaPo needs eyeballs to drive ad sales, so they send in a bunch of clowns to make outlandish statements based on their "sophisticated geo-political understanding" of the world based on what? What a clown.
This has to be the greatest statement of all time:
"After meddling with Iran’s democratic system".
What a buffoon.
December 10, 2007 10:30 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:30
Our Lord made man in his own image and the man he created was flawed. In the 1930`s he saw perfection and will create man once again with the perfection he saw as his model. First all the less than perfect men have to be destroyed and he set that in motion by giving man "The Bomb".
I am far to modest to tell you who it was the Lord saw in the 1930`s.
Yes the Lord will take a rib, as needed, from me.
December 10, 2007 10:20 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:20
Mr. Mustafa makes some valid points. Certainly the foreign policy of the US under the Bush adminstration has been appalling. I think Mustafa understates the importance of the NIE on Iran however. I think it is a turning point, internally in this country -- a coup of sorts, and that it might well have changed the course of history.
Bush has been derailed - a huge thing. I hope the world gives America another chance.... There is an opportunity, in light of this mess that has been created, for US foreign policy to emerge as better than ever. The vast majority of Americans were complacent about foreign policy before Bush...I don't think that will ever be the case again. Our foreign policy has never lived up to the ideals of the average American....perhaps, in order to redeem ourselves, we'll actually become the leader we've always been alledged to be. I don't think an Iranian nuke will solve anything - ok...so long as we don't elect Giuliani....if that's the case...ok...I concede...
December 10, 2007 10:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:16
Somebody wrote:
"October 23, 1983 - A suicide car bomb attack against the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut kills 241 servicemen. A simultaneous attack on a French base kills 58 paratroopers.
In response, President Ronald Reagan ordered the battleship USS New Jersey, stationed off the coast of Lebanon, to shell the hills near Beirut. "
You forgot about when Reagan retreated from Beirut, thereby encouraging terrorists for generations.
Still, though, you have a very impressive recall of history.
Actually, come to think of it, what were we doing in Beirut, anyway? Or any of the other places you mention, aside from on Sept. 11? What were we doing there?
December 10, 2007 10:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 10, 2007 22:12
I hope the first nuke detonated by Iranian-sponsored terrorists is "at the London office of a global hedge fund." And I hope this jerk's family live within walking distance of his office.
S