Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KriTiKiT
Says"play nice"
07:05 PM on 09/07/2009
well you should it really hot and dangerous
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Khirad
07:03 PM on 09/07/2009
This is a off-topic to the nuclear issue and for regulars of Iran threads:

Another Cultural Revolution?
http://tehranbureau.com/cultural-revolution/
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Khirad
06:58 PM on 09/07/2009
Since little in this story above was new, I'd like to provide a little contextual insight to the complex Iranian cultural attitudes behind the nuclear issue:

http://www.alternet.org/world/113104/why_iranians_love_and_loathe_ahmadinejad_and_think_nuclear_technology%27s_their_right?page=entire

Really, just an excerpt from his book, recommended.
08:19 PM on 09/07/2009
Good article. Khirad.
05:55 PM on 09/07/2009
He is actually saying: You don't negotiate wiht Iran - you force us. Historically this is old news.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Khirad
07:27 PM on 09/07/2009
You hint at little to no knowledge of Iranian history. If you wish, you may proceed to make your case.
04:57 AM on 09/08/2009
He can't make his case because he's not very bright. And yes, the US does have a long history of FORCING Iran, like when it FORCED upon the people of Iran a despotic, catastrophic government under Pahlavi to prevent the democratically elected, progressive government of Iran from nationalizing oil, which was controlled by the British. They lived under this monarchic menace to their freedom and their very lives for nearly 30 years, from 1953 to 1979. And then, after that happened, the US funneled money into Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, to fight the Iranians... little did we know that 25 years later they'd be so evil... Ah! Like that one time when the Red Army invaded Afghanistan (concomitant to this) and the US funded the Mujaheddin resistance led by one Osama bin Laden... My goodness!
05:55 AM on 09/08/2009
OBL never "led" the Mujaheddin.
05:30 PM on 09/07/2009
Ex-President Denounces Iran’s Government
New York Times / Robert F. Worth


BEIRUT, Lebanon — Mohammad Khatami, Iran’s former president, made a fiery speech Sunday against the government, accusing its leaders of trying to smear their enemies and purge them from public life with “fascist and totalitarian methods.”

The speech by Mr. Khatami, a leading reformist, came a day after his ally, the losing presidential candidate Mir Hussein Moussavi, called on supporters to deepen their protest movement, in his first major statement in weeks.

Together, the two statements, posted on the Internet by opposition Web sites, made clear that opposition leaders — much like their hard-line foes — are girding supporters for a long-term battle to be waged as much through ideas and quiet social organizing as through the public protests that followed Iran’s disputed presidential election on June 12.

Both Mr. Khatami and members of the group he addressed, the Islamic Society of University Prof... >>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/07/world/middleeast/07iran.html?_r=1
07:49 PM on 09/07/2009
I read the New York Times article, joabear. I guess it is wait and see. It is all an unknown, much like the nuclear issue in Iran. I don't know if the nuclear issue is only for peaceful purposes, though I suspect it is for more than just peaceful use, since nuclear war capability has been a goal of many developing and marginalized developed countries (ie Pakistan, India, South Africa during the 70's, Israel).
04:56 PM on 09/07/2009
Iranian nukes are useful because they are likely to promote peace. If Iran doesn't have any deterrent capability, it is only a matter of time before the US comes after their oil. If Iran has a deterrent capability, the US will limit their aggression to their usual targets: defenseless countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Likewise, if the US is so concerned about nukes, why don't their start dismantling theirs. Oh, that's right, they want be be the only one in the room with a gun.

Remember, the US is the only country to ever use these weapons on civilian populations.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
courtb
05:34 PM on 09/07/2009
Nothing promotes peace like an arms race in the middle east.
05:42 PM on 09/07/2009
Of course, Israel started the arms race when they developed nuclear weapons first.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DD1Prime
04:53 PM on 09/07/2009
Iran has eschewed negotiation -and abiding by international law - ever since the Islamic revolution. They still celebrate the hostage taking at th American embassy every year - and still build up their forces for a much anticipated and desired war with Israel - and the US.

There is no reason to be gentle with a government of Iran's ilk - whatever it takes to bring them to heel - or overthrow them - should be done. Otherwise there will be mushroom clouds over the oils fields of the Middle East despite 30 years of clear warning that this was coming.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PWM
Eisenhower Republicans are liberals
09:22 AM on 09/08/2009
One reaps what they sow. The US is reaping its shortsightedness in its dealings with Iran.
04:33 PM on 09/07/2009
why would he need to negotiate ?? who's to stop him ? what is going to be U.S. strategy -policy ?
Ahmadinejah 's nuclear ambition is tide-up in a desire to achieve a nuclear .....bomb ? Islamic superiority ? could he ever back away for going nuclear ? [no] that would be like Islam say-ing to their women through away the veil !
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PWM
Eisenhower Republicans are liberals
09:23 AM on 09/08/2009
Islamic superiority? He will have to build tens of thousands of Nuclear weapons just to catch up to the US.
01:57 PM on 09/08/2009
no just - ONE can give him leverage ? right at
04:28 PM on 09/07/2009
As much as I hate this situation, I think the world needs to get tough. Extreme sanctions. Including against Chavez if he sends gasoline to Iran. This is exactly the kind of situation the UN was created for. If they can not contain a single rogue nation, keeping them from creating a nuclear bomb, while opening threatening Israel, they are useless. Obama is a very nice guy, but he is no wuss. He has sent some of our toughest negotiators abroad, and Iran will be contained. I'd much rather do that than worry about Afghanistan. Afghanistan can be contained from afar, they have no nuclear weapons. Pakistan and India can and should work together to keep that in check. We need our fire power for Iran.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PWM
Eisenhower Republicans are liberals
09:24 AM on 09/08/2009
Never happen as China will veto any such resolution. Iran is their number one purchaser of arms.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:06 PM on 09/07/2009
Israel is able to continue with their policy of expanding their settlements because they have indisputable military superiority. If Iran ever gets nuclear weapons, it will undermine Israel's military superiority.

The more people with their finger on the button of using nuclear weapons, the more likely it is that we will end up in some kind of nuclear nightmare. Having said that, I think I have more trust in the common sense of most Iranians than is generally expressed in public. I am not prepared to see the U.S.A. declare itself the ruler of the world, and to unilaterally decide it has the right to attack anyone it wants to, including Iran, North Korea, or Iraq.

At least when the USSR was around, they and the USA tended to balance each other out, preventing one or the other from setting themselves up as rulers of the world. Now, the biggest enemy to the USA is our own ignorance and hubris.
06:43 PM on 09/07/2009
What's a word when you use it against a whole nation for political purposes? Israel is an Apartheid state because "we" say so. Meanwhile, you can't be a land owning Jew in Jordan, which I guess makes sense because the whole world knows that the Jews in Israel are simply Europeans practicing imperialism.

A lot of these "settlements" are really just real estate developments built on land bought by Jews from Arabs. Because the rest of the world wants to make it a big deal, it becomes one.

When you folks show me news articles of Jewish men lynching Arab boys for staring at their Jewish women too long, then maybe we can make these judgements based on our own country's past. But seeing as how the Israel bashers can't seem to dig that Jews have a right to autonomy in the Middle East-- in a state the size of Rhode Island-- and that every action they do has to be brought to the attention of the EU and POTUS, I seriously doubt logic and news from the ground will actually change anyone's mind here on HuffPo.

In short, how much do you deserve peace in the MIddle East? Think about it and quit spewing.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PWM
Eisenhower Republicans are liberals
09:27 AM on 09/08/2009
Wow. You live in a fantasy world. Israel is an Apartheid state as it rules milliions and allows them no voice in government. Where is your evidence a jew in Jordan cannot own land?

These settlements are illegal under international law, and the fantasy that the land was bought from Arabs has been debunked again and again.

I know how to have peace in the Middle East, cut Israel off from its military welfare it gets from the US. I don't see why one penny of my tax dollars should go to that hateful state.
03:19 PM on 09/07/2009
The Death of the Republic
Tehran Bureau / Rasool Nafisi
06-Sep-2009

http://tehranbureau.com/ascension-militarized-islamic-state/
03:07 PM on 09/07/2009
It's interesting to notice why people still don't understand what Ahmadinejad et al are up to.

I wonder why the American Media is not willing to expose Ahmadinejad for who he really is.
03:34 PM on 09/07/2009
Why don't you tell us?
03:58 PM on 09/07/2009
I have. please post replies...
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Khirad
07:18 PM on 09/07/2009
They are, they're just distracted by Wacko Jacko... still. Besides, they never actually dig behind who his advisers and mentors or the archconservatives behind the scenes are who support him - or the strand of thought he represents, or the hard-line revolutionary rhetoric he recylcles - the context it implies within the history of the IRI - and therefore what he envisions as its harsh, uncompromising future (never mind he stated the Mahdi was supposed to relieve him of his post before his first term ended... oops!). If you're unable to see past his rhetoric, take a look into them. I'll hope people let me pass right now without providing a list. I'm on another computer right now.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:03 PM on 09/07/2009
Don't want to negotiate??? Fine..........smile for the laser camera............
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PWM
Eisenhower Republicans are liberals
09:38 AM on 09/08/2009
Let's say for the sake of argument that Iran is telling the truth when it says that it merely wants to develop nuclear power (something they are allowed to do under international law). Now if we keep accusing them of trying to build a bomb, wouldn't we get angry at it after a time?

I suspect that the truth lies somewhere between the two positions - unsure what it is right now.
02:59 PM on 09/07/2009
The latest IAEA reports which suggest "weaponization" intent are things Iran should be addressing, not "energy e haste-ee hagh e mossalam e maast." (peaceful nuclear power is our rights) But that's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for you--talking populist, unrelated nonesense to a captive audience without ever tolerating questions or challenges. Up until June, most people living outside Iran did not realize just how disgusted Iranians inside Iran are with Ahmadinejad's politics and conduct; they claimed his policies were well-liked and well-supported in Iran. As has become evident at an enormously high cost, Iranians despise Ahmadinejad's conduct and decisions which have alienated Iran and have increased hostility toward it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Feanor
I want my jewels back.
08:45 PM on 09/07/2009
Here is a link to the latest IAEA report:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2009/gov2009-35.pdf

It does not suggest "weaponization" - in fact it does not even use the word.

Why do you find it necessary to premise your comment on a falsehood?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
01:35 PM on 09/07/2009
There's something demeaning about the president of the United States being forced to threatening noises to Iran every once in a while just to appease AIPAC, then essentially being told to go take a hike.
03:03 PM on 09/07/2009
When did Obama threatned Iran?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
09:36 PM on 09/08/2009
Sentence verb deadline
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:27 PM on 09/07/2009
There's something demeaning about coming up with some ulterior motive for any action of a politician or a country blaming it on the old antisemetic canard that jews control everything behind the scenes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
05:24 PM on 09/07/2009
Oh before you you shake your wattles in outrage, candidate Obama and president Obama made these statements at AIPAC conventions. As did umpteen Congresspersons, and 56 more just returning from their free 'fact finding mission' to Israel all primed to demand sanctions against Iran in October.