Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Not to screw up the attack-Iran push, but most Iranians want democracy, nuclear inspections

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:46 PM
Original message
Not to screw up the attack-Iran push, but most Iranians want democracy, nuclear inspections
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 05:48 PM by WilliamPitt
My quick analysis, fwiw...

1. Iranians are Persians, not Arabs. The majority of Iranians practice a Shi'ite version of Islam unique in the Mideast, as it was formed by multiple invasions of armies carrying different faiths and cultures, plus an underpinning of Zoroastrianism, i.e. ancient populist faith, that predates Allah by centuries. Iran is sort of the Poland of the Mideast; they got conqured over and over by armies that had to pass through their land to get where they were going (Jerusalem, Baghdad, Constantinople, etc), and those conquering armies left their mark

In short, most of the people there don't fit the "mad Arab" mold.

2. Iran is the only Mideast nation that had a democratic, republican, parlimentary system of government almost become the main deal. Mohammed Mossadeq became Prime Minister in the 50s, had a parliament, liberal reforms, free speech and basic Western governing principles.

But he nationalized the oil and threw out the US/British oil companies. British MI5 joined with CIA, per Eisenhower's order, and had his government overthrown (in, I think, 1953). We installed the Shah, who brutalized the populace but let the oil flow. This planted the wacky seeds that led to 1979, the Ayatollah, the hostages, and the takeover of the current nutbag Mullahs.

They had democracy, though. They wanted it. We killed it. This isn't conspiracy shit. It's black-letter history. Quick reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

There are shelves of books on the topic.

3. 75% of Iranian citizens are under 30, love the West, love TV, and hate the God-screaming Mullah elites. Iran is the world capital of the drug Ectasy. The most popular TV shows in Tehran are illegal satellite programs beamed in from Britain by expatriates, said shows being uniformly dedicated to pissing on the Mullahs. Most homes in Tehran have secret satellite dishes on their roofs to catch these shows.

4. There are two reasons Iran is run by the current nutbag Ahmadinejad. A) The Mullahs control the voting, and B) We invaded Iraq, which gave the nutbags a platform.

Iran wants to be Western, by huge majorities, and tried to be Western until we fucked with them. It is a gross irony of the 20th century that Iran is an enemy, while Saudi Arabia is an "ally."

Half the Sunni foreign fighters are Saudi. Virtually all of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi. Most terror funding is Saudi. The shoulder-fired missiles used to shoot down our choppers in Iraq were/are bought with Saudi money.

Iran should be a friend. But we overthrew their democracy, installed a dictator, lost control of him...and then made friends with Saddam Hussein to try and contain our mess.

The mess continues. Anyone think bombs and bullets will help this majority regain the democracy they tried to create 50 years ago?

=====

Poll: Iranians want democracy, nuclear inspections

(CNN) -- Most Iranians support nuclear inspections, a democratic government and normal relations with the United States, a poll by a U.S.-based organization has found. Terror Free Tomorrow found 80 percent of Iranians support full inspections and a guarantee not to develop nuclear weapons in return for aid from other countries.

Slightly more than half, however, said they still favor the development of nuclear weapons and think the country would be safer with them. Developing the weapons is considered a "very important" priority for just 29 percent of those polled. But when presented with an option to give up nuclear weapons development in return for outside aid, only 17 percent still supported nuclear weapons development.

The economy is more important to Iranians than developing nuclear weapons. Eighty-eight percent said they want economic improvement to be the government's top priority. The poll also found 56 percent think President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has failed to keep his campaign promise to "put oil money on the table of the people themselves."

Additionally, 61 percent of those interviewed "were willing to tell our pollsters over the phone that they oppose the current Iranian system of government, where the Supreme Leader rules according to religious principles and cannot be chosen or replaced by direct vote of the people."

Instead, 79 percent support a democratic system in which leaders are elected through free, direct elections. And while nearly two-thirds support financial assistance for opposition groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, 55 percent of Iranians support recognizing Israel and Palestine as independent states in exchange for normal relations with the United States.

More: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/07/16/iran.poll/ind...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. But do they want it at the point of a gun? And at the cost of their oil?
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 05:55 PM by rocknation
...Mohammed Mossadeq became Prime Minister in the 50s, had a parliament, liberal reforms, free speech and basic Western governing principles. But he nationalized the oil and threw out the US/British oil companies. British MI5 joined with CIA, per Eisenhower's order, and had his government overthrown...We installed the Shah, who brutalized the populace but let the oil flow...

How do we ask Iranians to trust us? More important, how do we ask them to be the FIRST to die for our OWN sins?

:shrug:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angstlessk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Hell compared to what we are talking about doing...NUKING THEM
the point of a gun aint so bad...though it would make everyone ANTI WESTERN..EITHER WAY!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. I agree.
But I really don't know what your point is.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
35. Well, they'll obviously greet invading U.S. troops with flowers and candy.
After all, we were told the same thing about Iraqis, right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. K and R
"Iran wants to be Western, by huge majorities, and tried to be Western until we fucked with them. It is a gross irony of the 20th century that Iran is an enemy, while Saudi Arabia is an "ally." "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
5. Lest we forget...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. Good post. Follow up question: why have the press, pundits, and congress
allowed and facilitated this mis-representation?

Remember when one of the MSM outlets (inadvertantly) mistranslated "nuclear energy" into "nuclear weapons?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. They haven't read "All The Shah's Men," for starters
An excellent primer on 20th centiry Iran, with deep analysis of their cultural history.

Also, they get paid better during wars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. A wee avoid-shooting bump
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:11 PM
Response to Original message
9. But, if they are attacked, nationalism kicks in and we would be the enemy
Similarly, if we were attacked militarily, by someone claiming to want to 'help us get rid of Bush', I would be in the streets fighting the invaders
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
10. Don't forget Jim Webb's remarks during his alternate State of The Union Address
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 07:39 PM by truedelphi
He pointed out that during the VIetnam era, Red China was guilty of supplying fire power to the North Vietnamese.

Did the USA become compelled to enter a major fray against Red China then?

No, we certainly didn't. And Webb indicates no real reason to start a war against Iran now.

But he seems to be in the minority of those in Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JacquesMolay Donating Member (413 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
11. I had a college buddy from Iran -
great guy, good friend. He told me what it was like in Iran before the revolution, and he gave me the impression that there have always been people there opposed to the fundamentalists running the country. I saw him last year and he told me the exact same thing. I think Ahmadenijad winning was a fluke, that could only have been made possible by a dumbass western leader rallying the reactionary right-wing core by labeling the nation as part of the 'axis of evil'. If the next election is not rigged, I think Ahmadenijad will be out on his ass. Bush will be by then, too. It would be better for both countries if there was a moderate reformer in Iraq. I still think it's possible that we could come to peace with them. But the right-wing nutjobs have got to go - in both countries.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Commonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:54 PM
Response to Original message
12. Unfortunately, the U.S. is now controlled by...
...the "Upside Down People."

Everything about their worldview is upside down to reality.
So, telling them that most Iranians would probably enjoy being friends with us won't have the desired effect.

Actually, nothing will have the desired effect, since the Upside Down People don't think. I'm not certain what you would call the impulses flying through their nervous systems, but "thinking" and "feeling" probably are not the proper descriptive terms. "Fearing" and "acting like idiots" are probably not too far off the mark.

Point is, I know that most Iranians are nice people who I could have a great time with, and you know that most Iranians are nice people that you could have a great time with, however, you'll never convince the 30 or 40 percent of Americans who are "Upside Down People" of anything close to that notion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lilith Velkor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
13. What they want matters about as much as what we want
Which is to say it doesn't.

However, unlike our previous two victims, Iran has an airforce and a conventional weapons industry. That could give the MIC and it's lackeys in our government enough pause to go into a stall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
14. The main problem seems to be with Ahmadinejad...
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 08:10 PM by AntiFascist
he is the one stirring up anger amongst Jews by threatening Israel, and by trying to unite Islamic retribution under the Revolutionary Guard. This is playing right into the hands of neocons, and because of that he has been assisting the neocons in creating an ideal enemy which could all too easily get nuked. No matter what propaganda Iranians may be exposed to, they need to be aware of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #14
25. He is NOT "threatening Israel"! Israel is threatening IRAN!
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 10:34 PM by scarletwoman
I can't believe there are DUers still falling for the bald-faced neocon propaganda based on a mistranslation of a single line in a single speech.

It is perfectly true that Ahmadinejad -- like just about EVERYONE in the entire Middle East -- would prefer that the "Zionist Entity" did not exist. But he has NEVER said that he is out to destroy it. He's not suicidal!

What he HAS said is that, eventually, just like the Soviet Union, the Zionist Entity will vanish from history. It's a prediction, not a threat.

Meanwhile, Israel is constantly advocating that Iran be bombed. Just WHO is threatening WHO?

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. I watched his interview with Mike Wallace...

then I watched the unedited version online. I got the distinct feeling that this man might be willing to sacrifice many of his own people in order to pursue a path not unlike that of OBL. If he feels that to die as a martyr is righteous, then I suppose that might conform to his particular extremist views; however, as a Head of State is it fair to subject many of his own people to the same fate?

Pushing to defend his nation against threats of aggression is understandable, but trying to push a broader revolution in light of what the US is doing does seem suicidal, which is why I felt that he is playing into the hands of the neocons.

Iran, like the US, and Israel for that matter, deserve leadership which is not prone to violence.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalsoldier5 Donating Member (248 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #25
38. Lay off Israel a bit.
They are not the bad guys in this conflict. BOTH my Polish great grandparents and grandfather (their son) were imprisoned in the late 1930's by Hitler's Nazi regime. When Ahmadinejad publicly denies that atrocity at conferences with David Duke as his special guest AND calls for an end to the "Zionist Entity" in the Middle East, I say loud clear: FUCK THIS GUY. I'm a liberal, not a leftist/socialist, so when I see gays and other minorites being executed by the Iranian government and women and others being downright oppressed, all while their sick government is consolidating power and teaming with Hugo Chavez to form anit-American unions, I get rightfully angry. I know a lot people on DU want to hate Bush more than ANYBODY, but just take comfort in the face that he's gone in 1.5 years (thank God) and pray that we can find a peaceful way to help the Iranians dump their "leader" before WWIII has to begin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. We don't need to "help" the Iranians dump their leader.
We just need to get a better President.

One who doesn't want to define any new "Axis of Evil."




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meshuga Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. Welcome to DU! :-) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
15. Yeah, well, tell it to the Senate, who just voted 97-0 to give bush another blank check.
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 08:20 PM by scarletwoman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Do you have the amendment text?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Yep, right here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. That is not another blank check.
Of course, neither was the IWR, if it is read by a logical, thinking person, say a lawyer worth her salt. Unfortunately it appears there is not a lawyer worth their salt in DC these days.

I guess all I'm saying is, if they attack Iran with that as their backing - we deserve all the scorn we get for letting them do it. There is nothing in that text that supports attack.

Plus it's fucking loaded with he said she said; since when does hearsay make for good legislation? This thing is a goddamn embarrassment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. You're damn right it's "loaded with he said she said" & hearsay!
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 10:03 PM by scarletwoman
The problem with it -- as I've pointed out here -- is this:

The Senate has gone on record charging Iran with aggressive actions in Iraq. Therefore, bush, at any time he chooses, can point to the Senate's affirmation of Iran's perfidy as "proof" that Iran must be dealt with. And with so much disinformation already part of the "findings", do you really trust that the required 30 day report is going to be LESS filled with hearsay and propaganda?

I stand by my assertion that this amendment leaves a wide open door for bush to "decide" that Iran must be attacked -- and that Iran can be attacked under the terms of the Iraq War Resolution with no further "permission" of Congress needed.


sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. Looks like a bill asking for information to be collected and delivered.
I can live with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Look a little deeper...
Dover Bitch at Digby sums it up pretty well:

the Lieberman Amendment

(excerpt)

If "force protection" is the name of the game, Congress has just, despite their attempts to de-fang the bill, handed the administration a list of Congressional "findings" that support whatever Bush and Cheney decide to do in Iran (and in secret). The findings themselves attribute the allegations of Iranian involvment to military representatives, but there shouldn't be any doubt that the White House would argue that the Congress has accepted them through their acknowledgement.

Consider how the water-carriers for this administration have used the libelous "Additional Views" of three Republican senators to claim that the entire Senate concluded that Joe Wilson is a liar in the Select Intelligence Committee's Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Assessment on Iraq. Now, the White House has a 20-point list of reasons to justify anything Bush has already been doing without Congressional approval.



Did you read all the "findings" at the link I provided above? Most of them have as much substance as Colin Powell's little vial of fake anthrax at the UN.

And surely you're not so naive as to believe that the required "reports" won't be just as filled with hearsay and unsupported assertions as the initial list of findings attached to this amendment, if not moreso?

Please read Chris Floyd's take on this -- he lays it out much better than I: Down in the Flood: The Senate's Blank Check for War on Iran

Like I said, tlook a little deeper into the implications...

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. You did well on this topic w/ Malloy tonight
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. I called my senators today and asked them wtf they were thinking.
I don't think they like it when we actually pay attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Did you get any responses? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. No. But at least no one hung up on me.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
18. We know this
And I'm sure the President (Cheney) knows this. If it will stop WWIII or not remains to be seen. Question is what do we all do if the maniacs do it anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
29. We'll be greeted as LIBERATORS!!! W00t!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
30. excellent article -- a must read
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CGowen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 07:31 AM
Response to Original message
31. they want Yen or Euro for their oil, therefore ... nuke 'em n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleedingheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
32. Well the folks in Iran must overthrow their own government and we need to stay out
a friend of mine is from Iran (she refers to herself as Persian) and her family knows that Iran has suffered under religious rule however until the folks in Iran decide that it is time to kick out the mullahs...they will live under that system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. There is a nascent civil society in Iran. We should be supporting it
not threatening it.

God, I hate BushCo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleedingheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. technically I think the less we threaten them and the less they feel threatened
the more likely they will be able to cut off the extremist element in their country.

The worst thing we could do is invade Iran...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Agree. Even Joe L* admits that our two biggest supporters in the ME
are Israel and Iran. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
34. Error: You've already recommended that thread.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
40. A rec and a kick. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyorDeath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-17-07 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
41. Anyone that has taken more than a cursory look at Iran
and Iranian history already knows this.

"the attack-Iran push" is all about Oil

and geopolitical power.

An attack on Iran when and if it comes has fuck all to do with Iranian's political beliefs
or Nuclear power.

It has everything to do with the Ocean of oil they sit on and the fact that they will accept
currencies other than the American $ in exchange for it.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC