Khamenei call Americans elections a victory for Iran

Parent Cafe
21

<p>Fairly correct, but I think there is more subtlety around the hostage issue. You see, I worked for the Iran-America Society, and it WAS a nest of spies. The Iranians students I knew, and taught, never quite understood Americans. Every house I used to go into in Iran, from tribal villages to the ruling class, had two pictures on the wall - the obligatory one of the Shah, and a picture of JFK. They knew absolutely nothing about JFK, but he was the answer to the Shah, the oppositional symbol of freedom, and of democracy, and of America. They could not imagine that the American people, if they only knew the evil being done to them in their name, would not support the Iranian people in their struggles.</p>

<p>But they never did. A nationalist opposition against the Shah failed. A moderate democratic opposition to the Shah failed. A socialist opposition to the Shah failed. A communist opposition to the Shah failed. Finally, all that was left was Khomeini who, 10 years earlier than 1979, would most certainly have NOT been the people’s choice - despite the massacres that sent him into exile. (You left out the predations of the so-called “White Revolution” of 1963, but that is probably more complex than is worth going over here.)</p>

<p>The situation at the embassy was manipulated by all parties, but the students (some of whom I have met since) were extraordinarily naive. They naively but truly figured that if they took the hostages and the embassy, the American people would learn what terrible things had been done to the Iranian people in their name, and would support them! (yes, I know, that is astonishing, but they really believed that, the U.S. being the country of “JFK”.) </p>

<p>I had one student say to me that “if only the American people knew what is being done to us, they would overthrow the government.” At the time, I took that to mean the Iranian government. But he actually meant the AMERICAN government - no self-respecting people, guardians of freedom and democracy, would allow its government to do such terrible things in their names.</p>

<p>Sadly, I am old enough to remember a time when the people of virtually every country in the Middle East were pro-U.S. Egypt, Syria, Algeria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, the list could go on. Now, people everywhere approve of the idea of killing Americans (even though most of them are very, very peaceloving, and want to raise their families in peace much the same way Americans do.) Some of this is just the failure for an Israeli-Palestinian peace to evolve (or for Americans to push hard enough for it.) But much is just the way bipartisan realpolitik has evolved. In the meantime, people have flocked to the banner of Islam, which is not surprising, given that every other attempt to express their wills throughout the region has failed.</p>

<p>I really honestly and truly believe that there are openings for the American and Iranian people to mend fences. It will take time. It will take significant steps toward resolution in Israel-Palestine. It will take the U.S. leaving Iraq - no trust can be created with 200,000 hostile troops on one’s borders. But Iranians value their independence, and their freedom, and their (little) democracy every bit as much as American say we do, and I think there is much room for rapproachment.</p>

22

<p>On this, mini, we agree. :)</p>

23

<p>Thank you Mini- It seems to me one solution to our war on terror may be some consideration on the impact of acting in “our best interest” has on the citizens of the other country. I have a coworker from Guatamala who has many horror stories about the impact of US decisions had on his country. In 1979 I was in college and remember an Iranian student at my school being tormented- his crime he challenged students to look at US actions and how they impacted Iranians- our patriotism did not allow us to consider his argument it was US right or wrong- sadly the professor did not control the class and we were unable to have any meaningful discussion. It was not until I met an Iranian coworker 20 years later that I looked critically at the issue. I work with many people from all over the world and they all love the US but they wish Americans had a deeper understanding of what our foreign policy decisions had on innocent citizens of their countries.</p>

24

<p>ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad:</p>

<p>I don’t believe my statement was a bit over the top. If a nation feels threatened, it will take steps to protect itself from that threat. If I were in the Iranian government, I would simply assume that the US has every intention of invading Iran once Iraq is pacified, and even if I felt Iraq might not easily be passified, I would not take the chance. I would attempt to develop nuclear weapons as a means of defense.</p>

25

<p>Nuclear weapons in the hands of extremist governments are very dangerous. I consider the present Iranian and NK governments as two examples of these. Iran’s government certainly isn’t acting very concerned about the US or Europe since it continues to rattle the cage every chance it gets. My point is that all they’re accomplishing is the hastening, not a lessening, of a reaction from the US, Europe, or elsewhere.</p>

26

<p>ucsd etc. dad</p>

<p>Did I say that nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranian or (for that matter) North Korean governments aren’t dangerous? Can you find anywhere that I said that?</p>

<p>What I said was that, if I were in the Iranian government, I would see the US as a clear and present danger. The US has proven in the past that it is quite willing to meddle very seriously in Iranian affairs, even to the point of installing and supporting a dictator who employed intimidation and torture against his (and presumably the US’s) enemies. The recent incursion into Iraq would look to me like invasion on the flimsiest of pretexts. In other words, the US would look to me to be just another in a long string of colonial powers, so oil hungry that it is ready, willing, and able to apply military might to cloy its insatiable energy palate. </p>

<p>Whether this is true or not is beside the point. I could not afford to trust the US government. I would have no reason for trust. As for Iran “rattling the cage,” I would only partially agree. Part of that is the sheer bravado of a nation expecting invasion and trying to act tough enough to scare the bully away. It’s as silly as the 90 lb. kid in the schoolyard trying to bluff the 150 lb. bully, but it’s perfectly consistent with ME behavior under stress. The rest seems, to me, to be the opposite. Instead of ratting the cage, I’d suggest that Iran has been stalling for time. It will not feel safe until it has a nuclear weapon or two.</p>

<p>Does its stance make it more and not less likely to be invaded? Depends on how you look at it. It makes it more likely in the near-term (before the bomb is developed) and less likely in the long term. Having said that, I will go back to my original point. If I were in the Iranian government, I would simply assume that the US is going to invade. That makes short-term issues of no consequence. I would see it as a race against time.</p>

<p>Why do so many Americans have so much trouble understanding how, if so many of us can be so frightened by a hostile group of terrorists certainly numbering no more than a few tens of thousands, other countries can be frightened by a government representing 300 million people, a navy larger than all the other navies of the world put together, and an air force capable of establishing absolute air superiority over virtually any patch of sky on the earth?</p>

<p>The US has, for some time now, spent a great deal of time trying to frighten other countries into submission. Why should we be surprised if they sometimes are frightened into aggression?</p>

27

<p>“Nuclear weapons in the hands of extremist governments are very dangerous.”</p>

<p>You bet. Pakistan, Israel, and the U.S. together make up a very dangerous triumvirate. All three have very large militaries, and a propensity for using them.</p>

<p>Iran is VERY concerned about the U.S. - it sees 200,000 hostile and aggressive troops on its border, coming from a country that incited its neighbors to use chemical weapons against them, and a government that instead of talking, calls them the incarnation of evil. Under the circumstances, if I were a leader of Iran, I’d call upon every nationalist tendency I could, build up my military, and acquire nuclear weapons as fast as I could. And given that my country is not Arab, I’d look for leverage points to to use Arab peoples around the region as a buffer. The best way to do so would to make common cause with them around Israel.</p>

28

<p>That is stupid. Since Israel’s independance they have been threatened with death. Israel needs nuclear weapons as a deterrent to its arab neighbors. </p>

<p>You do not get the title of incarnation of evil just like that. Iran had to do alot of harm to America and to the rest of the world to be called evil. They deserved it. I can just imagine you trying to justify the Nazis anger with the allies because they were called “bad people”. You are so morally bankrupt its amazing. The Iranian president wants me dead. He spends money to kill me and my family, yet you are an apologist for him.</p>

29

<p>Golani, I really can’t wait for you to go to college and learn something. Right now, you aren’t bringing anything to the table here except really tired soundbites, and no relevant experience on which to base your adoption of them. I generally enjoy the participation of students on this forum, but not so much when they parrot talk radio and insult their elders right and left. There is no excuse for some of your epithets.</p>

30

<p>Ditto, JHS.</p>

31

<p>Well, I don’t agree with either JHS or AM on this. I don’t support the notion that children should be “seen and not heard” or play in another room, away from the adults. As long as youngsters behave courteously, why should adults demean their participation? You don’t have to agree with Golani (I don’t always agree with him) but I know that you don’t agree with me either. Does that mean I shouldn’t participate in these forums? The best way, imo, for anyone to analyze their own beliefs and values is to defend them by debating with others. Golani may learn something from those who have a different point of view, and we may learn something from Golani.</p>

<p>JHS, I don’t think any of us know what another’s experiences are – maybe Golani’s life has a relationship to current affairs that you don’t know or understand.</p>

32

<p>SJ, I don’t think kids should be seen and not heard either.</p>

<p>OTOH, I think if kids are going to participate on an adult forum, they need to behave courteously (as I would expect the adults to behave towards each other), to avoid inflammatory statements, stereotypes, and bigotry. Being a know-it-all is really annoying too. This type of behavior from a 17 yr old really needs to be put in check, and if my own son were behaving this way, I would offer any adult the opportunity to shoot him off his high horse.</p>

<p>Golani has been lacking in courtesy and respect, and has been quite bigoted in numerous comments. I haven’t yet alerted the mods, although been quite close on a number of occasions.</p>

33

<p>What part of golani’s statement exceeded the norm for courtesy or inflammatory statements regularly found here on this forum? As far as being a “know-it-all”, well that descriptor would probably fit just about everyone on this forum.</p>

34

<p>

I KNOW it does.:)</p>

35

<p>Some of us have the grey hair to show for it though.:p</p>

36

<p>Allmusic, this is not the first tiem you have called my remarks stereotyped or bigoted, yet you never have proven that. For example, If I called you an idiot, it would be an unfair statement because I would not be able to back it up, so I challenge you to show a single truly bigoted remark I have made. Id be willing to go so far as to say that if you find one bigoted remark and its shown to be bigoted not because you said it yourself, but because it really is, then I will never post here again. My bet is you will not be able to do that.</p>

<p>So now for the sake of interest lets examine my last post:</p>

<p>"That is stupid. Since Israel’s independance they have been threatened with death. Israel needs nuclear weapons as a deterrent to its arab neighbors. </p>

<p>You do not get the title of incarnation of evil just like that. Iran had to do alot of harm to America and to the rest of the world to be called evil. They deserved it. I can just imagine you trying to justify the Nazis anger with the allies because they were called “bad people”. You are so morally bankrupt its amazing. The Iranian president wants me dead. He spends money to kill me and my family, yet you are an apologist for him."</p>

<p>In responding to a remark that Israel and the US are dangerous to the world, I,1. said it was a stupid assumption-namely because we all know that Israel and the US are not the real threat to the world, 2. I pointed out that Israel has been on the defensive since May 14, 1948. Perhaps, I am intellectually blind or myself am stupid, but that comment expresses no bigotry, no stereotype. In fact its not parroted “talk radio” and I did not even have to go to college to learn this. What I said is absolutely true. On May 14, 1948, Israel’s day of independance the country was attacked by armies from Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt. Then in 1956, Egypt cut off shipping routes to Israel, then in 1967 it did it again, but this time even more severly. Then in 1970 there was an intensification of cross border raids from Arab terrorists. Then in 1973, while most of Israel was in synagogue praying for atonement, they were attacked by Egypt and Syria. I think you get my point. So I assume I do not need to keep going to show you that indeed Israel has been threatened since 1948.</p>

<p>I then responded to Mini’s comment that Iran is threatened and is doing what it is because America has called it the incarnation of evil. Again perhaps I am blind and do not see the bigotry in my statement, but I merely offered the simple point of view that maybe Iran is called the incarnation of evil because it actually is. I tried to point out that America does not just call anyone the incarnation of evil. You do not see Bush calling France the incarnation of evil even though the two countries disagree. So that must mean that Iran had to have done something to recieve that title. So, I decided to find out what Iran had actually done. Lo and Behold in 1979 they took Americans hostage. Then they gave money, arms, equipment, and training to Hezbollah. Perhaps, I am bigoted for the following statement, but Hezbollah is responsible for alot of deaths, including the deaths of fellow Americans.</p>

<p>My next point was to draw an analogy. We bouth agree that Nazis were angry at the US for numerous reasons including but not limited too America’s harsh words to Nazi Germany. But we now know 60 years later, that America’s words were harsh because Nazi Germany, gasp, deserved it.</p>

<p>Afterwhich I called Mini morally bankrupt because she is apologizing for a person who wants me and my family dead. In fact, this person not only wants us dead, but has taken many steps to achieving that goal. These steps include giving money to a terrorist orginization so it could shoot a rocket at the home of a family member, giving the actual rocket to the terrorist orginization so it could shoot that very same rocket at my family’s home. Not only that, but it gives equipment money etc so a terrorist can enter a pizza shop my uncles is eating at and blow it up. Despite all of these things that the Iranian pres wants to do, Mini apologizes for him and justifies his attempted genocide of Jews. Perhaps she would be more succesful in justifying Hitler?</p>

<p>So again, maybe I am somehow blind and do not see the bigotry and stereotype in my own posts, in which case I apologize to the Iranian president for unfairly characterizing him.</p>

37

<p>Golani, most of your bigoted posts against Muslims have been pulled. There have been many. I am not going back through all 100 or more of your posts to see if there are still examples. It just isn’t that important to me, but, I know I have pointed them out to you in the past (before they were pulled).</p>

<p>For what it’s worth, as a Jew, I understand your worry and concern. I take the Iranian president at his word as well, but I disagree with you that all the problems in the world are the result of Muslims. The problems in the middle east are much more complex than you have ever yet seen them to be.</p>

38

<p>From now on, I want you to point out any biogted post I make, but instead actually explain why it is bigoted. Usually you just say it is and I am forced to tak that at face value. The problem is you cant find a bigoted post by me, not because they have been pulled but because they do not exist.</p>

<p>I am also interested in how you can disagree with me that “all the problems in the word are the result of Muslims”</p>

<p>Why that interests me is that I never said that. So how can you disagree with something I have never said.</p>

<p>However here is an interesting statistic: “Muslims are involved in 25 of some 30 conflicts going on in the world: in Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bosnia, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Cyprus, East Timor, India, Indonesia (2 provinces), Kashmir, Kazakastan, Kosovo, Kurdistan, Macedonia, the Middle East, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Somalia, Sudan, Russia-Chechnya, Tajikistan, Thailand, Uganda and Uzbekistan.”</p>

39

<p>I will gladly point out your bigotry from now on, Golani.</p>

40

<p>Interesting interview regarding the motivation of Muslim martyrs and terrorists:<a href=“http://■■■■■■■.com/snjkm[/url]”>http://■■■■■■■.com/snjkm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

</p>