The bluff that never stops giving?

Netanyahu and threat of bombing Iran

Share/Save/Bookmark

The bluff that never stops giving?
by Trita Parsi
08-Apr-2009
 

In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic, incoming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed to have told President Barack Obama that either America stops Iran or Israel will. Not surprisingly, the interview sparked quite a controversy and only a day later, General David Petreus told the Senate Arms Services Committee that "the Israeli government may ultimately see itself so threatened by the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon that it would take preemptive military action to derail or delay it."

So once again, in spite of President Obama's best efforts, the military option was put back on the table and the atmosphere for dealing with Iran was turned into "Do as we say - or else..." Even if the President wants to give diplomacy a chance, disbelievers have been quick to limit Obama's options by seeking to set arbitrary deadlines for negotiations - or by threatening Israeli military action if America doesn't act with its military might.

Reality is, however, that talk of an Israeli military option is more of a bluff than a threat - but it is a bluff that never seems to stop giving.

Israel does not have the military capability to successfully eliminate Iran's nuclear program. Even the most successful bombing campaign would only set back the known program for a few years - without affecting any potential clandestine program. This is not classified information. Military experts are well aware of Israel's capabilities - and its limits.

Yet, the threat of military action, or rather the bluff, serves a purpose: Threats of military action militarizes the atmosphere. It creates an environment that renders diplomacy less likely to succeed - it may even prevent diplomacy from being pursued in the first place.

In the Iranian case, Netanyahu's tough talk undermines the Obama administration's prospects for diplomacy in the following ways.

Getting to the negotiating table has proven an arduous task for the US and Iran. Both sides are currently testing each other's intentions, asking themselves if the other side is serious about diplomacy or if the perceived desire for talks is merely a tactical maneuver to either buy time or build greater international support for more confrontational policies down the road. From Tehran's perspective, uncertainty about Washington's intentions during the Bush administration was partly fueled by the insistence of the military option remaining on the table. Tehran seemed to fear entering negotiations that could have been designed to fail, since that could strengthen the case for military action against Iran.

Today, talk of Israeli strikes has similar effects. Tehran has repeatedly failed to appreciate the policy differences between Washington and Tel Aviv, oftentimes seeing them as either a perfectly coordinated team or as a single entity. Consequently, explicit or implicit threats of Israeli military action reduce Tehran's confidence in Washington's intentions.

Furthermore, Iran's sense of a threat from the US (and in extension Israel) is believed to be one of the driving forces of Iran's nuclear program. Whether Iran seeks a weapon or a civilian program that provides Iran with a weapons capability, the program's existence provides Tehran with a level of deterrence against the perceived US threat. The Obama administration's approach seems to have been to reduce Iran's sense of threat in order to kick-start negotiations. The threat of Israeli military action does the opposite - it fuels Iranian insecurity and closes the window for diplomacy.

Moreover, Israel uses this threat to pressure Washington and the EU to act tough. This has been a cornerstone of Israeli policy towards Iran since the mid-1990s. Even though Israel is reluctant to put itself on the frontline against Iran, fearing that this would counter its message that Iran is the world's and not just Israel's problem, it also fears that the absence of Israeli pressure would cause the West to go soft on Iran. Hence, Israel keeps the pressure on the West - by threatening military action - in order for the West to keep pressuring Iran. However, under the current circumstances, Israeli pressure may compel the Obama administration to adopt a confrontational approach that is incompatible with the diplomatic strategy President Obama seems to prefer.

Finally, Netanyahu - as well as hawks in Washington - are using the threat of Israeli military action to create arbitrary deadlines for negotiations with Tehran combined with exaggerated expectations of what diplomacy must achieve. The message of Israeli hawks has been that it can only afford to give diplomacy "a few months," meaning that whatever sanctions and confrontation has failed to achieve with Iran in the past 30 years, must miraculously be obtained after only a few months of negotiations - otherwise Israel will take military action.

This logic does two things. First, it brings us back to the foreign policy approach of the Bush administration in which diplomacy was treated with suspicion and skepticism, and military confrontation was viewed as a policy option with guaranteed success. Second, it ensures that diplomacy fails by denying it the time and space it needs to succeed and by setting the bar too high.

This does not mean that Israel does not have legitimate reasons to fear Iran's nuclear advances - on the contrary. But what lies at the heart of Israel's maneuvers is not necessarily the fear of a nuclear clash, but the regional and strategic consequences nuclear technology in Iranian hands will have for Israel.

In spite of its rhetoric, Israel views the regime in Tehran as rational, calculating and risk-averse. Even those Israeli officials who believe that Iran is hell-bent on destroying the Jewish state recognize that Tehran is unlikely to attack Israel with nuclear weapons due to the destruction Israel would inflict on Iran through its second-strike capability.

The real danger a nuclear-capable Iran brings with it for Israel is twofold. First, an Iran with nuclear capability will significantly damage Israel's ability to deter militant Palestinian and Lebanese organizations. Gone would be the days when Israel's military supremacy would enable it to dictate the parameters of peace and pursue unilateral peace plans.

This could force Israel to accept territorial compromises with its neighbors in order to deprive Iran of points of hostility that it could use against the Jewish state. Israel simply would not be able to afford a nuclear rivalry with Iran and continued territorial disputes with the Arabs at the same time.

Second, the deterrence and power Iran would gain by mastering the fuel cycle could compel Washington to cut a deal with Tehran in which Iran would be recognized as a regional power and gain strategic significance in the Middle East at the expense of Israel. This has been a major Israeli fear since the end of the Cold War, when Israel's strategic utility to Washington lost considerable justification due to the absence of a Soviet threat. Under these circumstances, US-Iran negotiations could damage Israel's strategic standing, since common interests shared by Iran and the US would overshadow Israel's concerns with Tehran and leave Israel alone in facing its Iranian rival. The Great Satan will eventually make up with the ayatollahs and forget about the Jewish state, Israeli officials fear.

Netanyahu's threat of stopping Iran if Obama doesn't should be seen in light of the Israeli rights's fear of a US-Iran deal. Talk of Israeli military action has not coincided with major advances in Iran's nuclear program, but rather with hints of an American preparedness to strike a compromise with Tehran that would grant it the dreaded know-how and limit Israel's strategic maneuverability.

The flaw in the Netanyahu's approach, however, is its underestimation of how US-Iran diplomacy can significantly alter Iran's posture towards the Jewish state and reduce the threat it faces from Tehran. Therein lies the opening for Israel's new prime minister that carries far greater promise for Israel's security than efforts to complicate Washington's path towards diplomacy.

Trita Parsi is president and co- founder of the National Iranian American Council and author of "Treacherous Alliances: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States." First published in Huffington Post.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Trita ParsiCommentsDate
Bibi’s Three Steps Forward, One Back
5
Oct 13, 2012
Mistaken Path
18
Jun 22, 2012
Give Obama Elbow Room on Iran
26
Jun 15, 2012
more from Trita Parsi
 
default

Natan.....whatever

by Anonymous111 (not verified) on

I don't know why everyone pays so mcuh attention to this nit wit. For one thing, he is too busy eating to do anything. Have you noticed? H is five pound heavier everytime there is new picture of him.

Plus, this is all talk to get attention and pus the U.S. into starting the war. Israel knows that it will dig its own grave fighting Iran. It just can't...plain and simple. So let the fat boy talk until he's blue in the face.


electric_samavar

Abarmard

by electric_samavar on

I appreciate you subtle approach to addressing my posting and my “short-comings”.  Although, I do not consider myself a journalist or a professional writer, I try my best to itemize my views for the good of the readers.  I am a true believer that over 70% of any group/community/nation are the “silent majority” who will join the left or right in their movements against the other side.  This is a struggle to win over them, and not a debate with you, Asghar Ghassab, or any of his Daddy Mullahs.

 

I appreciate you expressing your misunderstandings of my previous posting, since I take it that some of that 70% silent majority may be just as confused as you.  Therefore, I am obliged to clarify them.

 

I have openly criticized the Israeli government, as I have criticized the US government or any other progressive governments around the world.  They have all committed atrocities against the people of the world at one point or other, and continue doing so.  However, no suicide bomber, no sub-ameba fascist has the right to justify his atrocious acts because of such hiccups of a democratic process.  Dick Chaney and his retarded side kick, George Bush will be prosecuted sooner or later for acts of treason, from the lies about the Iraq, from plundering of the national treasury, to imposing of the Gestapo style “Patriot Act”.  And this is the very same thing that I suggest for the blood sucking criminals in Iran.  In the United States, some day, someone organization, may be members of the Congress/Senate may initiate such a process, present the documents to FBI and have Dick and W arrested, prosecuted in a court of law, and sentenced accordingly.  Do we have such authority over the vermin of Iran?  No?  Who does?  The People of Iran?  How?  Are they allowed to assemble let alone impeach the government officials?  WHAT?  I did not hear you!  Did you say, “Not everyone in this (non)Government is bad”?  ………………….    Please give me a few seconds while I vomit.  The vermin who rape 9-yr old girls for the sake of removing their virginity before executing them found guilty for passing out anti-government leaflets, the parasites who arm the insurgents in Iraq to blow up IRAQI men, women, and children, the fascists who behead their citizens around the world for the simple fact of TALKING against them, the hyenas who tore the unborn baby from the womb of a pregnant woman for membership in a political group, WHAT? WHAT is the “essence of this regime”?  The fanatics who pin the headscarf to a 15-yr old girl’s forehead, the thieves who have brought an OIL RICH country to the verge of bankruptcy to the extent that their “supreme leader(vampire)” has to humbly ask them to stop stealing money, in his new year’s address, the Gestapo force which is shoving the religion down the throats of its citizens, the executioners who arrest, prosecute, and execute men, women, children for their affiliation with a religious group or being homosexuals, DO I NEED TO MAKE A LIST OF DEMANDS THAT IRAN HAS?  IRAN?  I AM SORRY, I DID NOT HEAR YOU, DID YOU SAY IRAN?  DOES IRAN INCLUDE THE DEMANDS OF SHIRIN EBADI? SIMIN BEHBAHANI? IRANIAN STUDENTS? IRANIAN WOMEN, IRANIAN WORKERS, THE GAY 15-YR OLDS WHO WERE HANGED PUBLICALLY?   ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THEIR DEMANDS VS. U.S.?  That’s the only Iran I know.  Do you know any other ones?  Bottom line, I am all for ONE BIG F…G DEMAND THAT IRAN HAS:  LET’S HAVE OPEN ELECTIONS.  WHAT DO YOU SAY ABOUT THAT MR. ABARMARD?  Is that too much to ask?  The Iranian people that you, Parsi, or this Asghar ghassab claims to have suffered enough so they don’t deserve to be bombed, do they deserve OPEN elections?  Is that immoral, inappropriate, or unethical to warn the “sovereign” but abusive parents to treat their children right or they will be put behind bars, or they will be executed if they kill their children?  IS IT?  And if they don’t abide by the NORM, the police action would be necessary?

 


Fred

Dr. Strangelove

by Fred on

Islamists/Anti-Semites and their likeminded lefty allies including Dr. Strangelove who feign patriotism got another think coming. 

 Nuke advocacy for the messianic Islamist republic under the pretense of patriotism is as much of an oxymoron as the Islamist republic or the Islamist religious nationalist are.

 Doc’s ideological guru/mentor was on T.V. the other day and for all the Islamist mumbo jumbo packaged as patriotic nonsense that he preaches/peddles got a mouthful from enslaved Iranians inside Iran.

It is one thing to supply a segment of the Western political milieu with the type of ammunition that fits their given need of the time and boast about being an expert but quite another to be principled and patriotic to the core. Possession of a working patriotic compass is something the triumvirate can never be accused of.


Davood_Banayan

Kaveh Nouraee, Thank God that the Iranian Monarchy is Gone

by Davood_Banayan on

Americans for a Democratic Republic in Iran.

You don't get it do you?

Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was a dictator and a barbarian.  He was ordered to go on a permanent vacation and drop dead in Egypt in 1980.

Reza Khan was ordered to leave Iran in 1941.

It is plain and simple the monarchy in Iran was wrong.

The whole world was fed up with a monarchy in Iran because a monarch is Iran was so anti-Freedom.

America and the West along with 30 million Iranians abolished the Iranian Monarchy on February 11, 1979 forever.

It is high time that you wake up.

I know a lot of Iranians of every religion in Iran that are opposed to any type of Iranian monarchy.  Iranian Zoroastrians, Shia Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Armenian Iranians, Assyrian Iranians, Jewish Iranians, Bahai Iranians have all accepted the fact that Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was a freacking idiot.

It is high time that you accept the fact that the majority of Iranians voted for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Either you have to accept the fact or don't call yourself Iranian.

Even former President Bush accepted the results of the prior Iranian election.

Kaveh, you are a filthy animal.

You post disgusting stuff on this site.

No one likes you.

You are probably a fat short bald guy who has no life.

Kaveh, get a life buddy and then start posting stuff on Iranian.com.

Kaveh, try to become a REAL IRANIAN. 


default

Q

by Dariush (not verified) on

Thanks for attaching the link of Ron Paul's speech. I had not seen this one before. In just two minutes he made his case, but unfortunately often falls on deaf ears in and out of congress. Deaf ears such as samavar, farhad kashani and Fred, just to name a few. I hope they watched it and got some of the answers to their foolish claims.


Mammad

FK, you are mind boggling

by Mammad on

The only mind boggling things on this website are, (i) your imbecility and inability to accept when it comes to solid facts that even the worst of people do not argue with; (ii) your fabrication of history and its constant revisions; (iii) your naked hatred of Iran and whatever is Iranian, and (iv) your moans and groans about why you are not considered an expert. In short, you are mind boggling.

You are the man who worships everything ultra-right wing reactionary, including the former War Criminal in Chief, George W. Bush, and then do not even have the guts to admit that you are an ultra-right wing. What you try to propagate on this site are not repeated by even some of the worst right wingers in this country.

Since what hellish time Israel has the right to attack Iran in SELF-DEFENSE, without a war? This is the same nonsense that was used to start a criminal war against Iraq, and destroy it. 

The "self-proclaimed" representative is considered as a true expert by those who count. Who gives a hoot to whether you consider someone as an expert or not. If it were not for the generosity of Mr. JJ, you could not put up your crap even here. So, count your blessings, and stop bemoaning why you are not considered a "representative" of the Iranian community.

I have never known a person who justifies attack on his country by another country, out of sheer hatred, but you do. You asked me why I came to the US. I asked you why you call yourself an Iranian, or Iranian American, or whatever the heck that you consider yourself.

This post should make you even more determined to counter an "extreme socialist" like me!!!!! The old Peykan car that you use in your posts is truly fitting. Like the car, your mumbo jumbo is truly worn out and out of date!! That is the only sensible thing you have done on this website!!

Mammad


Q

Kaveh,

by Q on

I assume from your responses you are a conservative.

I base this on a couple of points. First you repeat the the Rush Limbaugh talking points attacks on Hillary Clinton while completely ignoring what COULD happen to that man in Somalia and his family here if she were to be more "manly" and aggressive.

Second, you repeat the nauseating neconservative meme about America being weak-willed, often couched in racist and sexist terms. These memes take it as a given fact that America has a right to be in the Middle East, propping up dictatorships, taking sides and and controlling whatever it wants and that anyone who objects is being "aggressive" toward America. And if America doesn't respond since there are definite cost/benefit analysis to running empires, than it must be because it doesn't "have the balls" to deal with the restless natives. John McCain said that same thing about Vietnam. That US "cut and run" in shame, once again making the underlying assumption that US belonged there in the first place.

Third, your thesis about America not having the "balls" AND your "educated" guess about "There won't be war" is seriously undermined by the fact that America is currently engaged in two wars with at best a promise to "reduce" the footprint in one in exchange for increasing it in the other. And this is just active shooting involvement. Nevermind the military and economic hegemony that basically protects and controlls numerous Arab dictatorships and makes it risk-free for Israeli rulers to continue making money on death and destruction while giving them no incentive to compromise. The problems that create these conditions are systemic and deeply rooted. Historically they can hardly be controlled even by political parties and Presidents.

I'll leave you with some words of wisdom from a real conservative.


default

samavar

by Dariush (not verified) on

You speak of logic, but there is none in the crap you write.

Last lines of your posting you wrote, Let's take them out while there is time (referring to Iran). Remember, Hitler's world domination started with peaceful take over of Austria.

Yes, we remember and we see.
Has Iran made any threats to take over any country? Even at the end of Iran-Iraq war, Iran had part of Iraq under her control, but gave it back to Iraq.
So who is taking over who? Is it not the Zionist regime of your beloved country Israel? Or America and British? They have been trying to expand and invade other countries. At least Hitler was honest about it and didn't preach democracy or freedom, while he did his killings.
samavar you are so full of it.
Respectfully


Kaveh Nouraee

Q

by Kaveh Nouraee on

To correct you once again (annoying, yes, but very necessary, I assure you), the proverbial "writing on the wall" existed long before Iraq was invaded or before the Twin Towers were struck.

Ever since this precious "Islamic" Revolution in 1979, it became increasingly clear to any would-be adversary of the West, and the United States in particular, that they would be able to carry out their criminal activities with near total impunity. By mid 1980 it was proven that the United States lacks the will, dare I say, the balls, to put these degenerates in their place once and for all. Any losses suffered by the antagonists are written off as incidents of "martyrdom", a cost of doing business, as they place no value upon life, even their own.

The latest example would be these Somali gangs off the Horn of Africa who hijacked an American merchant ship. They're in a lifeboat, with a U.S. Navy destroyer parked right next to them, equipped with weapons so technologically advanced, they have the physical capability to take out each and every one of those criminals without a drop of their blood falling upon the ship's captain who is being held captive. Yet they sit there like a bunch of buffoons because that has become U.S. policy, which is Israel's policy by default for the purposes of first-strike action.

For God's sake, that c**t Hillary Clinton is on videotape describing the situation, cackling while this man's family has probably not slept one minute since this all started.

And you think that they're going to attack Iran or give Israel the green light to attack Iran, which would require active U.S. participation?

Is an attack on Iran a possibility? Of course it is. Will it happen? No. Why? For the same reasons I have stated on many occasions.

But also, because Iran, Israel and the U.S. have been clandestinely dealing with one another "under the table" since the end of the monarchy. Like former spouses on the back side of a bitter and ugly divorce, they can't stand each other, but they can't seem to live without each other.

Does that make me Nostradamus, comical or otherwise? Again, no, for if I were, I would be winning the California Super Lotto or Mega Millions with stunning regularity. I can certainly accept that what I've stated is at best a guess. But it's an educated guess based upon common sense, rational thinking, and the ability to comprehend the obvious.

Is that clear enough for you?

I ask that last question because apparently it isn't clear enough to you that there is no "Y" in my last name, despite the countless posts I have left here on this site.


default

samavar

by Dariush (not verified) on

The word non sense in my posting was a bate for your nonsense, I knew it will drag you in.

You seem to have a very bad childhood memories of Ali Asghareh Ghassab. I thought American bombs was the reason you ran away from Iran when you were 17, to save your behind. Now I know Ali Asghareh Ghassbeh Ghazvini had something to do with it.

I have answered you in another blog and you didn't have much to say. The same seems to be going on here. It is really not necessary for me to say anything about you, when you say it even better.

Respectfully


default

Agha Kaveh, Q said it very well, I won't spend more time on it

by Mehrnaz (not verified) on

I had only returned to you, for reflection, your profound statement you made previously. I now suffice to attaching Q's response:

"There is a difference between a personal prediction and a personal conviction. Saying there "won't" be a war, is at best a guess. Saying there should not be a war, is a statement of conviction and values. Saying I will work to prevent a war or at least support those who do, puts your money where your mouth is on the conviction".

ps I find your moustache really scarey, and I will never call you a boy again.


Abarmard

Dear Electric Samavar

by Abarmard on

I agree with your notes/analysis before you conclusion. You have presented both sides of a coin correctly but your conclusion is not the answer.

In reality the Iranian regime is not one faced, and all evil. As you have mentioned in your post, every system had done things wrongly, and correctly given the time and place.

Iran is not Nazi Germany. I am surprised at your argument, having been build based on an open mind, and closed based on a prejudice.

I would ask you to investigate the essence of the Iranian regime. The mentality of your conclusion can be easily applied to Israel also, given the side that you stand. Therefore the solution is not relational to violence. What would be the goal to attack Iran? I would argue that whatever you come up with won't be satisfied.

At any rate, the ranting of Netanyahu is political and nothing else and the time for this kind of approach has passed. Here is my challenge to you. Make a small lists of the demands that Iran has, and the US has, then re read your own comment and see if it fits.


electric_samavar

Ali Asghare Ghassab Is Fuming at the Mouth- hides under Dariush

by electric_samavar on

I am not just saying this, but I laughed so hard after reading your response, my stomach is hurting.

Mr. Parsi, this is the kind of crowd you are advocating for.  And this one can write a few misspelled words in English, let alone those who don't even understand their proclaimed holy book.  The true face of lumpen is showing itself and you are singing the same song along with them.  The kind person who resorts to "utility pole" in his argument is in the same camp as you.

 What a shame!


default

samavar

by Dariush (not verified) on

Your hate has blinded you to the point that you are willing to scarify millions of Iranians and the destruction of Iran in order to get even with the government. As if Iranians haven't had enough pain and problems that you want to add some more by war. Perhaps, this is your way of progress. You defend Israeli fascists, sweep America's crimes under the rug, then you recommend Gandhi's way of protesting aggressor, but when it comes to Iran and Iranians, war and destruction is the only way? It is obvious that you are not Iranian. Why don't you recommend Gandhi's way to Israel and America?
You say all these non sense and still claim to be highly educated?

As far as I am concern, everyone is free to comment about the government, as long as Iran's sovernty, independence and rights is respected. This is a fine line that we should not cross!

As for me being an agent or Ali Asghar. I answer you the way we used to answer in Iran.
You are telling the truth, but the utility pole to whoever is lying.
Meaning; I wouldn't be saying this to myself, if I was lying. So that makes you the liar and the recipient of the utility pole. Congratulation.

I apologize to everyone else. I had to answer samavar's accusation in an effective way.


default

What "Aaggression"' Brother kashani?

by KouroshS (not verified) on

You are making this sound and look like a children't football game or something similar. Think about what you just said. A country, such as Israel, the mighty and capable and with all that advanced Technologies at its disposal, is supposed to merely "feel" the threat by some empty, baseless, and totally rhetorical remarks by a much weaker country. Not to undermine Iran's armed forces capabilities, but Let's get real. Does it make any Logical and credible sense for them to actually retaliate by making the same gesture and in a more Real and detailed format?

With the IRI the idea was brought up as a suggestion that hey, it would not be a bad idea to wipe Israel Off the map... you know...But With the Israel's plan, there is already talk about time and date and all other details, Now you tell me who is really Threatening whom??

How is Iran being "aggressive" By merely blowing hot air and coming up with the most nonsensical gestures, yet the same posturing by USA is considered as Bringing and promoting Democracy in other nations?

Mindboggling hipocrisy INDEED!!


electric_samavar

Azmoodeh ra Azmoodan Khatast!

by electric_samavar on

It is so "hilariously painful" to see such an accumulation of twisted facts, ranting, threatening, and going on tangents without a single word about the realities on hand.  Here is my assessments: 1- There is not a single government in the history without a history of criminal involvement, from genocide to acts of terror and enslaving masses.  IT IS NO F...G FOUNDATION FOR NOT FIGHTING AGAINST IT WITH EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE IN US!     2- The blood-sucking criminals in Iran need to be brought to justice as Milosevic  and Saddam were.  The only negotiation should be death by hanging or death in a gas chamber.      3- Iran needs all the help in the world to get rid of this Islamo-fascist plague, AT ANY COST.  Not only Iran,  but Mexico, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Peru, .....      4- Tell the brainless Arabs set aside their weapons and suicide bombings and employ Gandhi’s way of protesting an aggressor and watch billions of people supporting their cause and marching shoulder by shoulder with them, including myself.      5- Israeli people have a right to live in their homeland, IN PEACE, as much as Palestinians and they MUST have ONE government as the case is in South Africa.  Israel MUST stop labeling herself as a discriminating "Jewish State" and act as a true secular and democratically elected government by separating the religion and state.   6- There are governments around the world which regardless of their nature (based on facts or rumors) are affected by open elections, international pressure, and do not employ death squads for silencing their own citizens.  Those are the governments which we, the progressive activists (as opposed to paid agents on this site, such as Dariush aka Ali Asghar-e Ghassab) heavily rely on mobilizing against tyrannical regimes, such as the power hungry and expansionist vermin in Iran, while we equally work on bringing democratic changes within such governments.  United States of America has made heroic sacrifices in WWII to free the world from fascism and also has committed heinous atrocities against the people around the world, but today, regardless of the dark moments of 2000 and 2004 still has a form of a government where we can openly express our opinions, get elected into office, and fight for our rights and the rights of people around the world through legal channels.      6- Muhammad Ali once said, "You take people from the ghetto and move them into a nice neighborhood and they will trash it in no time, but you move the people from the nice neighborhoods into a ghetto, they will make it look nice in no time".  Bottom-line, every form of government has its own instinctive mission based on its genetic code, constructive or destructive.  Which side are you on?      7- The genetic build-up of any terrorist organization, whether a clan or in form of a government, they all have only one mission in life, destruction and chaos.  That's the only way they can stay in power, and that's they only way they must be dealt with, through eradication of their genes.  Negotiating with them is as futile as negotiating with parasites. Let's freeze their strand in a tube some where at CDC while we wipe them off the face of earth.   8- The mullahs who exploit the young soles in committing suicide missions may be too calculating to pull the trigger on a nuclear warhead , but their blinded, fanatics, who wear the jacket in hope of getting 72 virgins, do not care.  If they blow up themselves to kill a dozen "infidels", can you imagine what they'll do once armed with nuclear weapons?   9- Mr. Parsi, you may have a PhD in International Studies, but you have the common sense of an elementary school kid.  The expansionists in Iran do not care about their own people, let alone about becoming part of the world community.  As the torturer of Mr. Batebi indicated, they consider themselves as God's representatives.  How can you "negotiate" with "God’s representatives"?  There is no negotiation in Qoran, or any "holly" book for  that matter.  Are you going to be negotiating WHEN we are going to put chador on women in the West, since there is no negotiation involved about "if"?    10- The determination of Islamist fanatics far surpasses those of Japanese during the WWII.  Japanese believed to be the superior race, these vermin think they are the superior religion.  It was the determination of the Japanese solders at Mt. Suribachi, 650 miles away from Tokyo, which convinced the US to use Atomic Bombs on Japan.  Out of 21000 solders only 216 were captured (not necessarily surrendered).  If they network of Islamo-fascist blow up buildings at 4 corners of the world today, from Argentina to Africa, using conventional weapons, can you imagine, a suicide bomber armed with nuclear waistband can do to the free world?  Why wait till they are armed with it and then wait and see if they will be using it against the free world before we annihilate them in revenge?  What kind of foolish logic is that?  Let's take them out while there is time.  Mr. Parsi, would you have been advocating negotiations with Germany or Japan if they had the same ambitions as they did during the WWII?  If not, why not?  Remember, Hitler's world domination started with the peaceful take over of Austria.  We are far more sophisticated than before and we have to realize the nature of the beast, and act accordingly!!!

 


Q

The Yabu deserves the criticism here, not Parsi

by Q on

those who attack Parsi still don't get it. What he stands for is peace, dialogue and complete respect for Iran's rights and equal treatment. Only people who can't seperate their own politics of hate and revenge with the lives and livelihood of millions of Iranians don't seem to get it.

Parsi has never called himself the "representative" of the Iranian people in America. NIAC goes out of its way to make this distinction clear when they don't have to. But he and NIAC have more claim to representation than anyone who is mud-slinging at them or any other organization that the so-called "opposition" has been able to put together in 30 years.

Kaveh Nourayee
Yes, you have said before that there won't be a war. I bet you also thought US would never invade Iraq and that a bunch of Saudis couldn't bring down the World Trade Center.

Regardless of your personal convictions (which sound peaceful) your declarative statement that there "won't" be a war makes you sound like a comical Nostrodamous. Obviously it's a possiblity and at least until last year, a high one.

There is a difference between a personal prediction and a personal conviction. Saying there "won't" be a war, is at best a guess. Saying there should not be a war, is a statement of conviction and values. Saying I will work to prevent a war or at least support those who do, puts your money where your mouth is on the conviction.

I hope these are clear to you.


default

OOOh - Answer to Kashani (more like Tel Avivi)

by Kamran Kermani (not verified) on

Some people are sad that their bibi is under attack. Hey don't take it too hard that his bluff is caught. Iran will EAT Israel in one bite. Take that for your testosterone.

How dare the NIAC criticizes the DEFENSE of the Israeli to want to bomb IRAN?
DEFENSE of ISRAEL to want to bomb IRAN?
Kashani, thanks for the info and since I don't have an access to the weather channel at the moment would you please let us know how's the weather like in your Israel?
I guess you voted for him since this article pissed you off so much. Get use to it, this is just the beginning.


default

To Farhad Kashani

by Anthony (not verified) on

You need to get this point to your thick head that lobbying against sanctions and war on Iran does not equate to lobbying for IRI regime. How stupid can you people get? Dont you understand that the mullahs have benefited from western policies these past 3 decades? Or are you intentionally daft? Or are you get paid to parot various hawkish talking points.

You remind me of these old iranians living in LA who are completely detached from iran who talk about various conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact.


Farhad Kashani

Here goes the

by Farhad Kashani on

Here goes the self-proclaimed representative of the Iranian American community lobbying and apologizing for the IRI regime!

 

What’s really astonishing is how pro IRI groups like NIAC cry wolf about Israel’s defense against IRI aggression by calling it a “bluff”, but you don’t hear him say a single word about all the bluff the IRI has been saying for 30 years now about the annihilation of the country of Israel which has resulted in Israel feeling threatened and threatening to bomb our country!!! IRI’s bluff is what caused the animosity between Iran and Israel, however, IRI can “bluff” all it want, but Israel shouldn’t defend itself! And Israel should be the bigger person and understand that IRI is only “bluffing” and be responsible, but Mr. Parsi and his pro IRI friends at IRI never ask the regime to be responsible also and watch what it says and does!!! IRI should get a free pass, but it’s the rest of the world that should be the “bigger person” and compromise, and negotiate with IRI and establish relations with it!!!!

 

The hypocrisy is simply mind boggling!!!

 


default

Israel and America need not

by Meehan (not verified) on

Israel and America need not to worry that much for the real anymosity is between the Shia and Sunni. The first country to be the victim of the Islamic Republics nuclear disaster is Saudi Arabia. The fanatical Theocratic Iranian regime is # 1 enemy of the Sunni population. Israel will not be a victim for they have more nukes that you can imagine and infact Iran is more friendly to Israel than it's Arab Sunni neghbors. The Proof is that during Iran Iraq war Iran accepted Israel's help and weapons to fight the Iraqis. Irael infact bombed the Iraqi nuclear facility that would have been a big threat to Iran. The Sunnis hate the Shia the same way.

Next country that the Islamic Republic hates more than Israel and America is Russia for Russians do not have a religion and are considered real Kafirs. The IRI pretends to be friends with Russia only to buy Russian weapons and help in making nuclear facilities.

Next is India where people are Hindu . The IRI hates them more than Christians and Jews ,for Hindus are not people of the book and are considered real Kafirs and the only reason that IRI has good relation with them is for economic reasons.

Europe is hated by the Islamic Regime in Iran but not as much as IRI hating Sunnis, Communist Russians and the Hindus.

As for America, it is too far to worry about the Islamic republic of Iran's nuclear threat.

In fact, Islamic ideology is based upon an intense hatred of the non-Muslim. For Muslims, there exist two kinds of non-Muslim enemies. kafir (non-believers in Islam) and ahl al-kitab (People of the Book). Kafir, such as Buddhists and Hindus, must either convert to Islam or face execution. People of the Book include Jews and Christians. These people need only submit to Muslim authority to avoid forced conversion or death. Although they may keep their original faith, their status becomes dhimmi (a "protected," yet inferior non-Muslim status). So instead of outright forced conversion or slaughter, the Christians and Jews would be allowed to remain somewhat unmolested as long as they acknowledged the superiority of the Muslim.

In summary no country would be safe when the Iranian Islamic Theocracy makes it's own Nuclear Bomb but some are safer than the others.

Over the last 1400 years, 270 million non-believers were murdered by Muslim jihadists.

Islam destroyed the Christian Middle East and Christian North Africa. It is estimated
that upwards of 60 million Christians were slaughtered during this conquest.
Also, half the Hindu civilization was annihilated and 80 million Hindus murdered.

Islamic jihad also destroyed over 10 million Buddhists.
In other words, Islam is a killing machine.


OmidKarimi

I dont know about you guys

by OmidKarimi on

But I have family back home, alot. I have 4 cousins in the military, 2 as pilots in the air-force actually, flying F-5's. Its easy for Parsi to sit in Washington and call this a bluff, its not his chips he is gambling with.

----------------------------------

For clips about Iranian society and full movies, check out my website at: www.IranBebin.com

 


Kaveh Nouraee

Mehrnaz

by Kaveh Nouraee on

I've known the point all along. I'm not certain what you think you're gaining with your remarks towards me, but it's hardly necessary, or appropriate, especially your referring to me as a boy.

If you have ever truly read anything I have posted concerning this particular subject matter, you would have seen and learned yourself that I have consistently stated my belief that there won't be any attack against Iran, be it by Israel or the United States. You would also learn the reasons why I have that belief, which are equally consistent.


default

Despite Obama's efforts to

by Dariush (not verified) on

Despite Obama's efforts to make up for Bush administration's mistakes and improve United States image in the world, Israel continues to be a sore finger in America's body. To save the body this finger needs to be contained or amputated.

Israel is not so worried about Iran's nuclear program as they pretend to be. she is just using that as an excuse to push U.S. to war to minimize Iran's support for Palestinians and Lebanese resistance and Uniting other countries against their aggression in the region and the world.


default

kaveh N. You are learning!!!

by Mehrnaz (not verified) on

"When you keep boasting how you're going to kick someone's ass, the truth is the only ass that risks getting kicked is your own".

Well said ;) You seem to have started to get the point after all. That's a clever boy!


default

Obama's nightstand: Recommended Iran reading

by LauraRosen (not verified) on

Obama's nightstand: Recommended Iran reading
Thu, 04/09/2009 - 12:23pm

Last night, after he had made a grocery-store run, helped put his two kids to bed, and answered reporters’ phone calls about Washington’s decision to join international talks with Iran, Trita Parsi, a protégé of Francis Fukuyama and Zbigniew Brzezinski and a former Hill aide, was surfing the web when he noticed a spike in Amazon sales of his 2007 book, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Iran, Israel and the United States.

That’s when Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council, a group that promotes engagement with Iran, realized what was causing the spike: a new opinion column in the New York Times that calls for President Barack Obama to read his book.

In the latest in a recent series of bracing columns on U.S. policy toward Iran, the Times’ Roger Cohen argues that Israel has been “crying wolf” on the Iranian nuclear threat going back more than a decade. “You can't accuse the Israelis of not crying wolf,” Cohen writes:

Ehud Barak, now defense minister, said in 1996 that Iran would be producing nuclear weapons by 2004.

Now here comes [Israeli prime minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, in an interview …spinning the latest iteration of Israel's attempt to frame Iran as some Nazi-like incarnation of evil:

"You don't want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs.When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran."

What’s critical, Cohen continues, “is that Obama view Netanyahu's fear-mongering with an appropriate skepticism, rein him in, and pursue his regime-recognizing opening toward Tehran, as he did Wednesday by saying America would join nuclear talks for the first time … The president should read Trita Parsi's excellent ‘Treacherous Alliance’ as preparation.”

Parsi, 34, who as president of the NIAC and before that as a Hill aide and later a Ph.D. student of Fukuyama and Brzezinski’s at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, has long advocated for Washington to engage with Tehran. He found himself frequently demonized during the Bush administration as an apologist for the Islamic Republic of Iran, which the Bush administration shunned as a charter member of the axis of evil.

With the Obama administration now making a series of recent moves to try to engage Iran, Parsi finds his analysis in daily demand. Parsi, a Zoroastran- raised, Iranian born American who lived in Iran until he was four, and whose father was previously imprisoned in Iran, spent his youth in Sweden before emigrating to the United States.

Of Cohen's mention of his book, Parsi says, "Pretty cool. Will give the president a copy of the book per the NYT's recommendation.”

But the other day, after Obama spoke in the Turkish capital Ankara, Parsi thought he detected evidence that someone in Obama’s inner circle had already read it closely.

"We want Iran to play its rightful role in the community of nations, with the economic and political integration that brings prosperity and security,” Obama said in Ankara.

“This is completely new language for the White House to use, but it sounded awfully familiar to me,” Parsi wrote excitedly Monday. “I went and checked the last chapter of the book where I discuss a strategy of regional integration, and on page 279 I write: "This policy would be based on the recognition that, like China, Iran is a country that the US cannot contain indefinately, that Iran becomes more antagonistic when excluded, and that the US can better influence Iran by helping it integrate into the world's political and economic structure rather than keeping it out."

Coincidence? Whatever the case, Parsi said he would be happy to forward a copy of his book to the White House.


default

LOOK!!!!!!!!!!

by changiz alaaff ! (not verified) on

I hate the MULLA regime with passion and I want another revolution in Iran to kick the MUlla's out; but if Israel attacks Iran, i would go back to iran and i would beg and kiss the feet of khamenie or who ever the F*** who is in charge to let me blow up myself into tiny tiny peices for IRAN. EnD of story!


default

Fearless Iranians..

by nicksaf on

I just came back from a short trip to my beloved homeland. From what I gathered, regarless of what is going on, Iranians in Iran do not care or much pay attention as what Isreal has to say. They are fearless and have been through many hard times for the past 30 years. Isreal will have to write her own will to bye bye as a country if decides to attack Iran. I will be right back to HELP out if that ever happens. LONG LIFE TO TRUE IRANIAN PEOPLE AND KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

A fan of Iran, Esfahan!


default

Netanyahu would be 'ill advised' to try to strike Iranian nuclea

by luciferous (not verified) on

فرمانده کل ارتش جمهوري اسلامي گفت: "در سال جديد بتدريج
تجهيزات جديد، نوين و پيشرفته اي را در همه زمينه هاي هوايي، دريايي و زميني معرفي خواهيم کرد."Netanyahu would be 'ill advised' to try to strike Iranian nuclear facilities.


default

Life's task

by Arash Kamangir (not verified) on

Israel is a unique country in all aspects.A country which is surrounded by tyrannical enemies look to his politicians as heroes and leaders . Nethanyahu would never let a renegade country led by some fundamentalists lunetics endanger the existance of Israel. If this requires first strike or any other means then the World can be sure that he will use them. Israel has already dealt with bigger threat than Iran and I am very sure they will also deal sucessfully with this one. i as a freedom lover Iranian who believes in democracy and dislikes Tyrannical regime of mullahs wish him the best.