LIBYA

The art of writing so much and saying absolutely nothing!

Time magazine recognizes Noam Chomsky's book from 1957 "Syntactic Structures" as "All -time 100 best nonfiction books" where Chomsky introduces famous example of a sentence that is both grammatically perfect and totally meaningless: "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously."

What are you basing Iranian's feelings about Israelis on?

Vast Majority of Iranians Like Israeli's more than Palestinians.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on Sun Aug 28, 2011 04:34 PM PDT

Abarmard jaan IRI's core supporters are subsidized!

I can argue that Islamic Republic's core supporters are paid for and will support the regime for as long as this regime can afford to give handouts.  Once the handouts starts to get "light" the support will start to vanish. 

The "ideology" behind the core supporters is nothing new.  Just generic religious beliefs shored up by the Sharia law installed after the revolution which most, including core supporters, don't care for and can do without.

In my opinion, as Mr. Bagherzadeh mentioned himself, the chance of this regime crumbling from within is much more than any military action.  I'd say two similarities between Libya and Iran is the "ideology" that both Qaddafi and Khomeini thought were something special and bloody crackdown of disent "because" of it. 

Everything is sacred

Vast Majority of Iranians Like Israeli's more than Palestinians.

They want Israel to resolve its issues with Palestinians truthfully, honorably, honestly, humanely and justly.  They do not back the PLO or Hezbollah or Hamas.

Iranians Agree far more with the relationship of friendship with Israel then the IRI duplicity against Israel.  Palestine/Iran is not comparable to US/Israel relationship. 

Our Iranian/Persian Ancestors helped protect Israel and pay to build Jerusalem for them because it was their peoples request and the site of an ancient temple for them.  After the Persian King liberated Bagdad from the despot in power, the army discovered that the Jews had experienced a holocaust/near genocide and was bound to help them restore their freedom.

Previous to this holocaust they lived in Canaan (which is not too far from Bagdad), this was their original homeland as explained in the torah in modern day Iraq next to the Euphrates River. 

Due to the Bagdad Holocaust and knowledge of their leaders regarding Jerusalem plus some great decision making on their part (as far as trade/safety/water for farming etc) they asked the Persian King to Not be relocated in their promised land of Canaan, but in an area that had 1500 years earlier belonged to the phonecians/who are modern day palestinians.

The Modern intellectual dishonesty on the Israeli part stems from the fact that they say Canaan is their promised land and located in modern day israel.  Not true.  Their real homeland, original one known as the promised land or Canaan, is stuck in the most unforgiving location in Iraq today, with no ports.

If I were jewish today, I would prefer Israels current location and can't blame them for the misinformation.  We need truthfulness first and foremost and still the choice is theirs to make not ours, whether they want their promised land (Canaan) vs. Given Land and they should not lie so much to their own people about the difference.

With Israelis choice in mind, next they need to be honest with the local population and give them a life too... either 1 state or 2 based on consensus, I think palestinians should also have their choice too.  So if they seem Nationalistic wanting to keep the name palestine mostly, then I think both agree on  a 1 state for each=2 states not a combined state.

The stalling on a solution is helpful to no one except the USA.  The USA's aim is divide and conquer and Israel helps them perpetuate the real undeclared US policy... by artificially manufacturing a clash of civilizations. So Israeli injustices of denying palestians any country, are used to create Khomeini's and radical islamists.  That is why the USA will veto the idea of a palestinian state.  It wants fundamentalism for the region.

The USA ultimately wishes to use this issue to dominate the region and own all the various peoples resources, because as mullahs and democratic wisdom teaches us... why walk when their are so many donkeys that can be ridden.

Love and Light.

Amir Parviz

How can we deny Iran's history ?

 "In other words, IR is the first very “Iranian” system (modern history)." Abarmard

  Norouz, Chaharshanbeh suri, etc. which was originated from Zorasterian faith represent the first Iranian system, not shia which came to picture less than 1400 years ago. Islam was imposed to Iranians, but Zorasterian instructions speard among Iranians with no force.  These days, there are a lot of tendency among Iranians to fall back to the time prior Sassanian dynasty. There is a picture showing a woman was kissing Naghsheh Rostam monument, or there was another picture that showed group of people celebarating Norouz on the tomb of Koroush. These picutres are vivid examples of this fall back to the time prior to Sassanian dynasty. Most likey spirit of Persianism which has been rooted on nationalism will prevail. It will eventually defeat this Islamic devil that shaded over our country for last 32 years. It is just matter of time.

Mr. Bagher Zadeh

Thank you for clarification.

بهار یا پائیز ؟

با سلام خدمت آقای حسین باقر زاده و نظر دهندگان محترم

سوای دلائلی که در این مقاله مطرح نموده اید ، این نتیجه گیری شما که ( اگر قرار باشد موج سقوط نظام‌های دیکتاتوری منطقه بر اثر حرکت عمومی مردم به ایران برسد، سناریوی آن احتمالا بیشتر شبیه لیبی خواهد بود تا مصر و تونس ) واقع بینانه تر هست . علاوه بر شرایط داخل ایران به نظرمن رویدادهای لیبی نشان میدهد جامعه جهانی یا همان غرب و به عبارت مناسب تر گردانندگان دنیا دیگر به آن الگوی مبارزه مسالمت آمیز یا جابجائی بدون خشونت و یا انقلابهای معروف به مخملی پایبند نیستند .اینکه رسانه های غرب صبح تا شب مخالفین تفنگ بدست را به نمایش میگذارند حکایت از تغییر تاکتک در مراکز بالاتر هم دارد .

به هرصورت در صورت وقوع رویدادی شبیه لیبی در ایران زیان عمده متوجه مردم ایران خواهد . هرکه به زور تفنگ و پشتیبانی بمب های ناتو و حمایت و برنامه ریزی رسانه ها و سران بیگانه به حکومت در ایران دست یابد  ، هر چه باشد نه دموکرات خواهد بود نه ملی و نه مردمی .

با این وجود به باور من ماهیت و آینده شورشها یا جنبش های خاور میانه و جابجائی حکومتها غیر از آن است که عمومآ تصور میکنند . تقریبآ همگی از مخالف گرفته تا موافقین جمهوری اسلامی و از چپ ها تا راست ها و ملی ها و مذهبی ها با نظر تآیید و امید به آینده ای بهتر به تحولات خاور میانه و شمال آفریقا مینگرند . منتها هر گروهی تعبیر خودش را دارد یکی آنرا بهار عربی میخواند دیگری احیای اسلام خواهی ، یکی دیگر رشد جنبشهای ضد امپریالیستی و غیره .

به نظرمن تحولات و جابجائی هائی که تا کنون صورت گرفته نه بهار بلکه پائیزی هست که زمستانی بسیار سخت و غیر قابل تصور را در پی خواهد داشت . ذات این جنبشها ،سوای در باغ سبزی که نشان میدهند و سوای عدالت طلبی و آزادی خواهی عمومی مردم منطقه ، ارتجاعی ، مخرب و ضد مردمی هست . حدود شش ماه پیش نوشته ای در وبلاگم تحت عنوان ( در جهان چه میگذرد ؟ ) ثبت کردم . با پیگیری مسائل عمده اقتصادی جهان و رکود روز افزون و غیر قابل کنترلی که گریبانگر دنیا شده توضیح داده ام که در بعد آشوبها و جنگها ، فقر و استبداد نه تنها در خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا بیشتر خواهد شد بلکه اروپا و آمریکا و بقیه کشورهای جهان را هم در بر خواهد گرفت . در حال حاضر سران اروپا که مرکز سونامی هم در همان جا قرار دارد تلاش دارند  با کمک گرفتن از آمریکا رفقای سابق خود را ، حتی به قیمت ویرانی کشورهای خاور میانه هم که شده  ، قربانی کنند و سلطه دیرینه خود را نونما کرده ، تا شاید اقتصاد خود را دو باره پر رونق کنند و دست کم اینکه برای خود زمان بخرند .

ورای مطالب هیجان انگیز کنونی این را هم ببینیم که سود ویرانی های لیبی و احتمالآ ایران به جیب که میرود ؟ ذخائی ارزی لیبی و سایر کشورهای نفتی در کدام بانکها ذخیره شده ؟ و چه کسانی بر آنها کنترل دارند ؟

به امید اینکه خردمندان ایرانی عمق رویدادهای کنونی را هم ببینند و بتوانند ایده ای واقع بینانه ارائه دهند که اگر چه مقبول هیچکس واقع نشود در نزد وجدان خود روسفید باشند . رفتن و آمدن حکومتها اصل نیست حفظ  ایران و احیای بزرگی آن شرط اول است .

هر که مایل است با مشروح این تحلیل و پیش بینی آشنا شود به این پیوند مراجعه کند :

//iran-asha.blogfa.com/post-119.aspx

Abarmard

You completely missed the point  If I say mice are more (than say bats or insects) like human beings in the way they react to cetain drugs, that doesn't mean they are the same or similar creatures and you donot need to point out their differences.  You mention one difference between Ghaddafi regime and IRI, and I add ten more.  That wasn't he point.  

The point was that of the 3 Arab uprisings this year, which resulted in "regime change" Tunisia, Egypt and Libya (and one half-change in Yemen), the Libyan one has been bloody and protracted while the others were relatively quick and less violent.  I pointed out some of the charactristics which may explain the difference.  Then I went on to say that "if" similar movement were to take form in Iran, it would not be "plain sailing" like Tunisia or Egypt (as many optimistically purport it to be), but more likely that it would be bloody and protracrted.  You may not get it, but this was a clear warning to those who from the safety of their seats in the west try to encourage people in Iran to come out in the streets giving them the false hope that they can kick out Khamenei with their sheer numbers as it happened to Ben Ali and Mubarak.

No the article dose not say that the IRI can be toppled by a simliar uprising as it has happened in the Arab world and it does not equate Iran and Libya or ignore their many obvious differences.  It also gives the warning that any uprising a la Arab Spring in Iran of present political situation may lead to foreign intervention as it happened in Libya.  

Abarmard

" If tomorrow Khamenei leaves chances are some of the IR officials take over..." This statement may actually be tested fairly soon and give us empirical confirmation. Khamenei may die, and  I'm not putting my bets on a regime overthrow after his death--barring, as you say, foreign help (which would lead to an unstable order).

Commenting on some of your other points:

Cultural restrictions meant to keep the population satisfied? Yes!  Population changing? Yes!

With feeble insight into our cultural history, many Iranian seculars aren't aware that their mental software is running under the Shiite operating system. This means the regime is the product of all of us--secular, religious, modern, traditional... But, as you say, we are changing.  Therefore regime change? of course, in the sense that we are changing. And the faster we change, the sooner we will have that regime change everybody has been nazring about.

One difference of opinion: the West does understand that the IRI's power map is complex; acknowledging it happens to be inconvenient to their policies. 

Right on Abarmard!

And Welcome Back!

Thank you for your comments. I could not agree more with some of the points you have made. You hit the nail on the head when you said that the author is jumping on the bandwagon of the Western journalists, which in effect amounts to inviting an attack on Iran. The author has a track record of doing so, e.g., //iranian.com/main/2011/mar-32.

Good points Ari

Dear Ari this is not a strong article in my opinion. Forget about this article and let me explain my view, if I may.

The reason I don’t see any similarities about any of the recent uprisings and IR is simple. Unlike the regimes in those countries, the Iranian system relies heavily on its core supporters. The core supporters of IR are traditional/religious sect of the Iranian social mix. They are the majority, perhaps by small percentage. In my view, as long as IR has its core supporters it will remain in power. The oppositions to IR are (mostly) driven from middle, upper middle class citizens who will not become rebels nor will they go further than turning away from the system. Mostly if they can, they will leave. However I don’t doubt that within this group, there are radicals who would fight to the end, if the situation goes their way. Situation going their way is not yet likely.

One of the reasons that IR has its socials restrictions, even though I believe many in the system oppose! it is exactly that, to try to appeal to its core supporters. Main point being that IR follows a culture that has not been created in 32 years. The ideological system borrows from Shia traditional thinking, regardless of how accurate they present that tradition. In other words, IR is the first very “Iranian” system (modern history).  Important point to consider when thinking of Iranians system is to realize how complicated and mature the system reacts or put forth its policies. The image that there are no singularity within the system that carries the absolute power, has confused the population (And western media) about who is the “dictator”. Some time ago that dictator was Rafsanjani, then was Ahmadinejad, now is Khamenei. Some believe it’s not even Khamenei but the IRCG. Who are these people behind the scene of IRCG? What happens after Khamenei? Who is truly in charge? All we can do to speculate but no one knows the answer. The recent promotion of “Velayat e faghih” was a reaction to diverse political parties within the system, to in away “secure” or harmonize the system. That concept has taken power lately but because of the nature of IR can’t hold for long.

In Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi, Syria, Libya, and Tunisia the answer is simple. You know that one guy. That’s what makes Iran different. If tomorrow Khamenei leaves chances are some of the IR officials take over, perhaps even Karubi, Khatami, or Mousavi. Or even some of those who have now become opposition residing the West. Unless there is a government change with the help of the West, which I see very unlikely. Most likely the West will align itself with the future power, if that was to happen. Lastly one reason that Iran can’t have a Western supported official after Khamenei (assume he is “over thrown”) is that Iran is politically independent and also there are no chances for a military coup.

Another interesting point about current Iranian political format to add is that this very traditional system has a huge dilemma going forward. Increasing universities and students, modernity and internet, all and all are there to turn the future against their core supporters who will have no choice but to move forward. Therefore in that view, Iran will be OK. It’s a matter of time, but the time and the style is not Arab uprising, it’s Iranian, and that’s the future.

I was going to write one paragraph and see what happened! Sorry for the long comment. 

Abarmard,

I understand your points. The point that resonated with me most from historical anlaysis angle was #2. The point that can be most directly observed without relying on deduction is #5-T. To wit, even during the heat of the post-election uprising Iranian protesters made it clear that they did not want foreigners to intervene. By contrast, the Libyan rebels explicitly asked for military support from NATO. 

Mr. Gilani

You are correct if you were to use US DOS, however do you agree or disagree that issue could be more complicated than a report from US?

Suppose US or Europe agrees to have MEK as a terrorist organization or take them out of the list, does it change reality of organization's behavior and platform? Would you agree that either case is based on political view to take advantage of future strategic move in an active diplomacy?

In my views Palestinian issue to Iran is similar to Israeli issue to US. The core concept doesn’t change whether U.S. or Iran put Israel or Palestine as a terrorist nation/system/country. We can play with their diplomatic moves, or we can try to view a more realistic picture beyond daily politics and current affairs.
 
Therefore simply put, if we are going to agree that everything US, Europe, China, Iran, or Russia promotes as realistic image of this political field, and if “US DOS” is the core for your argument, then I am wrong and you are absolutely correct.

Back to this article, if you understood my point correctly you would argue whether Iran and Libya are similar cases. My argument is that they are totally different. My work here is much easier than yours because in every aspect from social, geographical, military, historical experiences, form of government, cultural norms or attitudes, nationalistic and social format, and so on, Iran is nothing and nothing like Libya. Even as mentioned in case of having oil, or dependent on oil, Iran ranks 2nd in the world as oil producing nation. Libya? Way at the bottom. Customers of Iran are vast range, Libya? Very limited. We can go on for a long time to prove this article wrong. I assume that you agree with this article, and after reading this article I would assume your position in this matter.

Your opinion is valid if you are going to take this article's logic, I don't agree with this article at all. I am not at all convinced that one can make such connections between these countries.

Abarmard, before we get into a debate......

Let's see if we can, indeed conduct a logical debate.

To start with, On your claim:

"Iran does not support terrorism"

I proved you to be wrong, based on the latest report from US DOS.

Do you accept that you were wrong? A Yes or No answer is all we need here.

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Mr. Gilani

The article's claims that Iran is similar to Libya are absolutely flawed in every sense. Some points in my comment can be argued from a political, philosophical, or moral point of view, but the purpose of my comment was to bring to writer's attention that a few simple similar points don’t make Iran or its regime similar to Ghadaffi or Libya. Those kinds of argument can be developed for any country in the world. Assume that US state department is correct to call Iran a state sponsor of terror, even though I believe it's a direct and planned political act rather than reality, my points still remain valid.

 RG: Don't waste your

 RG: Don't waste your time with Abarmard. He is a die-hard supporter of the IRI and the refoemers. He has made many more outlandish claims and justified everything every IRI crimes under the guise of "evolution" and non-violence. He is a known basiji supporter as well.

Just read some of his previous blogs and comments:

//iranian.com/main/member/abarmard

"In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer."- Albert Camus

ایران بر خلاف نظر نویسنده حمایتی از تروریست نمی کند

Abarmard, I disagree with every single point you raised on factual grounds. The most astonishing is your claim that " Iran does not support terrorism"!!

On Thursday, the US State Department released its annual Country Reports on Terrorism, which provides an overview of terrorism for the previous calendar year.

Iran "remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism in 2010," the State Department reported. "Iran's financial, material, and logistic support for terrorist and militant groups throughout the Middle East and Central Asia had a direct impact on international efforts to promote peace, threatened economic stability in the Gulf, and undermined the growth of democracy."

Read more: //www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/08/state_department_ira_1.php#ixzz1W6NLJEAO

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

۱ـ رژیم قذافی

۱ـ رژیم قذافی دیکتاتوری تک فردی بود در حالی که حکومت ایران نیمه جمهوری، نیمه توتالیتر، و کمی هم انقلابی است. استفاده رایج کلمه دیکتاتور برای تمام حکومتهای استبدادی و یا شبه استبدادی اشتباه است.
۲ـ ایدولوژی رژیم قذافی از خود او سر رشته می گرفت ولی حکومت ایران از فرهنگ بومی شیعه سر مشق می گیرد.
۳ـ قذافی رهبر نبود بلکه حکومت بود، در حالی که در ایران اینطور نیست. گر چه اینطور بنظر می رسد که آقای خامنه ای سردار حکومت است ولی او قدرت مطلق نبوده و نمی تواند باشد. در ایران امروز، تمام قشرهای مختلف سعی بر این دارند که خود را با رهبری مطابق کنند، ولی این قدرت رهبری نیست. در زیر این هیا هو، قدرتهای بسیاری سعی بر گرفتن کرسی حکومت دارند و مسابقه تمام نشده. گیجی بسیاری از تحلیل گران غربی هم از نبود درک لازم از گیر و بندهای جمهوری اسلامی است. آنها سعی کرده اند با دادن قدرت به یک فرد معادله را آسان کنند که کاملا اشتباه بوده و هست.
۴ـ ایران بر خلاف نظر نویسنده حمایتی از تروریست نمی کند. حمایت ایران از فلسطین همانند حمایت آمریکا از اسرائیل است.
۵ـ دارا بودن نفت و احتیاج به فروش نفت به هیچ وجه ایران را شبیه کشوری و یا حکومتی همچون قذافی نمی کند و این استدلال کاملا اشتباه است. مثال هر گردویی گرد است ولی هر گردی گردو نیست اینجا بجاست.
۶ـ آن شباهتها می تواند با بسیاری از کشورهای منطقه مقایسه شود ولی مهم تر اختلاف ایران با کشوری همچون لیبی است که باید مورد توجه قرار گیرد:
الف ـ ایران کشوری وسیع در جغرافیای منحصر به خود است. هر شهر ایران به اندازه کل لیبی جمعیت دارد (کم و بیش)
ب ـ ذخایر نفتی ایران سوم (جدیدا دوم) در دنیا است. عربستان نتوانست نفتی را که چین یا هند قول داده بود بر آورده کند. این بر قدرت ایران می افزاید و احتمال جنگ را کاهش می دهد.
پ ـ ایران با اینکه احتیاج به فروش نفت دارد، می تواند بدون فروش آن زندگی کند. ایران می تواند خوراک کشور را، هر چند کم و با زحمت، تامین کند. لیبی هرگز.
ت ـ لیبی کشوری قبیله ای و مردمش حس وطن پرستی ندارند در حالی که ایران کاملا بر عکس است. با احتمال حمله به ایران، مردم ایران با جان و دل از کشورشان در مقابل هر دشمنی دفاع می کنند. اصلا کل  تئوری حمله به ایران با همین دلیل نفی شده.
در کل بنظر من نویسنده سریع به واگن روزنامه نگاران غربی پیوست و به طوری "جو گیر" شد. اگر نکته به نکته ایراد این مقاله را بگیریم خودش کتابیست که در جای این کامنت نمی گنجد. 

Enemies of Islamic Republic will Fall not IRI

Agents of Enemies of Iran think they can overthrow Government of Iran with there cowardly Article. All Evil will fall soon including enemies of Islamic Republic. Just wait and watch next 10 years...

Nice analysis

I that such regimes will not go easily into the night as I have said many times.

While Gaddafi and the mullahs in Iran may share some common grounds in their ways, I do not see a strong ARMED opposition in Iran taking shape (at least today) that will be able to stand up against the murdering thugs currently in power. That is without foriegn intervention, which would obviously defeat the whole purpose of an independent representative government that will be needed to replace and repair the damages of 32 years of theocracy and anti-nationalsim..

Also, for Iran to change we need a shift in the way we view governance. With all the different ideologies (samples are presented here on I.com daily), it would be difficult (if not impossible) to assemble a representative government which is the only way to a sustainable political system.

And, let's not even contemplate on the secular aspect of this imaginery representative government.......Things are already impossible enough.

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Excellent Comparison of IRR with

Ghadafi's Regime.  Two Regimes ideed have a lot of similarities except the Iranians are different from Lybians and their actions against the barbaric IRR may not be the same.  We must hope best for Iranians & IRAN to get rid of IRR as whole.

 Insightful assessment.

 Insightful assessment. Libya and IRI have much more in common than reformers  like to believe...

"Whenever a separation is made between liberty and justice, neither, in my opinion, is safe." Robert Browning in 'Ceuciaja'