WAR

We Must Demand Hambastegi from All Iranians Abroad

Dear Ms. Amini,

I agree with you that Iranians with a high profile abroad have been pitiful and have failed to show a backbone to date. You and I and regular Iranians worry incessantly about war, while every self proclaimed leader in exile and thinker pretends they are doing something.

Shame on the approximately 150 recognized figures in the Iranian community abroad who did not put their petty jealousies aside to convene in the aftermath of the disputed elections in 2009. While I am willing to chalk up their failure to get together in 2009 as negligent, a failure to do so now when our country is on the cusp of war is criminal.

I think is incumbent on ordinary Iranians to demand of every well known Iranian personality abroad they may know (whether they be monarchists, constitutionalists, mossadeqists, IRI reformists, human rights activists, or eminent scholars to roll up their sleeves and assume a leadership role and band together with others of different political persuasions. Our best of collective intentions may not succeed in convening a gathering attended by various personalities, but not trying is no excuse.

If our so called leaders are fickle, it does not mean that all us Iranians are off the hook and can afford to be anything but vigilant. It is occassions like this that allow us to seperate the truly high minded from the two bit egoists. We should harass everyone who claims they care about the future of Iran.

Whether it be Reza Pahlavi, Esmail Nouri Allah, Khan Baba Tehrani, Hadi Ghaemi, Shirin Ebadi, Karim Lahiji, Akbar Ganji, Manouchehr Ganji, Houchang Nehavandi, Mehrangiz Kar, Ardeshir Amir Arjomand, Abdolkarim Soroush, Hassan Youseffi Eshkevari, Mohsen Kadivar, Ahmad Batebi, Ali Afshari, Attaollah Mohajerani, the Amouzegar brothers, Shahriar Ahi, Parastou Forouhar, Noushin Ahmadi Khorasani, Abolhassan Banisadr, Mansour Farhang, Shahin Fatemi, Fatemeh Haghighatjoo, Mohsen Makhmalbaaf, Hedayat Matin-daftari, Jalal Matini, Mehrdad Khonsari, Mahnaz Afkhami, Gholam Reza Afkhami, Abdolreza Ansari, Alinaghi Alikhani, Khodadad Farmanfarma, Shadi Sadr, Halleh Esfandiary, Faraj Sarkoohi, Mohsen Sazegara, Hassan Shariatmadar, Mojtaba Vahedi, Ardeshir Zahedi, Hamid Zolnoor, Amir Abbas Fakhravar should recognize that they must work together. 

All their voices are more powerful than disparate ones. If any of these personalities fail to act they will slide into irrelevance and be marginalized as patriots.  

Journalists and writers such as Mahshid Amirshahi, Ahmad Ahrar, Iradj Pezeshkzad, Maziar Bahari, Alireza Noorizadeh, Ahmad Ahrar, Enayat Fani, Bijan Farhoodi, Azar Nafisi, Bahram Moshiri, Jahanshah Javid, Roya Hakakian, Azadeh Moaveni, Rudi Bakhtiar, Darius Kadivar, Nazanin Ansari, Masih Alinejad, Nikahang Kowsar, Nazila Fathi,Dariush Karimi, Hadi Khosandi, Ebrahim Nabavi, and Kambiz Hosseini should put their pens to good use to advocate for prominent Iranians abroad to convene and pull together.

Finally, we should all harangue eminent thinkers such as Ehsan Yarshater, Mashallah Adjoudani, Dariush Ashoori, Mehrzad Boroujerdi, Ramin Jahanbegloo, Touraj Atabaki, Tooraj Daryaei, Ali Ansari, Hamid Dabashi, Ahmad Ashraf, Trita Parsi,  Karim Sadjadpour, Reza Aslan, Afshin Molavi, Nader Hashemi, Mohammad Tavakoli-Targhi, Homa Katouzian, Mohammad Amini, Houchang Chehabi, Fakhreddin Azimi, Abbas Amanat, Shahram Chubin, Payam Akhavan, Abbas Milani, Farzaneh Milani, Dariush Bayandor, Seyyed Hossein Nassr, Vali Nasr, and Shirin Tahmasebi-Hunter and others to assume an active role in convening a get together.

Hopefully in our life time we will see Iranians work together. If not now at a time when our country is on the cusp of severe military attacks, when.     

A Friendly Critique of Ms. Fariba Amini’s Article

Dear friend Fariba,

We share about 90% of our views. On this issue, however, I disagree with you. I think you are wrong on several grounds. More significantly, your errors of analysis would lead to terrible results (if my analysis is correct). Here is my analysis:

1. Your analogy of the current vf regime confrontation with the U.S. with Mossadegh confrontation with U.K.-U.S. is a false analogy. Mossadegh’s goal was to nationalize Iran’s oil, and establish democracy. These goals were objected to by the U.K. because they threatened the British colonial control of Iran. The Eisenhower administration finally sided with the U.K. because of the threat of the good example of Iran for other third world countries that would use the model of Iran to nationalize their foreign companies. Mossadegh was defending Iran’s national interests. He was not making any threats to the lives of millions of people anywhere. The fight was basically between a third world nation struggling to gain economic and political independence and a European colonial power struggling to maintain its colonial control over Iran. The Truman administration needed the U.K. due to the Cold War rivalry with the USSR. Truman wanted to keep friendship with Iran and alliance with U.K. The Eisenhower administration was solidly with the U.K. and saw the world a little differently than did the Truman administration.

The confrontation between the vf regime with the U.S. has to do with the aggressive, violent, expansionist foreign policy of IRI. From Carter to Reagan (remember Iran-Contra affair), to Clinton, to Obama, the U.S. has tried and tried to open relationship with the IRI. It is the vf regime that has been exporting its jihadi bellicose policies.

You apparently believe that the vf regime did not, or does not have a nuclear weapons program!!!!! If that is your belief, then your belief clashes with the beliefs of so many others as well as a whole lot of evidence that point to the nuclear weapons program of the vf regime.

The world is worried that a bunch of fanatic extremist Shia fundamentalists get nuclear weapons, there is no way to contain them. Many Israelis fear that the vf regime would use their nukes to annihilate them. The Saudi regime fears that with nukes, the vf regime could invade and take over Kuwait, Bahrain, the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, ....

If one accepts that the vf regime’s nuclear program is for bombs, and considering the regime’s expansionist aggressive policies, then the more accurate analogy is with Hitler and Nazi Germany. The main difference is that with several nuclear weapons, the fundamentalists can do much much more killings in a few minutes that Hitler could do in several years.

Therefore, the option for Obama is not to be a Truman or Eisenhower. The option for Obama is to be Nevil Chamberlain or Churchill-FDR.

2. If you are wrong, and I am correct, what is the worst thing, or a likely scenarios, that could occur if the world does what you suggest?

The vf regime gets nukes. Would use it on Israel, and then there will be massive retaliation by either Israel or the U.S. In such a scenario, the U.S. would have to nuke so many places in Iran due to the fear of the vf regime hiding some of its nukes there. In all likelihood, there will be around 60-70 million Iranians death.

The question is are the leaders of vf regime "rational" or do they believe in Shia beliefs of mass martyrdom of Imam Hussein that it is good to fight for what they regard as just? Do the leaders of the vf regime believe in the 12th Imam and that a cataclysmic event could make him to appear and end the world or would he sit back and watch the whole thing?

Because of such concerns, neither the Israeli leaders, nor the American leaders, nor the Saudi leaders will accept the vf regime to have nuclear bombs. YOU might not worry about Khamenei or Mesbah or Jennati to have nukes, but the leaders of Israel, U.S. and Saudi Arabia do.

Therefore, they will use diplomacy first, then sanctions, and finally military strikes to stop the vf regime from having nukes.

You seem to think that diplomacy could work. History has proven this notion false. Obama offered to sit have direct and unconditional negotiations with Khamenei or anyone he would send to have a grand bargain. Obama sent Khamenei at least 2 letters. It was Khamenei who refused the offer. Obama has continued the offer.

If vf regime’s nuclear program is for developing nuclear BOMB, then what could the U.S. and Europeans give Khamenei to give up the bomb? If Khamenei wants to have nukes, then there is NOTHING that the U.S. and Europeans could give that would be comparable to vf regime having nukes.

With nukes, Khamenei could give whatever help he wants to Hezbollah or PIJ to attack the Israelis and there is nothing the Israelis could do to retaliate. The vf regime could threaten to nuke Israel if the Israelis did anything. Or the vf regime could invade Kuwait. What can the U.S. or Saudi Arabia do to stop the vf regime from occupying Kuwait. The control of Kuwait’s oil will solve the vf regime’s economic problems. The vf regime could easily invade Bahrain. And then invade the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, which contains much of Saudi Arabia’s oil as well as most of its Shia citizens.

YOU may not think that the IRI would do these. But look at the actual history of the vf regime. Has the vf regime helped Hezbollah, Hamas, PIJ, the Saudi Hezbollah, groups in Bahrain, in Iraq, in Afghanistan????? And the vf regime has been doing all these despite not having nukes. Why would it not go all the way, if the vf regime did get nukes?

Therefore, the two final options for the U.S. is to either go to war with the vf regime BEFORE its gets nukes, or go with war with the vf regime AFTER it gets nukes. The war with the vf regime before it gets nukes would cost very few lives. The war with the vf regime after it gets nukes will probably cost more than 60 million lives. In the words of Hillary Clinton it would "totally obliterate" Iran.

In sum, YOUR policies may result in the deaths of more than 60 million Iranians. This scenario is the scenario that every responsible human being on the planet should try to avoid. The vf regime has not accepted negotiations on serious issues for the likely reason that it wants to have nuclear weapons, and it does not want to give it up. The vf regime is also worried that even if it tried to lie and fool the U.S. in a diplomatic treaty and cheat on it, then the U.S. would find out. You and I and every responsible person on this planet knows that the vf regime officials from Khomeini to Rafsanjani to Khamenei to Ahmadinejad are liars and charlatans. How could any sane person accept a word these charlatans say?

Therefore, YOUR views could lead to the worst case scenarios and cause the deaths of more than 60 million Iranians.

You even oppose sanctions!!!!!!! This is probably the only way short of war to weaken the vf regime, so that the Iranian people, ourselves, can overthrow the vf regime. With the weak sanctions that exist, Khamenei gets about 90 BILLION dollars year after year after year. With this money, he can not only maintain his regime in power, but also continue his clandestine nuclear weapons program. If the world followed your policy proposal and got rid of the sanctions, then Khamenei will have access to more than 110 BILLION dollars year after year after year. Even with a grand bargain, the vf regime could easily cheat and finish its nuke.

The appeasement of Hitler did not work, the appeasement of vf regime will not work. Unlike the world of 1939, today we have to worry about nuclear bombs that can kill millions and millions of people. Thus, your policy proposal, could lead to the end of Iran, period. You, like Chamberlian, are a most decent human being. You want to do good. It is like the story of doostieh khaleh kherseh. You love for Iran and the Iranian people and your wish to help the smaller problem (the fly or sanctions or limited war with vf regime before it get nukes) will result in the total killing of Iran.

I appreciate and honor your love for Iran. I have serious problems with the assumptions you make, that I find untenable. Your assumption that the vf regime does not have a secret nuclear weapons program, that the vf regime does not lie, that a grand bargain with the vf regime would work, that the vf regime officials are not aggressive mass murders, that the vf regime officials are not believers of the martyrdom of Imam Hussein, are all bad assumption.

Leaders of other countries (e.g., U.S., Israel, Europe, Saudi Arabia) do not share your assumptions and analogies. It is clear that if the current path continues, there will be war. The only realistic way to prevent war is to overthrow the vf regime before it get close to finishing its nuke program. If the Iranian people fail to overthrow the vf regime, there WILL BE WAR BEFORE the vf regime finishes its nuke program.

You will think that others are evil warmongers. But if the world followed your policy and your assumptions are wrong (which they most likely are), then in all likelihood your policy would cause the death of 60+ million Iranians. So, in reality, those who you think are warmonger in reality save the lives of over 60 million Iranians. As the saying goes, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." But the role of responsible leaders is to avoid the hell or the poor soul in the story of doostieh khaleh kherseh. The lives of more than 60 million Iranians, as well as tens of millions of other human beings depends on others NOT following your views.

Best regards,

Masoud

این مملکت صاحب دارد

We should all assume there

We should all assume there would be a war on Iran if not now in the next couple of years. The issue is what can we do about it? Pitting US agaisnt the Israel, ranting about US imperialism, raving about AIPAC, are going to convince anyone's minds  who make the foreign policy for the US??

What other alternatives are there where we can convince all sides there is no reason for war? War is money for the US economy and those who have stocks in arms manufacturing companies. The war on Afghanistan and Iraq was not a disaster for the warprofiteers. They enriched themselves beyond their wildest imagination and will do anything to maintain their  gains. They will not allow at any cost IRI to have more influence than it already has in Iraq and to cease those oil fields in Iraq. Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world. The US is not about to leave that to IRI..This is a fact. IRI must either change its behavior or it would be eliminated. IRI is not in a position to win a war with the US, period. As Ted Kopple said in his program, the entire American way of life depends on keeping IRI's hands off  from those Oil fields in Basra.

 A state of war only serves
as an excuse for domestic tyranny.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Born December 11, 1918

Russia and China's Bitch!

VPK, I totally agree.

Cousin Mehrdad,

At least America's goods are still working after 32 years. The F-4's and F-5's, F-14's and C-130's, the Boeings are still in operation (with the help of smugglers.) It is the Tupolev's that are crashing and the cheap Chinese stuff that are breaking (including made in China Ghor'an and Araki switch blades!)

Faramarz jaan what happened to Saddam when he invaded Iran?

Nothing!   As Joe Piscopo would say in his SNL skits, what's going on in the world of sports?  NOTHING!

So if the world has changed since WWII why did you use those examples?!  "People" always give money and weapons to locals to promote their own agenda.  This has been the same since man lived in cave!

The situation is ripe for America to invade Iran.   When US invaded Iraq, there was no evidence of Iraqi involvement in 9/11 and the mistake about yellow cake in W's speech to congress was corrected the very next day, yet they invaded Iraq anyway!

The only reason we're not seeing a war in Iran is because of the mess in Iraq and Afghanistan.  There was a mess in Vietnam too but by 1990 it was forgotten.  My point is that US or NATO for that matter will not invade Iran for Iranians benefit.  Where does that fall into this equation? 

I hear a lot of people talk about going to war in Iran to "get the economy to roll again."  They say everytime there is a war economy has improved.  With US out of Iraq and soon out of Afghanistan, it will have a negative impact on the economy.

We went through a period of about 1 - 2 years that we did not see much dicussion about war here on i.com but now we are seeing more and more discussions.  Why?  I don't think it's because Islamic Republic is asking us to do so. 

Everything is sacred

Shushtari

You are right most people I know want IRI goen. But they also don't want war and any risk. Well how do people want it. As you said Mollahs will kill everyone to remain in power. What are people supposed to do now.

Mehrdad

And it looks like the same holds true for the IRI, as they have not shown the willingness to be the America's bitch.

If this was the only issue then most Iranians would not oppose IRI. But the issue goes far beyond it. IRI is the greatest enemy of Iran and is wrecking the whole nation. That is the problem not "being Americas bitch". 

See it is these kinds of posts that get us at loggerheads. Do you see anything good in IRI? If so what. If not then what is wrong with cooperating with America if it helps Iran.

FA

I agree and disagree.....

it's true that no true iranian would want an attack on his/her country- however, the dilemma is that they mullahs would burn iran down to the ground and kill every last person in order to stay in power.....

you do not need a full scale war.....it is very easy to bring these thieves to their knees- stop buying oil from them.....within a short time, they will be bankrupt....

also, a covert small operation to destroy only khayenei's residence and the pasdars' HQ would do a lot of damage without a full scale war

the point is these animals will not go in peace, that much is proven.....so it's whether you want iran to die slowly under their vicous rule, or if you want to cut the head of the snake and free our country 

Dear cousin Framarz: You are correct...

"When it comes to this Regime, turn the other cheek is not going to work"

And it looks like the same holds true for the IRI, as they have not shown the willingness to be the America's bitch.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

some points

Dear Cyrus,

I don't disagree with you but the fact is that within this constant propaganda, there is the truth and there are made up stories. The fact is that the last IAEA report was full of gaps. (I did an interview with an Israeli American expert on this issue and he confirmed that the last report had no credibility). 

We all agree on one thing : that the regime in Tehran is repressive and does not have the best interest of the Iranian people in mind. Why should we build nuclear reactors in a country that is earthquake prone?  Why waste the oil money on others in order to buy their loyalty?  

But on the other side,  I am not sure if the U.S. and the West have our interest at heart. After all,  the West has proven in recent decades that it is after its own interest.

Having said that, until Iranians really come together and work actively and have one voice, we will never get anywhere. There is so much mistrust, labeling and jealousy among Iranians outside (even inside) that it is difficult to form a national front in opposition to the IRI.

But the drums of war are real and I am afraid that if we do not show one voice, it will be too late. 

Frankly,  and to be honest, I don't know what the long term solution would be, but I also know that RP is also against any attack on Iran's soil.  In that we agree.  War is devastating and it will not bring about democracy if the society is not ready for it. I do believe though that Iran is far more advanced and open to democratic principles than many of the Arab states.  

If we had a leadership that really cared about the people and not its grandiose ambitions, interferring here and there, we would have a first class country.  We don't.  But let us not destroy it until we have something better.  I am deeply worried about Iran as I think all of us are.  

Esfand jaan: Well said..

In both comments.

Thanks

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Esfand Jaan, the World has Changed

The world has changed since WWII. The last time that someone invaded its neighbor for no reason was Saddam against Kuwait 20 years ago and we know what happened to him. Nowadays, people give money and weapons to locals to promote their own agenda.

Hilary did say that in reply to a question about “wiping Israel off the map.” Also Mullen said something similar, “we are not seeking a war with Iran, but don’t get me wrong, if it happens, we will crush them like ants.”

I don’t believe that the current US government or even the tough talking Republicans will start an invasion of Iran for the sake of a Regime change, but if the Regime challenges the US and the west militarily, they will pay a very heavy price, no matter what you and I think or say.

When it comes to this Regime, turn the other cheek is not going to work.

I also identify and share the sentiments of Cyrus Khorasani…

So, without repeating what it has been said so eloquently and I agree with wholeheartedly, we need to recognize the fact that the state of Iranians, specially outside of Iran, is too fractious and there is hardly any unity among us.

We have also seen a sustain campaign on groups of Iranians that have aimed to united Iranian-American’s voice, attack anyone who take a stands against war and of course it need not to be said that IRI itself is a great contributor to this escalation.

Lastly, I think we all need to recognize that the current drive/escalation of rhetoric by Republican candidates is vastly aimed at getting the Jewish vote and to earn the backing from AIPAC which is the main driver in the road to bomb Iran.

A great and well written article indeed.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad

Faramarz jaan "after" Pearl Harbor?

Iran is not Germany or Japan of WWII.  Germany and Japan were world super powers who invaded other countries.

It is true that the Islamic Republic has been having their own war rhetoric but from Obama down to all his people you have mentioned have said even before they got into office that either Iran will be "obliterated" if she as much as farts towards another country to that "all options will be on the table." so no one on the American side has ever reduced their rhetoric.  The only difference is that Iran is no longer an "axis of evil".

Besides US and Israel can shrug off everything else that Iran says except their war rhetoric?  When Iran says they're going to send a warship to Norfolk, Pentagon laughs it off but are dead serious about having a war inside Iran because of rhetoric?

There is no monopoly on which side of this war should be the receiving end of our condemnations.   You can focus ALL your attentions on the Islamic Republic and when war breaks out keep your focus the same until the Islamic Republic is no longer.  But the war will not stop.  Just like it has not stopped in Iraq and will not stop for the forseeable future.  Daily bombings and kidnappings are now the risk average Iraqi from all walks of life is now faced with day in and day out.

Everything is sacred

Misdirected Concern

The drums of war have been coming from the IR Regime for the past 32 years but somehow it is the west and the US in particular that is getting all the blame. The Obama administration from the man himself, Hilary, Biden, Panetta and all the way down have said again and again that they are not seeking a military confrontation with the Regime. They have been clear that a military confrontation will have unintended consequences. But day-in and day-out you hear the talk of war from two camps; the IR Regime and the Regime-inclined folks in the west.

The sanction policy is working and the Regime will sooner or later look like the North Korean regime, completely isolated and without cash.

What puzzles me about the articles like this is that the blame for war mongering is put squarely on the US while it is the Regime that actually is looking for a war. Ever since Khomeini came to power the Regime has been seeking confrontation with the world. Be careful what you wish for, you may get it.

And what is the world supposed to do, surrender? Remember, this is the Regime that prolonged the war with Iraq for 6-7 extra years. This is the Regime that ruthlessly killed people like Bakhtiar or Farrokhzad, bombed the place in Argentina and on and on.

All the options should be on the table, not for the sake of the Iranian people or a new and democratic Iran, but rather to confront a threat to the international community. And all the talk about “a military confrontation will set back the reform movement”, well, gee whiz, just imagine that if after Pearl Harbor someone told you that a war with Japan or Germany would set back the democratic movements in those countries!

I Couldn't agree more with

I Couldn't agree more with Cyrus Khorasani...I also believe the role of Israel has nothing to do with the US et al wanting to protect its interest in the region. The region is a competition arena for Russia, China, and the US because of its geographical position, resources, and religious reasons.

Even if there were no Israel, Vatican and illuminatis would have invented one to  control the jews and the muslims of the world. Our hatred for Tel Aviv and its criminal behavior toward Palestinians and overestimating their role will not help us to avert a devestating war on Iranians.

We need to present an alternative to all parties who want war with Iran , even the mullahs. We need to convince the mullahs that war will not save their hold on power.

Just my 2 cents.

p.s. Ms. Amini I highly recommend you watch this clip:

An eye opening report by Ted Kopple tonight on rock center with Brian Williams. Though the program was about Iraq but the main topic was Iran and the jingoism was frightening and the issue was not Iran's nuclear weapons..Don't miss it.

//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/45646118#null

//rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/12/9389050-as-us-military-withdraws-from-iraq-questions-remain-about-american-presence#comments

A state of war only serves
as an excuse for domestic tyranny.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Born December 11, 1918

Cyrus

You know why more Iranians don't do things to stop a war? I have a theory that many people really want war to kick out the Islamic Regime. But they don't dare admit it fearing being labeled. 

Therefore they sit back and watch. Because deep in their hearts many would love to see Khamenei and AN end up where Saddam ended up.

War or not

It will take more than a Friday prayer to knock out the IRI. But it will not take as much as some like to think. I don't like war but if they want to do it they better be ready to go all the way. I said this to my congressman in person.

As for IRI supporter or not you don't need to support IRI to be against war. But you don't need to be a maniac to support war either. People have a right to different points of view. The 3% number is meaningless since it is not up to us. Americans will decide what to do based on what is good for America. Main thing to  do if there is war is influence the outcome. 

I rather put our energy in that instead of all this infighting. At least I hope we agree a Secular United Iran is what is needed. 

Fanciful Thinking will not get us out of this one

I respect Ms. Amini for her heart felt concern that Iran be spared a military attack. The real possibility of a strike represents a sobering moment for many of us that are suffering sleepness nights. 

That said, I diasagree with the premise of various observations Ms. Amini has made in her well written article.

First, waiting for the emergence of an eminent American to save us from the ravages of war is sheer fantasy. Why can't Iranians abroad adopt a more forceful and creative position rather that await an American Godot.

It is incumbent on all public figures among the emigre Iranian community to band together and speak with one voice on this issue. When Reza Pahlavi, our noble laureate, and figures representing every shade of public opinion from constitutionalist, to the National Front, secularists and reformists and numerous Iranian academics are content with merely signing petitions to stave of a foreign invasion, why would a foreigner feel compelled to enter the fray to save the day. 

Shame on us Iranians sitting on the sidelines and expecting others to emerge as mythic heroes. Az mast ke bar mast. We iranians inside and outside that country must demontrate more of a backbone and craft a tenable alternative solution. Every Iranian public figure outside Iran should put aside their petty personal considerations and partisan reflexes to join together.

Every high profile Iranian eschews delving into the details of hot potato issues and merely states war is bad. Can anyone say that any Iranian personality has held forth on the pros and cons of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, adopted a less than ambiguous position on sanctions, or presented a realistic alternative to war that may be woth considering by the State Department, Tel Aviv, or London.

Eenshallah and Mashallah, or crossing our fingers will not get us out of this mess.    

Also, curiously Ms. Amini plucks an anecdote from the 1950s that hardly supports her position. Yes Dean Acheson may have initially adopted an upright position to mediate a solution to the stand off between Dr. Mossadegh and Great Britain. Yet Dean's efforts came to naught. Dr. Mossadegh hemmed and hawed and the opportunities to forge a mutually acceptable solution were lost when he refused to heed American advise.

Finally, Ms. Amini concedes that the IRI is unlikely to agree to a diplomatic compromise. The IRI neither understandes nor cares to promote Iran's national interest. As such, how can we expect the rest of the world to consistently stall things and give diplomacy another chance, when Iran's leaders prefer confrontation.

We all have to do better in presenting realistic alternatives, rather than simply say to the outside world hold off and things will magically improve. 

Rastgoo and Fariba

I agree with both the article and Rastgoo's comment.  I think we should talk against the war and continue to do so especially at times like these when the war rhetoric is non stop.

The fact of the matter is that many on this very website alone really do not care about the outcome of a war.  All they want is for the Islamic Republic to be gone at all costs.  Since they don't intend to ever go back to Iran they really don't care.

You also have those who as we say in Farsi push away with hand but pull in with legs!  They say they are against the war but when it comes to taking a position they're like; welllllllllllllll, you knowwwwwwww, welllll .... and talk about "all options should be on the table" and the "threat of war".  Well the threat of war cuts both ways and Islamic Republic uses the same "threat of war" for their domestic benefit but they don't know it because they don't read Iran's domestic media. 

I think 3% of Iranians in US wanting a war with Iran is a reasonable number and it's always good to have this 3% compartmentalized for reality checks.  We live in a different time.  

Everything is sacred

Friday pray is the only target

Only 3 planes can do the job during friday pray while Khamanie is preaching. On that specific day, all these Islamic criminals gather in Tehran university to listen to rahbar's speech. Best time to take an action. 1 explosion will send all these monsters to the hell. Surely collespse of Islamic regime will be in order. Quick and easy. No need for bombing or war.

Goal : Restoring monarchy

More chicken hawk prop

To think that the aftermath of an American/Israeli attack would bring about a regime change in Iran is utter naivete (euphemism for ignorance and stupidity).  If there is an attack it will be in the form of aerial "surgical" bombardment of 10,000 to 20,000 targets.  These include military targets as well as soft targets like bridges, railways, tunnels, power stations, communication bays and hubs....Tens of thousands will die and the regime will only tighten its bloody grip on the population.  Iran will most likely enter into a period of civil war as the ethnic minorities will want to be separated from Iran.  There will be no US troops deployed due to a lack of support from the American public.  Even if they did, Iran will prove to be another Vietnam for America.  Just do the math based on a 10-20% regime support and you will find out that they will have tens of thousands fighting against the "great satan".  Iran will be forced into destitution like Iraq was after the 1991 American bombings of that country.  From 1991 to 2003 over 500,000 Iraqis died due to the combined effects of the war and the ensuing sanctions.  You, who cheer for this Machiavellian "the end justifies the means" method should be ashamed of calling yourselves Iranians. We all like to see the Iranian regime gone, but none of us should be willing to pay the ultimate cost of a total destruction of Iran for it.  The Iranian regime will fall someday when the people of Iran want to overthrow it as bad as the people in Syria want to overthrow their government.  Until such day while you bask in the comfortable settings of the West you should remember that the reason you are fortunate to be here is because of a poor nation called Iran and remember that you are not better than any one else who is stuck there and has to face the nightmares that you chicken hawks profess.

آفرین! آفرین

Continue to vindicate and protect the bloodthirsty regime of Iran for another 32 years. aafarin!

Take a close look at what youre supporting:

//4.bp.blogspot.com/_wMNtIDuNWao/S94qXwC8G4I/AAAAAAAACBg/LJMxudu-8-Q/s1600/basij+sepah+police+pasdar+basiji+etelaati+naja+%D8%A8%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%AC+%D9%BE%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1+%D8%B3%D9%BE%D8%A7%D9%87%DB%8C+%D8%A7%D8%B7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%AA%DB%8C+%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%A7+%D8%A8%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%AC%DB%8C++(57).jpg

Walmart is having a sale on its picture frames. This one is perfect for hanging in your homes! Aafarin! 

Mahtub

Hamvatans

Regime change is what we wanted /needed since  31  years ago. The islamic regime  was  Pushed  to us, as a result of  covert actions back in the 70s by USA ,UK, france and german goverments.

once somebody told me, american govermnet is not about bringing stability . its about bringing unstability to world. Iran has been destroyed by  Illegal Islamic thugs Mullahs ,as a direct result of actions of  USA and UK.

32  years fastforward, Neither of the 2 goverments  telling the truth,and do not mention how we got here.

Iran and Iranninas want/ need  regime change, to a Secular democratic constitutional monarch  system. even we  do away with the Monarcy, we  still have a huge problem ahead of us. the damage done to iran and issue of  Justice for  crimes against Humanity, for Iranninas. Removing the mullahs  regime must be our # 1 priority.

and Never forget who did this to us.

Long Live secular democartic  goverment of Iran. UK and USA must be hold  responsible  for this  crime.

great job, Fariba

you will probably get a lot of crap from the 3% of the Iranian-Americans who want war, or from the other crowd that wants chocking sanctions, practically leading to war.  If anyone else had written this article, there would have been 20+ comments accusing you of being an IRI supporter.  Thanks for your courage.