Iran protests may mark end of radical Islam
The Detroit News
28-Jul-2009 (8 comments)

Is history ending yet again?

Much as the hammers that leveled the Berlin Wall in 1989 marked the end of the Cold War, so might the protests rocking Iran signal the death of radical Islam and the challenges it poses to the West.

No, that doesn't mean we'll be removing the metal detectors from our airports anytime soon. Al-Qaida and its ilk, even diminished in strength, will retain the ability to stage terrorist strikes. But the danger brought home on Sept. 11, 2001, was always greater than the possibility of murderous attacks. It was the threat that a hostile ideology might come to dominate large swaths of the Muslim world.

Not all versions of this ideology -- variously called Islamism or radical Islam -- are violent. But at the core of even the peaceful ones, such as that espoused by Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, is the idea that the Islamic world has been victimized by the West and must defend itself. Even before the United States invaded Iraq, stoking rage, polls in Muslim countries revealed support for Osama bin Laden and for al-Qaida's aims, if not its methods. If such thinking were to triumph in major Muslim countries beyond Iran -- say, Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia -- violent extremists would command vast new stores of personnel, explosives and funds.

This is precisely the nightmare scenario that is now receding. Even if the Iranian regime succeeds in suppressing the protests and imposes the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahm... >>>

recommended by Farhad Kashani

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

 
Farhad Kashani

Liberation08, The whole

by Farhad Kashani on Thu Jul 30, 2009 05:46 PM PDT

Liberation08, The whole notion that there are a group of people called “neo Cons” and they “hate Iran” and “all they wanna do is BOMB Iran” is valid no more. As matter of fact, they turned out to be right in most things they said. They said Iraq will have a democracy, and it does, they said IRI is part of axis of evil, and it is, they said IRI is an oppressive regime, and it is, they said we should support the Iranian people when they stand up against the regime, and they should since today even people like Shirin Ebadi and Human Rights group called for International intervention in Iran. So, if anything, they should have the upper hand, not the ones who thought these so called “Neo Cons” have nothing else to do but love Israel and hate Iran. I didn’t use personal attacks, I didn’t call you names or make it personal, rather, you did that with the author by calling him a “Neo Con” in a negative manner. This article is not about bombing Iran, but you tried to delegitimize his absolutely legitimate argument by engaging in character assassination. One last thing, if America or Israel want to bomb Iran, we should absolutely disagree since it is morally and strategically wrong for obvious reasons. Morally because innocent Iranians will die in the process and we don’t want to see our country destroyed and strategically because it will give an additional and powerful excuse for IRI to oppress Iranians, and also U.S or Israel will suffer heavy casualties. However, we have to understand why they want to bomb Iran to begin with since IRI has done nothing but provoke them day and night with no benefit to the Iranian people., not to come around and immediately attack them and call them names. We need to attack IRI and call those Fascists names for provoking others to attack Iran.


  •  
liberation08

Farhad Kashani, where did

by liberation08 on Wed Jul 29, 2009 07:17 PM PDT

Farhad Kashani,

where did i say anything about the iri being a victim? what do you mean by "people like you"? what was i wrong about? muravchik describes himself as a "neocon". bombing iran would be the best thing that could happen to the IRI hardliners. the conflation of iran and al-qaeda is false

perhaps you should follow the rules of iranian.com, which are against personal attacks


  •  
Farhad Kashani

HATEIRI jaan and che khabar

by Farhad Kashani on Wed Jul 29, 2009 03:47 PM PDT

HATEIRI jaan and che khabar jaan,  

Absolutely right guys.

 

  Liberation08, 

Using the whole “neocon” and “Zionist” and things like that as execuse to play the victim card for IRI regime will never work again. If you’re saying that Neocons were saying this all along and people are starting to realize that is the case, then Necons were right and people like you were wrong all along!

  


  •  
Farhad Kashani

XerXes,   I don’t

by Farhad Kashani on Wed Jul 29, 2009 03:44 PM PDT

XerXes,

 

I don’t know where to start, so, first off I’m just gonna say change your name from XerXes to Ruhollah, more suitable since you are an IRI supporter, don’t you think?

 

Briefly in response: this is very simple. IRI introduced this model of government, and behavior, that you can rise in the name of Islam, commit all kinds of atrocities known to men, take over the country and enforce “Islamic” law. All these groups that you mentioned, along with numerous more out there, follow the exact same doctrine. They are all Khomeini wannabees. Khomeini inspired and his legacy inspires them to do so. Islamic Fundamentalism was revitalized with IRI taking over. IRI is a model that they want to establish in their own society. How come they weren’t around, or if they were they were insignificant, pre 1979 revolution? You never though about that? It’s just like Communism or Nazism. Communism prospered and took a different dimension with USSR and it collapsed and severely weakened with its fall. White supremacy prospered and took a different turn with Hitler, and it died out and marginalized with the collapse of the third Reich.

 

We’re not even talking about material support here! As far as that goes, IRIs creation of Hamas and Hezbollah is not something they even deny. Their material support for Houthis in Yemen, and Shite (and even some Sunni) groups in Iraq, Islamists in Algeria (in the 90s Algeria cut off relations with IRI because of that), Egypt (in the 90s Egypt cut off relations with IRI because of that), Morocco (recently cut off relations with IRI because of that), Bahrain (in the 90s and beginning of 2000s had really really bad relations with IRI because of that), and others is well documented. IRI itself hints all the time that they support all who seek an Islamic society. It’s even in its constitution. They have acted upon that, day and night. They brainwash people to commit crimes in the name of Islam. Most Imams in the Muslim world who adopted IRIs way are Khomeini wannabees.


  •  
liberation08

the writer of this article,

by liberation08 on Wed Jul 29, 2009 03:36 PM PDT

the writer of this article, josh muravchik, is a prominent neocon and advocate of bombing iran


  •  
che khabar e

In that your article

by che khabar e on Wed Jul 29, 2009 02:53 PM PDT

In that your article referred to radical Islam and radical Islam only, I will agree with you.  Not to be confused with Islam as a religion but getting rid of a radical Islamic regime.  One can only hope.  :-)

But then, I'm for getting rid of ANY extreme faction. 


  •  
HATEIRI

I agree 100%

by HATEIRI on Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:02 PM PDT

IRI is a cancer and a disease that is and has spread around the world

Removing this barbaric and brutal regime from the face of the earth we might have accomplished 70-75% in our war against terrorism.

The rest is supported by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and UAE.

 

FREE IRAN

CHEERS


  •  
XerXes

WRONG

by XerXes on Wed Jul 29, 2009 06:38 AM PDT

you are saying that if IRI dies, the Taliban, Junollah of Baluchestan (Supported by Israel)
Asbat ol Ansar (Sunni extremists)
Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Egyptian Sunni terrorists)
Hamas (your area, you should know them)
Kahane Chai (Jewish extremist group aims to restore the biblical state of Israel)

are all going to be gone? hmm, you learn something new from Kashani every day. smart guy and not one sided at all.


  •