Faramarz

faramarz and MM

Fellas.

First of all i was really please with faramarz's down to the point and matter of factly way of seeing things. Much better than those who still happen to live in a fantasy Island of Hoping that their dreams will eventually come true.

MM .

I am not sure you realize what we are dealing with in here. Sadly. many of us have not yet recognized that no matter what gets on the table and what gets negotiated, Be in Human rights and all other things, All we will get will be a Facade of something remotely resembling a less strict political atmosphere and more freedom to express our griefs. Do you really think You will Get more "room" to do anything? are you sure you live on this planet???

Besides, what do expect to see coming out of these supposedly well-intentioned negotiations? Have we already not seen the result of the quite factual statement globally published and broadcast by the UN appointed HR rep? So... my question is, Has that eased down on the intensity of such abuses? Can you honestly attest to it? SO what is the point of more strikes and more this and that???!!!

Please get real folks and listen to the voice of reason .  

Faramarz

If you already predict an impasse on nuclear negotiations, then what is all the fuss?  Be assured that the red line will be crossed and regardless of who NIAC blames, there will be war.  

In TP's book, whose references /passages can be seen in Amazon (//www.amazon.com/Single-Roll-Dice-Obamas-Diplomacy/dp/0300169361#reader_0300169361), his conclusions are based on interviews with 70 high-ranking officials from the U.S., Iran, Europe, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Brazil—including the top American and Iranian negotiators.  And, it is ok to disagree with his conclusions, but it is not fair to say that he blames everyone but the IRI because TP blamed AIPAC (Israel!), the Saudi Arabia, the IRI as well as the US for the current impasse on the nuclear negotiations.  But, I have to agree that TP tries to be an academic in the current political world. 

You had asked me what Trita really believes in, and here is a sample from IC when I invited TP to write what NIAC is all about; Setting the Record Straight On NIAC | Iranian.com.  In the early blog exchanges which are not there anymore, here are Trita's quotes which I summarized for Ahura regarding what TP said in blog:

"But as much as we hate the Islamic Republic we love Iran even more."

Is there anything else that you want me to say? Ok, here I say it:

* We do not represent IRI and we do not get paid by IRI or any of its agents.

* We do not like the Un-Islamic Islamist regime of Iran

* We want democracy

* we wish that there will be fair (not secret, with jury, with evidence) trials of the criminals of the regime at the hands of the people of Iran, or at The International Criminal Court at the Hague for crimes against humanity, where ever they may be.

MM

You and I are far apart on the Regime.

This Regime operates in either Master or Slave mode and sees everything as a "zero sum game", therefore it is not capable of negotiation. It is a Master to Hezbollah, Syria, Shia Iraq. It is a Slave to Russia and China. The only time it has accepted a deal was when Khomeini drank from the "poisonous Chalice" and walked away from Iraq impasse.

The Regime will not resolve the nuclear issue with the US and the west and NIAC will conveniently blame it on AIPAC and the election year politics.

As far as NIAC intentions, I am judging them by their actions and where they spend their time and energy, not their intentions. 

Faramarz

I do not think that you and I are far apart in the final goal, Re: Iran.  But, the falacy of your argument is that the west will negotiate with Iran over the nuclear issue.  And, once the nuclear issue is resolved, the IRI will turn inwards and does as she pleases with impunity.  However, if human rights are highlighted and negotiated, then the Iranian voices will have more political room to maneuver instead of the current choking political atmosphere.  For example, ideally, with the human rights on the table, the Iranian oil-workers may be able to strike rather than the easily cicumventable oil-sanctions, or an oil-embargo which is basically a war declaration.

However, you and I are far apart as to the intentions of NIAC.  Sorry.

The only language IRI can

The only language IRI can comprehend is the language of Force proven by the fact that the regime is receptive now to negotiations. However, in this negotiation, IRI does not have the upper hand and might have to not only give up its "grand bargain" aspiration but also expect to have the same fate as Libya in the long run.

 The people of Iran should be smart enough to overthrow this menace from the inside before its too late.

IRI bayad bereh....

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

The Fallacy of Choice and the Trojan Horse

MM,

The problem with the NIAC narrative is that they have put forward what they regard as the two choices that are in front of Iran and the Iranians today. In their view, the choices are either to accept the Regime with all its short comings (criminal acts) in the hope that over the long run it will change and become moderate, or face a war and invasion of Iraq scale and see the country destroyed.  

To start with, these are false choices and the premise is wrong.

Then using these two false choices as the reality at hand, they are trying to use a Trojan Horse to promote an agenda that they describe as ending the sanctions to ease the pain on average Iranians (while it actually enriches the Regime and its allies), talking with the Regime but in reality, not genuinely negotiating which ultimately prolongs the life of the Regime.

And somewhere in there with the introduction of nuclear weapons and more accurate long range missiles, the Regime can promote its regional and global agenda while remaining somewhat immune from outside threats.

I believe that the proper strategy against this Regime is to cut off the flow of oxygen and weaken it as much as possible, support fissures from within the Regime to separate the hard core elements, support the Iranian opposition in any way, shape and form and ultimately eliminate the Regime at the proper time.

Now the redlines have been drawn clearly and I believe that the Regime understands them perfectly that's why they have backed off from the threats on closing the Strait of Hormuz, and will most likely not pursue a nuclear weapon for the time being.

That's why keeping all the options on the table against this Regime will help Iran and not destroy it.

If Canadians do not behave,

If Canadians do not behave, we will have to send the Salvation Army to deal with them ;-)

I approve of negotiating with IRI ...

... Clint Eastwood style

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MJPAWG-BC0

Precise thinking MM

Since the West is negotiating over the nuclear issue then it has already accepted the principle of negotiation with Iran. In fact, when the U.S. says "No options are off the table," it includes bargains that Deputy Marshal Samuel Gerard may not like...though he may allow his wishes and affections to see only the threat of Iran getting nuked by the U.S.

The irony of mimesis

The phrase “survival of the fittest” is nowhere to be found in any of Darwin’s books. It was first coined by Herbert Spenser, a British philosopher who had his own “alternative view on the Evolution Theory.” His interpretation of Natural Selection – namely, Social Darwinism - made him the darling of American elite in the late 19th century (Gilded Age), who embraced his coinage as their own raison d’etre.

It makes a desperate motto for those who have run out of any excuse
to justify their heinous acts. Have we forgotten Holocaust?

Faramarz

If we assume that the majority of Iranian-Americans do not want war between the US and Iran, then the options are either A. we do not do anything, or B. we negotiate.  But, the facts are that the US and the western allies do try to negotiate with Iran over the nuclear issues. NIAC's position has been that if the west negotiates with Iran, then don't just have one main issue; nuclear (which, by the way will give legitimacy to the IRI), but rather have human rights on the table as well. 

If we do not negotiate, even regarding the nuclear issues, the chances are that Iran will try to have the nuclear capabilities or even try to build a nuclear device, especially in light of all the posturing (rajaz) on both sides.  Which, will definitely result in crossing somebody's red-line and the possibility of military action by a foreign government.

Whether war is the hope here on this site, or whether that will change the regime, or result in total chaos is the subject for another discussion, but my hope is that the change will come thru the actions of the people of Iran.

 I added the blogger to my

 I added the blogger to my "do not waste your time reading" list a while back, since I noticed his blogs and comments were mostly propaganda for Islamist regime of Iran, thinly disguised as pseudo intellectual mumble jumble...  

I had reached the same conclusion a long time ago. You should read his comments before 2008 rigged election...rabidly pro-IRI.

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

Obviously , your understanding of Charlie and his thoughts....

Goes well beyond the title of his books, dear learned friend  faramarz, when you say

"Negotiating with someone whose main aim is to defeat and destroy you goes against all the laws of nature".

 charlie was right, it is the survival of the fittest. not pretty, but that is really what it is... 

BTW, did not read the original blog, I must admit. I added the blogger to my "do not waste your time reading" list a while back, since I noticed his blogs and comments were mostly propaganda for Islamist regime of Iran, thinly disguised as pseudo intellectual mumble jumble...

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Faramarz, That's why you are a head and a shoulder above the

adversaries!
You are the president!

Social and memetic

Social and memetic evolution do not work in a theocracy, period. Ari et al don't even understand the mechanism by which social evolution works. Therefore, like Abaramard, they can't ever come up with a cogent counter-argument against those who understand that social evolution does not happen in vaccum or when there are already contingency plans to counter that evolution.

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