Mullahs - the most anti-Iranian people on the planet

Share/Save/Bookmark

Observing_Iran
by Observing_Iran
08-Nov-2010
 

The Islamic Republic has long had a passionate love affair with the Middle East's number one terrorist group, Hezbollah and its leader Hassan Nasrallah. The Islamic Republic funds Hezbollah to the tune of $200m a year, and regularly meets with its leaders, including just last month. One can understand why, given that the medievalist clerics in Iran have a lot in common with their Arab counterparts.

Nasrallah has appeared in a video in which he proclaims that "there is no Persian civilisation...only Islamic", which aside from being racist is 100% incorrect. Iranians are not Arabs and they have never been Arabs. The majority of Iranians are Persians and speak Persian, not Arabic. Though one can see why under his Islamic Republic masters, Nasrallah may (mistakenly) believe that Persian civilisation does not exist.

For the past 31 years, the illiterate gang of Mullahs and their thugs that rule Iran have been engaged in a persistant attempt to destroy Iranian culture, and replace it with Islamic culture. The founder of the Islamic Republic, the epitome of human evil, Ayatollah Khomeini was particularly brazen about this when he went on the record to say "I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world". Stirring stuff.

Aside from imposing Islamic law on the country (a bit like putting Iran in a time machine bound for 7th century Arabia), the Mullahs then changed Iran's flag with the 2500 year old symbol of the Lion and the Sun to a flag with Arabic writing on it. The ruling thugs also pondered changing the Persian Gulf to the "Islamic Gulf", though obviously they were unsuccessful in this regard except with Osama Bin Laden who used the term in 1996. The Mullahs went on to ban the naming of newborns with Persian names, dictating instead that only Islamic (Arabic) names were allowed.

Having then changed the names of roads, squares and even metro stations to those of Islamic "heroes" or "martyrs" (said "heroes and martyrs" include actual terrorists and murderers), the Mullahs turned their eyes to the education system. During the "Cultural" Revolution of the early 1980s, universities were purged of secular and liberal students and academics, and many thousands were imprisoned and killed. Universities with Persian names were changed to Arabic or Islamic names. At 1:15 one of the main ideologues of the "Cultural" Revolution Abdolkarim Soroush is recommending that "the universities must from head to toe accept the fragrance of Islamic thought".

The Islamic Republic carried on its determined path of "de-Iranianising" Iran by also striking from school textbooks any mention of the prophet Zoroaster, the elevated status of Persian women in pre-Islamic Iran. The Cyrus Cylinder, the worlds first Charter of Human Rights (even mentioned in the Bible) is not mentioned, nor is Cyrus the Great's freeing of the Jews from slavery. The sections on ancient Iran are fraught with inaccuracies and mistakes. In all, 37 pages of a middle school textbook are related to pre-Islamic Iran whilst 2.5 volumes are dedicated to the violent antics of Islam and Mohammad.

The Mullahs have an immense hatred of anything to do with ancient Iran, the most obvious example being the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei's yearly sermon, (which the Iranian people studiously ignore) on the "evils" of the traditional Persian New Year celebrations. The Islamic Republic also loathes physical manifestations of Iran's pre-Islamic past and the likes of the mentally deranged psychopath Ayatollah Khalkhali advocated the destruction of Iran's cultural treasures such as Persepolis and Pasargad.

At the heart of all of this, is the Islamic concept of "Ommah" or community, which is the idea that Islam transcends and should replace individual nations and cultures with Islamic culture and Islamic rule. For the Islamic Republic and for Hezbollahis like Nasrallah, the idea of Iranian nationhood and culture, a culture renowned for its humanity and liberalness, is scary as it undermines the very concepts of fascism and tyranny which are at the centre of religious law. It's no surprise that the Mullahs have tried to destroy Iranian culture.

Of course, the credit here should be given to Iran's people who have bravely resisted and protected Iran's culture. They have carried on giving Iranian names to their children, they fly Iran's flag without the Arabic Allah symbol, they still revere the likes of Cyrus the Great and give their lives to resist the fascist Mullahs. The Islamic Republic is nothing but an illegal occupation regime run by a gang of anti-Iranian thugs who seek to replace Iranian culture with Arab-Islamic traditions. But 1400 years ago the Arabs couldn't destroy Iran, what makes Khamenei think he can do it today? Contrary to what Nasrallah and his masters in Iran believe, Persian civilisation is eternal and Iranians will never let go of their culture.

Death to the Islamic Regime

Long live Independence, Freedom, and the Iranian Republic!

Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Observing_IranCommentsDate
Mir Hossein Mousavi and the 1988 massacre of political prisoners
16
Jun 10, 2010
In defence of Caspian Makan
12
Mar 24, 2010
Islamism vs Iranian Culture
13
Mar 15, 2010
more from Observing_Iran
 
Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

detroitpistons18

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

 

At this time we are in disagreement (I agree!). However facts are there for both of us the examine and find out. History is written by the victor. Except that in recent times we can draw on history written by relatively uninvolved sources. That does not mean they are unbiased since pretty much everyone has got their agenda.

Let me make it clear. I believe that pre-Islam Iran was not perfect. The Sassanids had great corruption or else the Arabs would not have beaten them. The killing of Rostam Farrokhzad's father by Azarmidokht and the retaliation by Farrokhzad is just one. Another one is treatment of Mazdak and his proto-Socialist movement. So I know the problems we had. Sort of reminds me of the Shah. However what we got after them was a whole lot worse.

My point is that propaganda does exist to try alienating Iranians from Islam to refocus on our past.

Let us say there is. I argue that it is the actions of Islamist radicals as well as governments like IRI that alienates people from Islam. In reality Islam has been hurt more by Muslims specially Islamist radicals than anyone. When peaceful people watch these guys blow themselves up they are turned off. Some of them recoil and reject the whole thing. Specially in the West where it is very easy to chose your religion or no religion.

Personally I am not the kind who pays attention to propaganda. I decide for myself. As an individual I do not follow any organized religion. Because I don't want some priest or mollah or rabbi or guru sucking my blood and telling me what to do.

From a pragmatic approach, the past is the past.

We as a nation are made up of our past. In our case we have two distinct ones. Islamic and Iranian. I have always found our Persian customs: Norooz; Charshanbeh Sori; Yalda; Mehregan appealing. On the other hand from when I was a little kid I hated: Moharram; Ashura; Roozeh Khooni;Ramadan. The Persian ones are full of joy while the Islamic are full of mourning and sorrow. This is specially true for Shia. So if we want to leave the past behind I rather leave the Islamic part behind.

Like I said, great empires of the past had their glory days and moved on. I am not saying that Iran has seen the last of its glory days, but what I am saying is that to move forward,

Sure empires fall. Rome and Greece fell but at least they have a respectable democracy now. Why should we be stuck with the backwards 6th century mollahs? Why should our kids suffer the hijab and other sharia laws? Yes, by all means let us move into the modernity.


detroitpistons18

Response.

by detroitpistons18 on

Veiled one, I respect you taking the time to respond. This discussion is exceptionally engaging and thought provoking. 

I guess we must settle to disagree. My studies are not tainted with the IRI lens. I study through an impartial, critical lens in the Western setting. Once again, I'm neither pro-Islam, pro-Zoro, pro-Arab, pro-Iran, nor anything else for that matter. I take great issue with Iranians  for not critically assessing their history and for rashly coming to judgement (as with any other "label," be it Muslims, etc.)

My point is that propaganda does exist to try alienating Iranians from Islam to refocus on our past. From a pragmatic approach, the past is the past. Like I said, great empires of the past had their glory days and moved on. I am not saying that Iran has seen the last of its glory days, but what I am saying is that to move forward, our eyes need to look forward. Beyond Zoro, beyond the Shah, and beyond the corruption of the IRI. I do not condone the IRI and I am extremely critical of the steps taken in 1979 to present-day. But we cannot continually blame Islam nor the Arabs for our fall. My point is that propaganda paints both as archenemies when history clearly shows otherwise. It's a very oversimplified argument, and I hope you agree with me on this.

May the holiday season find you in great spirits.

Peace.  


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

detroitpistons18

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

 

Nothing I am saying is made up. It is all easily verified historical fact. If you don't believe me then do your own research.  

Arabs DID ban speaking Persian and went as far as to cut people's tongues out. However you can not effectively ban Persian in such a huge territory. Nevertheless they had some success. 

Iran had its own alphabet based on Aramaic with several variations. The Arabs BANNED the use of it. They would burn books in Persian script. Therefore Iranians started using Arabic alphabet. The Arabs did not "lend" us their script. Iranians simply started using it to avoid having their books burned.

Islam was spread by the sword and that is a historical fact. Whole cities like "Estakr" were destroyed and population killed when they resisted. Large number of Iranians were killed or put into slavery. Do you really think the Arabs just came and nicely asked people to please become Muslim? The "Islamic Studies" by Muslim scholars is biased due to their religious beliefs. You need to find work that was done by people without a personal stake.

Forget what you learned in IRI approved classes. Go get some historical books by unbiased and credible authors and read them. If you want the truth then avoid the works by biased IRI approved "scholars".


detroitpistons18

My friend, the first

by detroitpistons18 on

My friend, the first sentence of your first bullet had the F word in it, which aroused my intense emotions. 

Nevertheless, my argument (although embellished with a strong choice of words) stands strong and clear. The premise of my frustration stemmed on your first reply.

To reduce my unequivocal argument to a lesson of mannerism is simply your effort to evade the issue.

Mamnoon.  


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

detroitpistons

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

 

You sir are a disgusting "bad dahan" aka "Foul Mouth" person. You need to learn some manners before you are invited to sit with humans.

Using F* every other word is not an argument. It just says what kind a person you are. Now go take your meds before you crack up.


detroitpistons18

Rebuttal.

by detroitpistons18 on

Claiming my genes at the door would show that I'm NOT trying to be an outsider claiming to hold the truths about another group. By disclosing my genes, it shows that there is dissent within the Iranian fuckbrains. 

Are you of the Parsi community to know much of them? By all means, if fire-worship is what you'd like to retain, than convert to Zoroastrianism. I've had up to HERE with Zoroastrian talk. Do you think Greeks, Romans or Phoenicians hold silly arguments revoking their current religion to adhere to their old gods? Get the FUCK over it. 

Has it occurred to you that if Arabs were to really ban the Persian script and force the Arab script upon Iranians that they would have banned Farsi altogether and regulate ARABIC? Think about it... why would they "lend" us their script? A CONQUEST WOULD HAVE FORCED IRANIANS TO SPEAK ARABIC. 

But we don't. It's not because we are strong, it's not because they were weak. It was because they respected us as non-Arabs. Otherwise, like the Sassanian empire, we too could have fallen.  

What genocide are you fucking talking about anyway? You must be out of your mind. The Muslim conquest of Iran is praised in Middle Eastern Studies as the most peaceful expansion ever. I'm not Pro-Islam nor am I pro-Zoro-shit. WE NEED TO STOP LOOKING BACKWARD TO LOOK FORWARD. Zoro-shit is NOT going to fix our problems. 

And the book-burning took place in Baghdad, under the Abbasid period in which the Monguls burned Arabic and Persian books. It was said that they threw all literature into the rivers that the water was a heavy blue from the ink.

And if your inspiration are the swarthy Indian Parsis, then by all means, support that rape and "brownization." 


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

detroitpistons18

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

 

Are you joking?

  • Anyone may claim to be of "f Iranian descent" so what? Say you are, do some genes make your incorrect arguments more correct??
  • Farsi is a corruption of Parsi. The Sassanid language was fine and we did not need genocide to come up with it. You somehow do not mention all the Persian books that were burned by the Arabs. They BANNED the use of Persian scripts in order to FORCE Arab scripts on Iranians. Sorry, I am not grateful. I don't like rape and genocide just to have my books burned.
  • Regarding misogyny. Why is it that the"Parsi" community of India does not practice it. They are Iranians who left after the Arab invasion. In order to remain Zoroastrian and be spared "the gift" of Islam. 

detroitpistons18

There are a few errors in

by detroitpistons18 on

There are a few errors in the article and the comments that follow. I study Iranian and Islamic studies in New York and have come to terms with an "Iranian Propoganda" that disparages Islam and Arabs while fomenting an Iranian sense of nationalism. Mind you, I am of Iranian descent, but I do not follow--nor condone--the fallacies that plague our people.

The Muslim Conquest of Iran did indeed mark the end of the Sassanian empire, and Iranians perhaps never were able to cope with their defeat. However, what Iranians seem to "forget" is that the Muslim Conquest was extremely important (and perhaps needed) because it codified the Farsi language. It is at this period that Farsi adapts the Arabic script and makes it available to the masses. Before, it was exclusively held for the elites, which led to mass illiteracy among Iranians.

Iran and Iranians do NOT practice the "pure" form of Islam. One must remember that under Shah Ismail (in the Safavid period), Iran became a Shi'i Empire. Khomeini and his revolution in 1979 changed the Shi'i dynamic to make it what it is today. Valeyat-i-Fiqh is actually a political innovation used to control the thoughts of the masses. Islam is not the culprit, Khomeini and his revolution changed the free-thinking Islam Iran once enjoyed into a political ends. By employing a sole marjah, Khomeini was able to easily control the minds of millions. His tactics are seen as non-Islamic by many, Sunni and Shi'i alike.

This pains me to say but Islam (or Arabs) never introduced misogony to Iranians. Iran has always been a patriarchial society that values masculinity, in turn subduing the feminine voice. In fact, the Abbasid Empire (which manifiests the Iranian influence on Arabs and Islam itself) marks the social shift which denounced the status of Muslim women. This shift does not mirror Islam nor Arab values, but Iranian ideology. Persian history reveals the way political leaders manipulated Islam to vanquish women rights.

 


AlexInFlorida

Great Article.

by AlexInFlorida on

It's not everyday we read a great article on this site.

Your points are well made.  Tyrannical Islam has been as the Shah called it.. an ertejahe sia, a dark corrupted force.  Unfortunately the world plays a game of not wanting them yet doing everything to keep them in power, so mullahs will succeed at the expense of the people in the short term.

Mullahs proved Islam to be a negative force, seeking power and control over government, law, military and education leading to a complete corrupt facade of religion.Eventually they will get thrown out and when that happens it will be a blood bath for them and iran as iranians will seek justice for the crimes they committed against iranians.

Your words were good, beautiful and true, keep up the good work. 

The Islamic Republics days in power are the darkest days of Iran.  But a bright light is shining on the otherside of these maniacs and we are almost there.

 


G. Rahmanian

Parthia:

by G. Rahmanian on

We all know the most essential problem, that is the ruling class in power. What's the solution? What should be done to rid Iran of the source of the problem?


Parthianshot91

The Mullahs

by Parthianshot91 on

These people have been a leach on the nation of Iran ever since they were formed, we need to get rid of them one way or another. None's gonna miss them

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

"They are not afraid of the ideology alone, but of the detemination and will of the men behind it"


Simorgh5555

Prophet

by Simorgh5555 on

Good posts as usual. I am heartened that more and more Iranians are ditsancing themselves from Islam and embracing Iran. I understand it is difficult for some Iranians to reonouce the religion they were handed down from their parents and it is still a taboo. Iranians are now realising that Islam and Iran cannot be reconciled.


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Islam is

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

 

more or less similar to herpes. It may be with you for a long time. But it is not something you want. The one difference is that there is a cure for it. That is "waking up". Once you wake up you open your mind and it is possible to be healed.

It may have been around for 1400 years so what. I say enough torture; ditch it.


Parthianshot91

No Fear

by Parthianshot91 on

   You are an idiot beyond belief. So what if Islam has been in Iran oppressing our people for the past 1400 years? does not mean it's the true form of Iranian culture. Islam encourages Arab culture, therefor it cannot be Iranian/Persian. Plus, Nationalism = benefiting your NATION, not religion, so you are not a nationalist, nor are these leaches in our regime, they are islamists.

 

You would rather rely on islamist clowns with a death wish who blow theirselves up around children and women, while I rely on nationalists who would fight for their country, today, tomorrow and the future, not one's with a death wish. Just ask yourself, which soldier is more effective? One who fights with no mercy to exist and live, or one who wants to die recklessly? No wonder the Muslims are getting their arses beat in Afghanistan and Iraq, and every war they've been in the past century, it's cause of your mentality and your stupid death wish.

 

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

"They are not afraid of the ideology alone, but of the detemination and will of the men behind it"


G. Rahmanian

Fair:

by G. Rahmanian on

My comment about you taking NF seriously was meant to imply NF's lack of coherence in presenting his arguments and his staunch support of the regime after more than three decades of its oppressive rule. He is no teen-age country bumpkin who has been brainwashed by the mullahs or the warmongering rhetoric of power-hungry militarists. As I have written in my comments, his unshaken loyalty to the regime can only be explained in terms of his self-interest and nothing else.Returning to this site after a short stintnose years back and a long unmissed absence, I have recently been paying more attention to what's going on here. I have read your comments and do admire your steadfast efforts in exposing the regime and its lackies of all shades and colors.Keep up the good work.


G. Rahmanian

Mr. Gilani:

by G. Rahmanian on

The likes of NF cannot be taken seriously and reasoned with simply because they remain unrepentant in the face of three decades of reprehensible barbarities perpetrated by the regime in Tehran. The audacity displayed in his flagrant defense of IR's criminals is testimony to his irredeemable frame of mind and his inveterate hostility towards Iranians. As I said in another comment, "No Iranian would defend the brutalities of the regime if it were not for the handouts they receive from Tehran." And there is nothing more lothesome than self-serving individuals who justify such defense as a patriotic act?A glimps at NF's comments reveals his unmitigated respect for and alligence to the ruling class, elevating the militarists in power to the level of war heroes who are acting in the national interests of Iranians. "War heroes" whose bounties are exhprbitant bank accounts in the banks outside of Iran and whose private enterprises have been awarded hundreds of large and mid size projects reaping unprecedented profits in the name of national interest."War heroes" who falsely assume by merely denying any knowledge of the recent $18 billion heist from the national coffers they can exonerate themselves.NF talks about national interest championed by the ruling militarists when the Iranian nation has shown its overwheming opposition to the regime by pouring in the streets of major cities in millions after las year's fraudulent presidential election.And those of us who remeber the Iranian history of the past three decades know well that not only the mullahs must be blamed for provoking the war with Iraq, but the regime did not show any willingness to end it when it could. The regime saw the war as a golden opportunity to consolidate its grip on power.


vildemose

Fair: No fear does not

by vildemose on

Fair: No fear does not understand the simple fact that in principle, the US would be insane and remiss in its obligation to its citizen if they were to trust or negotiate with hostage takers, period. Not now, not ever. The IRI dug its own grave and they have no one to blame.


No Fear

Fair,

by No Fear on

Chants of  " Death to America " or " Death to England and Russia " has absolutely NO bearing on international politics and how governments size each other up before negotiations. Politicians are not teenage girls who take these gestures seriously or be offended by it. It is widely known what is meant for internal usages in US and Iranian politics. Burning Flags or Koran does not prevent diplomates from engaging per se. Afterall, diplomacy is the art of working with low percentages and possibilities.

Having said that, considering the political climate of Iran , each time our administrations made a genuine gesture towards US administrations, we were rejected. This happened during most of our previous administrations. The reformists admited this. So did Rafsanjani, Bazargan, Khatami and Ahmadinejad. I believe we even approached them during Khamenie's presidency as well ( but this has not been confirmed by Khamenie himself ). 

I don't understand what you mean by " low level gestures". Do you want VF to announce he wants to talk to US?  You think our administration does not represent the overall foreign policy direction which IR decides collectively with VF as a moderator? Hmmm ...

You are welcome to hold the same position as Islam being the root of all evil in Iran since whenever your heart desires. Blaming Islam for a nation's shortcomings is counter productive. It definitely can not be considered as a nationalistic solution. You can argue the harmful effects of a political Islam and still be proactive. But adopting a non compromising revolutionary solution which advocates  the complete elimination of what you believe is the root of our problems, displays how little we have learned from our past.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Fair

I disagree No Fear

by Fair on

Which faction are you talking about?  Many of those who fought and died for Iran during the Iran Iraq war were not for a religious government, and to elevate one faction (regime supporter basijis etc) over another is not only unfair, it is criminal.  That is the same bs pretext that IRI uses against our people today in the streets- that basijis are more entitled than others.

Talks with the US?  Which administration are you talking about?  Bazargan? Banisadr? Khatami?  We saw how all of these were treated by the overruling overriding establishment of the SL and hezbollah.  Of course the US will not take low level gestures seriously when the most powerful centers in the islamic republic maintain the policy of "death to america" and it was great to take hostages.  So no, attampts to have a dialogue with the US were NOT ever serious in so far as they did not have the support of those who mattered in the regime.

And also, No, it is not in the interest of Iran to play cat and mouse with the US in the region.  This stupid game has been to Iranian people's loss, and of no loss to the US.  All the US wants in that region is free flow of oil, which it has had for the last 30 years, and no islamic republic big talker is going to change that anytime soon.

And finally, a big NO to the notion that combination of religion and nationalism have been a powerful force for reform in our country.  It has been a powerful DESTRUCTIVE force that has stood in the way of our advancement for centuries. Religious establishment was just as big (if not bigger at times) an obstacle to mashrootiat succeeding 100+years ago, to Mossadeq andnationalists succeeding 58 years ago, and to the revolution succeeding 30 years ago, and to our modernization reform and advancement today.  Countries much more dictatorial, poor, and backward than us 30 years ago have shot ahead and become world class economic players today, and their main difference with us is that they do not have akhound and this "powerful force" that you talk about

 

And G Rahmanian:  You are dead on with the analysis of how these creatures define "victory".  Simple, they hide behind the skirts of old women, fire rockets from there, let them get the retaliation and suffering and lose everything, and then say how strong they were and how they "defeated" Israel.  It is pathetic.  As far as taking No Fear seriously, I have discussed with him before, we agree on practically nothing, but I just try to stay focused on the points.  I don't really care if it is him or anybody else making them.  The sad reality is, this regime and Islamists still today after 30 years of being a failed state and an utter failure, STILL want to sell to Iranians and others that this bankrupt path may have something to offer for the future.  But those of us who lived under it know that this is not the case.  

 


Rea

VPK

by Rea on

Rather successful, hélas.

From a formerly secular country where hijabs were seen mainly in villages and small towns, it now hosts vehabi villages over which Bosnian government has little, if any, control. Even their schools are not part of the Bosnian education system. Lot of them are in fact foreigners who'd come to Bosnia during the war time, married Bosnian women and stayed on. And so it goes.

As for who'd had a hand in it, well, SA is primarily a US ally. The UK as usual approved tacitly.


Rea

However, IRI is still trying in Bosnia

by Rea on

"Iranian leader speaking to new army officers" (10 Nov 2010)

//bosnian.irib.ir/vijesti/liderstvo/item/94277-govor-lidera-pred-novim-iranskim-oficirima

Viva Khamenei ! 


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Rea

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

 

I am sorry to hear about the Sadudi hand in Boasnia. How successful have the Sadui been in exporting their Islam to Bosnia. What a shame this would happen. We need to learn more about this.

Would UK have had a hand in this by any chance? They seem to stick their hands in businesses all over the world.


Rea

When it comes to Bosnia.....

by Rea on

IRI did in fact try to export its ideology to Bosnia. It just didn't work. First, because of the prevalent secularism at the time and, second, Bosniaks are Sunni Muslims. It has nothing to do with Russia-IRI dealings and conflicting interests, for Russia has no leverage in Bosnia whatsoever. 

Mind you, where IRI did not succeed, the Saudis did. And that is just as bad. 


Roozbeh_Gilani

Actually I take Mr or Miss no fear seriously..

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

He/she seriously supports the islamist regime of Iran.That is why Like other serious and "fearless" supporters of islamist regime, he/she is residing in the heart of the "zionist controlled corrupt west", enjoying  the "luxuries" like a house, food, health care and freedom of speech which are otherwise denied by the islamist regime to the Iranains unfortunate enough to be living back in Iran. 

Not even in the dying stages of the soviet union and eastern block were the paid agents of the KGB residing in London or LA openly defending the soviet system! This is a measure of how corrupt, weak and bankrupt the entire islamist regime of Iran has become!

"The wall is rotten, it just needs a big push before it's collapse!"

 


No Fear

G.R.

by No Fear on

Looking for my identity?  ... I am an Iranian voter. Does that satisfies you?


No Fear

AO,

by No Fear on

Yes, I understand your concerns of a War involving US and Iran. Obviously such war wouldn't be beneficial to anyone, including US.

PS: I don't mind your insults or anyones for that matter. All i care about is us making valid points in a debate. Otherwise, all our exchanges is nothing more than a monkey business.


No Fear

Fair,

by No Fear on

Yes, as long as we are engaged in a cat and mouse game with US in middle east, Iran will seek to expand its influences , both politically and militarly, all over the globe. Why not ?  Aren't they poking their fingers in our neighborhood? If protecting european countries and US  national interests in the middle east brings their fifth fleet in our waters, why not we start by expanding our strategical borders? 

Every single Iranian administration since the revolution tried to talk to US one way or other. When it was the reformists turn, they were down on two knees begging for negotiations yet we faced the possibility of an imminent war during their era.

Ofcourse, Ahmadinejad's foreign policies can not be considered successful in opening negotiation with US on all fronts ( He tried too ), but defending Iran's right to enrich based on international regulations makes a strong case for our administration's defense of our " national Interests ".  I believe the majority of Iranians inside Iran supports the current administration's policies in regards to our nuclear activities.

Is a confrontational foreign policy the best approach?  I guess we have to look and see whether Ahmadinejad government has been successful in defending our national interest under that pretext ( confrontation ) for the last 5 years.

And ofcourse, many Iranians love their country. Many of them muslims. We can not advocate " nationalism " by defining it as being " anti Islam".  Who benefits from this definition/division?  Its very interesting and heart warming to witness the faction who gave the most lives during the  Iran iraq war, are the first who are claiming there is no different between the Love of your country and defending Islam.

This is a welcoming sign. The history of our country has shown us the combination of religion and nationalism has been a powerful force of reform ( or changes ) in Iran.

 

 

 

 

 


G. Rahmanian

Fair:

by G. Rahmanian on

I doubt you'll see the sight of NF for some time until he appears at a different blog.


G. Rahmanian

AO

by G. Rahmanian on

Thanks! I think our friend Fair has taken NF seriously. I guess I know who he is, though. His writing style and his sudden disappearance have given him away. I could be wrong.


Anonymous Observer

Good one G. Rahmanian

by Anonymous Observer on

With all the military might that "No Fear" has described the World War 3 mayjust be around the corner.

See, you miss the point.  What these IR monkeys mean by IR's military might is this: WE (not the people) are powerful enough to SURVIVE an attack by a foreign nation...kind of like their Lebanese monkey, Hassan Nasrollah, who claimed "victory" after half of South Lebanon was destroyed and 1500 people lost their lives.  He claimed "victory" because HE had SURVIVED.  The same will be the case for the mullahs.  if someone attacks Iran, they will go into hiding, and when the country is destroyed and thousands die, they will come out of their holes and claim victory.  

Also, their claim of "asymmetric warfare" is nothing but a threat against Iran and the Iranian nation.  Let's face it, how are they going to conduct "asymmetric warfare" against the U.S. Navy?  Strap suicide vests around their wastes and swim to the American aircraft carrier?  Or send one of their 1960's Soviet designed "flying boats" to "swarm" the boats?  Their "asymmetric warfare" means this: if you depose us, we will unleash the 5% of the population that we have totally brainwashed and have supplied with weapons into the mountains and deserts of Iran and start a civil war that will break the country up.  That's all.