What a Surprise: U.S.-Based Iran “Experts” Promoting Israeli Policy

As the new round of nuclear diplomacy between the Islamic Republic and the P5+1 unfolds, an informal coalition of forces is coalescing in the West to oppose any prospective deal in which the United States would “accept” safeguarded uranium enrichment in Iran.  Of course, Israel and the pro-Israel lobby are at the heart of this coalition.  Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s remarks about the Iran nuclear talks on NBC’s Meet the Press this past Sunday, see here, are emblematic of the “zero enrichment” camp:    

“The question is not of hope; the question is of actual result.  The test is the result.  The result has to be the full dismantling of Iran’s military nuclear program.  If that is achieved, that would be very good.  If it’s achieved peacefully, it’s even better…I think the pressure has to be maintained on Iran, even increased on Iran, until it actually stops the nuclear program—that is, dismantles it.  I think that any partial deal could end up in dissolving the sanctions.  There are a lot of countries waiting for a signal, just waiting for a signal, to get rid of their sanctions regime.  And I think that you don’t want to go through halfway measures… 

As far as the freezing of assets—as far as I remember, those assets were frozen for three reasons:  one, Iran’s terrorist actions; two, its aggressive actions, particularly in the Gulf; and three, its continued refusal to stop the production of weapons of mass destruction.  You know, if you get all three done, and they stop doing it—well, then, I suppose you could unfreeze them…Those sanctions weren’t Israeli sanctions.  I’ve always advocated them, but the international community adopted very firm resolutions by the Security Council, and here’s what those resolutions say:  they said Iran should basically dismantle its centrifuges for enrichment (that’s one path to get a nuclear weapon) and stop work on its plutonium heavy-water reactor (that’s the other path for a nuclear weapon). 

It’s very important to stress that it’s for nuclear weapons.  Nobody challenges Iran’s or any country’s pursuit of civilian nuclear energy.  But seventeen countries in the world, including your neighbors Canada and Mexico, have very robust programs for civilian nuclear energy, and they don’t enrich with centrifuges, and they don’t have heavy water plutonium reactors. 

Here comes Iran and says, ‘I want civilian nuclear energy.’  I don’t know why, because they have energy, with gas and oil, coming out of their ears for generations.  But suppose you believe them.  Then you ask, ‘Why do you insist on maintaining a plutonium heavy water reactor, and on maintaining centrifuges that can only be used for making nuclear weapons?’  And the answer is because they want to have residual capability to make nuclear weapons.  And you don’t want that, and UN resolutions don’t want that, Security Council resolutions.  And I propose sticking by that.”       

Anyone who has been following the Iranian nuclear issue with any measure of objectivity will note that Netanyahu mixes up U.S. secondary sanctions with sanctions authorized by the United Nations Security Council; likewise, he misrepresents what the relevant Security Council resolutions actually say about Iran’s nuclear activities, and misstates basic facts about fuel-cycle technology.  Never mind all that.   Notwithstanding his myriad factual errors, Netanyahu gives authoritative voice to the main rhetorical tropes of the “zero enrichment” camp

–Iran has to dismantle its current infrastructure for uranium enrichment, and stop work on the heavy-water reactor currently under construction at Arak. 

–Moreover, even if Iran does these things, this is not enough to warrant a lifting of sanctions.  The Islamic Republic must also terminate its relations with democratically validated resistance/religious/social service/political movements like Hizballah in Lebanon, and stop suggesting that disenfranchised Shi’a populations in countries like Bahrain actually have political rights.   

In the wake of Netanyahu’s Meet the Press appearance, we were struck by the similarity between his positions and those espoused in an Op Ed, titled “The World Must Tell Iran:  No More Half Steps,” published earlier this week in the Washington Post, see here

“Despite its softened rhetoric, the new Iranian regime can be expected to continue asserting its nuclear ‘rights’ and to press its advantages in a contested Middle East.  The Islamic Republic plans to remain an important backer of the Assad dynasty in Syria, a benefactor of Hezbollah and a supporter of Palestinian rejectionist groups.  It will persist in its repressive tactics at home and continue to deny the people of Iran fundamental human rights.  This is a government that will seek to negotiate a settlement of the nuclear issue by testing the limits of the great powers’ prohibitions. 

Washington need not accede to such Iranian conceptions.  The United States and its allies are entering this week’s negotiations in a strong position.  Iran’s economy is withering under the combined pressures of sanctions and its own managerial incompetence.  The Iranian populace remains disaffected as the bonds between state and society have been largely severed since the Green Revolution of 2009.  The European Union is still highly skeptical of Iran, a distrust that Rouhani’s charm offensive has mitigated but not eliminated.  Allied diplomats can use as leverage in the forthcoming negotiations the threat of additional sanctions and Israeli military force. 

Given the stark realities, it is time for the great powers to have a maximalist approach to diplomacy with Iran.  It is too late for more Iranian half-steps and half-measures.  Tehran must account for all its illicit nuclear activities and be compelled to make irreversible concessions that permanently degrade its ability to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program at a more convenient time.  Anything less would be a lost opportunity.” 

Who is the author of this Op Ed?  An AIPAC spokesperson?  One of the many neocon firebrands to whom the Washington Post long ago turned over its Op Ed page? 

No and no.  The author of the remarkably Netanyahu-like Op Ed cited above is:  Ray Takeyh, the mainstream media’s long-time “go to” (if also perennially mistaken) Iran “expert” who advised Dennis Ross’s destructively incompetent handling of the Iran nuclear file during President Obama’s first term and is now back at the Council on Foreign Relations.

We have no reason to believe that Ray is coordinating his public positions with the Israeli government.  But it is remarkable how congruent his views are with those of the most hegemonically-minded Israeli prime minister in living memory.     

–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett


519 Responses to “What a Surprise: U.S.-Based Iran “Experts” Promoting Israeli Policy”

  1. Smith says:

    It is simple. It is about regime change. Many Iranian expatriates (at least those with access to media resources and big mouths) are anti-IRI. They would want IRI to fall today. This is their dream. Day and night.

    Their greatest fear nowadays, is the fact that if Iran ever becomes a nuclear weapon state, then there is absolutely no chance that a foreign force like United Nation or United States or NATO ever attempt a regime change in Iran at least through overt military action.

    The Iranian expatriate community has reached the conclusion that they lack the ideological and public support within Iran to bring about a regime change on their own. The aborted color revolution of 2009, also proved that still the majority of people stand with IRI within Iran. The only way for a regime change in Iran is going to be either a massive political shift within Iran whether artificially created/home grown or through a foreign military intervention or a combination of both.

    Nuclear weapons vaccinate Iran for military invasion, therefore disappointing these expatriates, Israelis and Saudis whose sole mission life is to see a failed weak and non-ideological Iran. This is their primary concern about Iran’s nuclear program. A secondary concern is Iran’s technological advancement.

  2. Smith says:

    “It will persist in its repressive tactics at home and continue to deny the people of Iran fundamental human rights.”

    As the above quote from Ray makes it clear, the supposed successful solution of nuclear issue is not going to solve Iran’s problems with imperialist powers. Rather it will exacerbate them.

    Even if Iran gave up its entire nuclear program and suspended all chemical and biological industries/universities/research in Iran, nothing will happen that will change the policy of US/EU/White man. Iran will still be demonized and ridiculed 24/7. The issue will quickly move on to “human rights” and “democracy” and “the right of 3 year old girls to learn about safe sex”. This thing has no end. Regime change is the goal.

    The only way to honorably reach a conclusion in this fiasco is for Iran to develop nuclear weapons, pull out of NPT, test them (one underground, one high altitude ballistic atmospheric) and keep England, the favorite petite whore of US on its cross-hair.

  3. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 24, 2013 at 9:58 am

    So tragic.


    But each year nearly 16,000 children get shot in United States of America.

    More kids die in US of gun shot wounds than cancer.

    More children are shot each year in United States than in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Syria (during civil war) and Pakistan combined.

  4. Smith says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 24, 2013 at 11:38 am

    Thank you. And what you wrote is so right.

    Iran does not have any deterrence (a demonstrable military force capable of preventing war).

    Non-nuclear means are no response to nuclear weapons. No matter how sophisticated or how numerous. Nuclear weapons can only be deterred by nuclear weapons.

    A single thermonuclear explosion of a large yield nuclear weapon releases more fire power and energy than all other explosives used in war in all of human history (including nuclear weapons used on Japan). Imagine that. You can not counter such a fire power with bullets, cruise missiles and half a tonne war head ballistic missiles. It is almost laughable to suggest it. And using this as deterrence argument is lunacy.

  5. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 24, 2013 at 11:25 am

    IR-40 is of utmost importance for Iran. It is a technology demonstration project, in which Iranian scientists and engineers are learning reactor design and construction.

    As I said above, this thing has no end.

    Soon the white man will demand Iran to hand over all girls between the ages of 5 and 35 to be used to satisfy his sexual desires. This is where we are going with these demands.

  6. Smith says:

    Karl… says:
    October 24, 2013 at 9:15 am

    Officially United States of America has threatened Iran with nuclear weapons and still keeps it as an option.

    France overtly threatened to nuke Tehran.

    These things are not new or isolated incidents.

    Nuclear weapons are the international law.

  7. Smith says:

    thecelticwithinme says:
    October 24, 2013 at 5:28 am

    That is the whole point.

    Iran must have a fool proof deterrence to prevent any kind of war or strike on Iran (from “pin prick” to “operation **** freedom”).

    Right now Iran is vulnerable. Defenseless.

    Only nuclear deterrence can protect Iran. Nuclear deterrence is a great and perfect equalizer. It would not matter if the opponent is richer, bigger, more advanced or more populous. It equalizes. And through its threat of deterrence by punishment, it discourages any kind of attack and war. Mathematically proven.

  8. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 24, 2013 at 9:58 am

    Continued from above:

    And then we have a girl from Pakistan shot on the way from school being roamed around for propaganda purposes. But all those American kids, thousands of whom shot on the way from school or inside school are not put on the list win prizes here and there. The hypocrisy is sickening.

  9. fyi says:


    The siege war continues (just like the Christmas bombing of North Vietnam…)


  10. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 24, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    The militarization of the police force in US and France started about 15 years ago.

    Now police in France are going around dressed like soldiers.

    In UK, more and more of the police now carry weapons – it used to be a rarity.

    And then you have the United States were many police departments are playing at being Commandos/Special Forces – ridiculous and deplorable.

    With the Sunni extremists attacking US and later UK and Spain, these policemen have really gone overboard in arming themselves for some sort of fantasy movie-like war with whom exactly?

    In cases in US when drug-crazed and drug-addled men have attacked schools, these hyper-armed police men were nowhere to be found; in one case in Colorado they were roaming the school yard rather than risking their lives and plunging into the school.

  11. fyi says:



    Seems to me, by April US planners realized that they had failed in Syria and thus needed an incident which Saudis obliged by August 21.

    Only they failed to assess the degree to which the Barons were concerned with what was emanating from the Court (of the Mad King).

    So when the peasants revolted – across the political spectrum in UK – the Baron there conveniently hid behind that revolt and the other Barons also begged off.

    In the Court, divisions among the Insane, the Mad, the Deranged, the Fantasists, and the Merely Stupid was sufficient to derail the project to destroy Mr. Assad’s government.

    In my opinion, that project is now on hold but not discarded.

    The over-riding project – the program to destroy Islamic Iran – for which this subsidiary project of destroying the Ba’ath State in Syria was undertaken – still remains in force.

    What this means that a settlement even on the nuclear file with Iran is not possible.

  12. Karl.. says:


    I havent denied that Iran have capabilities however Iran doesnt and will never have greater capabilities than the US. Iran could hurt american “interests” but it cant win such a battle and it doesnt have the power to push out americans from the region.

    Some people say, oh Iran will do this, Iran will do that in war, we must also remember that if Iran do this or that, US will do this or that to Iran which will hurt Iran tremendously. Of course Iran have all right to defend itself but acting as a madman and shooting at every american interests, will only hurt Iran.

    It almost seems that some arent paying too much attention to a possible war or deny it as something that Iran could somehow win. If a war happens it will sure be the end of the islamic republic as we know it of today because in a war (not strike) US wont stop bomb until the rulers are gone or are heavily decimated.

  13. Karl.. says:



    Obama Backs First-Strike Nuclear War as U.S. Policy

  14. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 24, 2013 at 2:18 pm


    Don’t act like you haven’t read or don’t understand what I asked , you are not answering what I asked , once again I asked why US didn’t initiated a war when she was even stronger than now and Iran was much weaker, once you know that answer to that
    Then you can start your hot war and tell us US will do that Iran will do that she will bomb Iran to Stone Age, Iran will push ships out of gulf ect. I guess for you guys are always easier to go straight to hot war and then compare hard military capabilities, but there is a long road there that hasn’t happened yet and is getting less likely to ever happen. To learn something new here is the Persian term for what you just did “Maghlateh” meaning changing the subject by muddying; can you translate that to Dutch?

  15. Karl.. says:


    Why would US have attached Iran 5-10-15 years ago? It makes no sense.

    Sanctions are biting, Iran is getting more isolated and dehumanized etc, you dont really see where this is going?

  16. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 24, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    No, if that’s what you really believe, obviously we see it differently, I personally believe US is less capable of having a planned hot war with Iran, reasons for that are numerously longer than 5, 10, 15 years a go
    From recent US military defeat to financial burden to change in international political alliances and situation, to increased Iran military and none military capabilities, even to where Iran now being a retaliatory capable nuclear state, etc. etc.
    Now is your term to spell out what you see that make US more capable than before to conduct a hot war with Iran but please none of that repeated hasbara stuff. Show us what has made US more determined and stronger today than she was yesterday which now necessitates a hot war with Iran to further US interest in Iran’s region, if the need is there what makes the war least expensive solution to get these foreign policy interests. Let me know when you really have something to say.

  17. James Canning says:

    As the Financial Times has noted repeatedly, no resolution of the Iranian nuclear dispute is likely possible unless the P5+1 accept Iranian enrichment to low levels. John Kerry himself said in 2009 that it would be “ridiculous” to expect Iran to stop all enrichment. The Israel lobby, however, does not want an improvement in America’s relations with Iran, and it will therefor try to wreck any deal.

  18. James Canning says:


    Neocon warmongers during the GW Bush administration had hopes for a US war with Iran, but the long civil war in Iraq, and the CIA, in effect prevented such a war from happening. Obama does not want a war with Iran but some of those trying to prevent a nuclear deal certainly do want such a war.

  19. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    October 24, 2013 at 4:35 pm

    Yes, Mr. Obama did not wish a war with Iran during his presidency.

    That is to have been – and still probably is – the project for the next US president.

    Mr. Obama’s project was to smash Syria as a way-station to smashing Iran by the next US President.

    That much is clear.

  20. Karl.. says:


    I can only repeat what I just said.
    Iran is more isolated and under more sanctions and threats and acts than ever at the same time a deal is obviously only possible if a grand deal is accepted which will not happen.
    If you dont think this will lead to war its up to you.

    You didnt reply to my questions btw.

  21. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    October 24, 2013 at 4:42 pm

    I think a small deal is possible on the 20%.

    But I agree with you, one does not hear anything about strategic settlement with Iran in the Court of the (Mad) King.

    None of the Barons are advocating it either; at least not publicly.

  22. kooshy says:

    This Amazing Girl, made my day, no she really my year, enjoy

    دخترکِ نمونه در مشاعره

  23. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 24, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    That is one big society with paranoia.

    Basically rationality dictates that the cop that is being paid for the job, must take all the risks. If there is any doubt, it should be him/her to lay down his/her life. Not the other way round.

    But then police has become not an instrument of keeping civil peace but an instrument of control over populace for society’s aristocrats.

  24. Smith says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 24, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    So shameful.

    In a contest between meat and meat-grinder, the meat-grinder wins every time.

    This was a lesson that Iran’s military commanders learnt during Iran-Iraq war and one can only hope that they have not forgotten it.

    There were many during that war who believed given the sufficient quantity of fresh young meat, the meat-grinder is going to get jammed. But they had underestimated the unique qualities of electric powered industrial meat-grinders specially given the fact that the owners of the factories producing meat-grinders were friends of Iran’s enemy.

    You see, almost the same thing had happened earlier which culminated in shameful “Treaty of Gulestan” 200 years ago to this day. That is right. Today is the bicentennial of that black day (24 October 1813). It had happened because the Iranian military commanders prior to that war thought that, given sufficient quantity of fresh young meat, it is possible to jam the Russian meat grinder. Alas, it was not so. The zandost, bigheirat, bikhasiat king of Iran at the time, then signed a treaty with Russia giving Russia all those areas plus Caspian sea’s best in return for Russia recognizing his regime.

    Whether it was Bahrain, wherein US conspired with British to take it from Iran and convert it to a US naval base with a Sunni puppet king at the helm or the treaty of Turkemenchai, whenever Iran miscalculated, it lost substantial amount of land and prestige.

    In modern era, only a nuclear deterrence can guarantee Iranians to live in peace and independence. Not fresh young meat.

  25. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 24, 2013 at 4:42 pm

    Really Karl, how did you figure out that, Iran is more isolated than ever before, you think even more than Israel, in ME? Wow
    Iran just had an election with 72% of her eligible voters participating in the election, even more than Germany, she is the most stable protected state in her region, when her new president came to UN this September he was the hottest ticket in town, everyone including the president of US was begging to have a meeting with him, now do you still think Iran is more isolated than before, aren’t you repeating that same talk that comes out of Hasbara. On the other hand when over 2 years ago Iran’s last president said that we don’t see Assad fall, everybody in west laughed, but surly they all beg to differ don’t they. You know what I think; I think some people her can’t stand the fact that Iran can resist and resist successfully at the expense of US/West/Israel, but who cares so be it it’s the fact.

  26. kooshy says:


    Let’s assume Iran is politically so isolated that no one want to deal with her further lets assume that Iran is economically so restraint that she is not exporting any oil, if these are the case then Iran should falling behind progressing but why is then that Iran is the fastest developing country scientifically as well as humanistically, these are according to World related organization, isn’t Iran suppose to be isolated according to you Obama Nutnyaboo ( American Indian for crazy mule) and Smithy white orgy act?

  27. kooshy says:


    If you really want to understand what has prevented a direct US attack on Iran , if that’s so, than you may want to have Smithy white man orgy warm up act translate this video for you, this video is all about what Iran’s real nukes are , enjoy it.

    حضور رئیس‌جمهور در منزل جانباز ۷۰ درصد

    فیلم/ شوخی حسن روحانی با خواننده پاپ

  28. Karl.. says:


    So you deny that Iran is more isolated/under most sanctions than ever? That 72% vote in the iranian election have nothing to do with Iran being isolated or not.

  29. nico says:

    The US becoming a failed state ?
    With the prospect of economic gloom to worsen and the individualistic society (one would say the lack of social fabric) the question is open.
    But no need to worry with the US being already the country with highiest world rate of population in jail they know how to handle it.
    You know with commando like police, swat teams, militarization of homeland security, full spectrum surveillance and secluded communities.


    “Just four months on the job, Detroit’s new police chief got an early taste of the city’s hardscrabble streets.
    While in his patrol car at an intersection on Jefferson two weeks ago, Police Chief James Craig was nearly carjacked, police spokeswoman Kelly Miner confirmed today.
    Craig said he was in a marked police car with mounted lights when a man quickly tried to approach the side of his car. Craig, who became police chief in June, retold the story Monday during a program designed to crack down on carjackings.”

  30. nico says:

    Why the (real) US economy prospect is (very very) bad and getting worth ?

    Few easy charts to understand the situation.


    That is for the (real) situation:

    “In 223 years, the average real GDP growth for the USA has been 3.8%. At 1.9%, the 2000-2010 decade was the 2nd worst decade for real GDP growth in the storied history of the United States. The worst since 1790 was the 1930s which was followed by what many hope for now, an explosion of growth that occurred in the 1940s. However, three years in, real GDP growth for the 2010-> decade does not look as good as ‘hope’ would like it to be. So what is different this time and what ‘facilitated’ the 1940s recovery? The sad, but very real, truth is… war… but funding that this time will be problem… The 2nd worst decade of growth for the US ever… and getting worse”

    As for the propect, the staggering level of debt can only be sustained by printing virtual paper money and low interest rate.
    Which generates gross misallocation of capital, asset bubble, speculation, inflation and distortion of market prices
    We are at such point that there is no turning back only forward escape.
    Thus no recovery to be expected any time soon before it get much worse.
    The end of it can ONLY be war or a crack of historcal proportion somewhere in the (near ?) future.

  31. Sineva says:

    fyi says:
    October 24, 2013 at 11:25 am
    These were the same “experts” on the same site who two or three years ago were openly doubting the ability of iran to enrich to 20% and to produce the fuel assemblies for the trr,before that they were doubting the ability of iran to build and operate hexafluoride conversion plants or to produce 3-5% leu that wasnt contaminated with impurities,you`d think they would have gotten sick of underestimating iran and the progress of its indigenous nuclear industry.One of the comments that really made me laugh was “the P5+1 might consent to help Iran finish the IR-40 project”,yeah and if you really believe that one I`ve got some investment opportunities in nigeria you might be interested in.I think the lesson here is not to underestimate iran especially when it comes to things nuclear

  32. A concerned world citizen says:

    I find it quite ridiculous how Iranian leaders think nukes are “Haram” but somehow knives, bullets, Shahabs, Sejils etc etc are OK..

    I mean does it really matter much to the dead how he/she died??? Whether by nukes, bullet, knife, stone, bricks etc etc – it makes no difference whatsoever!!! By their logic, those items I’ve mentioned above MUST also be banned and considered “Haram” as well because they can also be used for mass murder, depending on the circumstances.

    If Iran’s ever nuked, God forbid, no amount of fatwas can stop/solve the fact that thousands/millions of Iranians have been murdered in one sitting.

    My thinking is that Khomeini didn’t really understand the concept of nukes before issuing his senseless anti-nuke fatwa. I think, like their Wahhabi/Takfiri counterparts, whatever subject they don’t understand, they conveniently issue fatwas to ban them. The Wahhabis/Takfiris don’t understand Shi-ism or Shias or women driving so they issue fatwas to that effect. A rather illogical approach but it works for them.

    The whole concept of war is to inflict enough pain/damage on your enemy so much so that they conclude there’s no point fighting or even contemplating launching a war. Russia will in no way launch a war on the UK because the UK can also retaliate with nukes on Russian cities. Of course the UK will be annihilated eventually in the process but many millions of Russians will also die in the process. This alone is enough deterrent to prevent any miscalculation on both sides.

    What deterrence does Iran posses in the face of US aggression? In fact, I’ll go as far as saying the US can afford to treat Iran like dirt(sanctions, humiliation, insults etc etc) on a daily basis because they know Iran does not have the means to hurt/inflict major pain on them as much as they can. Iran can cause some inconvenience to US interests in the region but US leaders have calculated that’s an acceptable cost compared to the damage they can/have inflicted on Iran. So much so that they’ve even enlisted their friends to join in the fray.

    I think Iranian leaders haven’t yet grasped the concept of power politics. The North Koreans, hate them or love them, understand this very well. They now posses nuke, which is no match to US arsenal but has now become a factor in US calculations. North Korea will be annihilated in any confrontation with the US but the US and her allies will also suffer huge damage/cost that it’s not worth the effort. They can lay waste to South Korea and Japan (Both US satraps) to the point where both states will probably cease to exists. Their nukes also guarantees that China doesn’t make them starve too much. China doesn’t want to have a mad, starving NK on their border. They’ll rather feed them to keep the peace.

    My point here is that, for every fatwa to be relevant to Iranians, they must first live to realize that fatwa. For a country the size of Iran, no amount of fatwa, Shahabs, Sejils can secure her sovereignty. Only a comprehensive deterrent will assure this. Until then, Iran will continue to be treated like dirt forever.

    My two cents!!

  33. nico says:

    In the current state of western economic weakness and road toward collapse the real existential question at world stage is the new world order.

    The US are economically agonizing and their European minions as well.

    Would they accept a civilizational shift of power balance from the white man to yellows and browns ?

    Not that they have much choice in that. The only other 2 global powers, that is China and Russia, have nukes and hold the western economical balls.
    Russia with the European overdependency on oil and gaz from the former.
    And the China-US trade and financial unbalance.

    It is not in China and Russia interest to have the westerners collapse but to get a more balance and multilateral world order.

    US and western neocon gambit for world domination through long term domination of the ME is an utter and dismal failure.
    One could even wonder if such war campaign were not aimed at restarting a western economic growth cycle like WWII.

    The US are still in their arrogant posture wanting to dictate the world from their exceptionalist pedestal, wheereas they have not the means for that anymore.
    Syria was a wake up call and return to reallity.

    The only thing that is still making the US “exceptional” is the USD status.
    But China said few days ago that iy should come to an end as the USD is a common good as per its world reserve status. Not to be usee by the US selfishly.

    Besides the USD reserve status is NATURALLY (that is for Canning) coming to an end.
    China has become the world first oil importer, soon the first world economy.
    And the US economic position even if still holding a major is not that much dominating.
    (One can see the Euro-North America union currently being discussed as a depserate move for the west to keep tye world civilizational supremacy. Personally I think it is nonsense and would be a failure just like the EU)

    Wolfowitz said in the 90s after the collapse of USSR that the US got a window to reshape the world before a new superpower and regional power emerge.

    That window has been closed in Syria.

    That being said. What does it tell about Iran ?

    First that the western world need to deal with the issue of rising China, Russia and their own economic woes first.
    Iran has become a secundary subject.

    Second that the era of unilateral military intervervention in the ME is FINISHED short of a nuclear world war.

    Third that Asia is with China and India is bound to become the first economical partners of ME countries.

    Fourth that the US is pushed into the corner to rebalance their alliance with KSA and Iran as the US have no means anymore to impose their domination through economy and military.

    We are seeing in live the end of the of the western unique and unilateral world domination.

    Whether it will happen overnight, I doubt it.
    Are the westerners ready to start a world war ? I doubt it.

    What Iran needs to do is to allow the ongoing process to achieve its full course and defends its right prudently and peacefully.

  34. Jay says:

    Britain plans to ship 1.6 million tear gas canisters to Bahrain – one per man, woman and child with some spare capacity.

    The goal is to promote friendly relations between the two countries!?

  35. Jay says:

    nico says:
    October 25, 2013 at 6:13 am

    War, in the traditional sense, will not help the US get out of her morass.

    The recipe of the Defense Plant Corporation (DPC established in the 1940s) is hard to repeat today. US government’s significantly increased funding to support the “war market” was managed by the DPC for the purposes of creating new infrastructure and products for the post war market. This was a major reason for rapid US economic development post war. While the strategy of the 40’s relied on being better, more innovative, less expensive, and faster to the market to beat your competitor, the strategy of today is to restrict resources to your competitor, while capturing control of key steps – beat your competitors by erecting barriers through force, conflict, chaos, cost,…

    The goal of dominating economic resources remain, but there is a fundamental shift in tactics and strategy. That is partly the reason why I do not agree with a strategy of nuclearizing Iran’s defense doctrine.

  36. BiBiJon says:

    A concerned world citizen says:
    October 25, 2013 at 6:33 am

    Plus my one cent, that should make three.

    “I find it quite ridiculous how Iranian leaders think nukes are “Haram” but somehow knives, bullets, Shahabs, Sejils etc etc are OK..”

    I think it is to do with the ‘scale’ of indiscriminate murder of non combatants. No amount of careful targetting, and improvements in precise navigation, etc. will stop a nuke being a weapon of mass murder way, wat beyond an errant shahab.

    “I mean does it really matter much to the dead how he/she died??? Whether by nukes, bullet, knife, stone, bricks etc etc – it makes no difference whatsoever!!!”

    I’ll be sure to ask myself in afterlife what did or did not matter. In this life however, I refuse to get a gun permit because I think it only increases the chances of conflagration, accidents, etc.

    “By their logic, those items I’ve mentioned above MUST also be banned and considered “Haram” as well because they can also be used for mass murder, depending on the circumstances.”

    I think you might be mischaracterizing “their logic.” They are not pacifists. They are just not into mass murder.

    “If Iran’s ever nuked, God forbid, no amount of fatwas can stop/solve the fact that thousands/millions of Iranians have been murdered in one sitting.”

    Truer words are seldom spoken here. Perhaps, reducing the chances of being nuked, by openly disavowing possession of nukes yourself is a “logical” defense.

    “My thinking is that Khomeini didn’t really understand the concept of nukes before issuing his senseless anti-nuke fatwa. I think, like their Wahhabi/Takfiri counterparts, whatever subject they don’t understand, they conveniently issue fatwas to ban them. The Wahhabis/Takfiris don’t understand Shi-ism or Shias or women driving so they issue fatwas to that effect. A rather illogical approach but it works for them.”

    You clearly understand what goes into becoming grand Ayatollah. Brilliant.

    “The whole concept of war is to inflict enough pain/damage on your enemy so much so that they conclude there’s no point fighting or even contemplating launching a war. Russia will in no way launch a war on the UK because the UK can also retaliate with nukes on Russian cities. Of course the UK will be annihilated eventually in the process but many millions of Russians will also die in the process. This alone is enough deterrent to prevent any miscalculation on both sides.”

    Nothing like a reduction to basics for clarity of thought (or thoughtlessness). These last 65 years shows adversaries probably have other rungs on the ladder of escalation before contemplating their own, or their adversary’s use of nukes. Russia gave US a very bloody nose in Vietnam, as did US to Russia in Afghanistan, Hezbollah cleaned out the IDF’s clock in 2006, etc., etc., I guess forgetting the other side has nukes.

    “What deterrence does Iran posses in the face of US aggression? In fact, I’ll go as far as saying the US can afford to treat Iran like dirt(sanctions, humiliation, insults etc etc) on a daily basis because they know Iran does not have the means to hurt/inflict major pain on them as much as they can. Iran can cause some inconvenience to US interests in the region but US leaders have calculated that’s an acceptable cost compared to the damage they can/have inflicted on Iran. So much so that they’ve even enlisted their friends to join in the fray.”

    Hardly a day goes by that some disparaging remark is not thrown in the general direction of Russia, China, US, India, UK, France, NK, Pakistan and Israel. I guess whatever else nukes are good for, a shield against insults, and humiliation ain’t one of them. The west, I recall sanctioned the hell out of USSR and Peopl’s Republic and their client states as if they had no nukes whatsoever.

    “I think Iranian leaders haven’t yet grasped the concept of power politics.”

    Surviving in that neighborhood either requires some deft understanding of power politics, or a tremendous amount of luck on daily basis. As you said, if you don’t understand something, go ahead issue a fatwa denying it exists.

    “The North Koreans, hate them or love them, understand this very well. They now posses nuke, which is no match to US arsenal but has now become a factor in US calculations. North Korea will be annihilated in any confrontation with the US but the US and her allies will also suffer huge damage/cost that it’s not worth the effort. They can lay waste to South Korea and Japan (Both US satraps) to the point where both states will probably cease to exists. Their nukes also guarantees that China doesn’t make them starve too much. China doesn’t want to have a mad, starving NK on their border. They’ll rather feed them to keep the peace.”

    I always thought when neocons equate North Korea and Iran, they do so as a sleight of hand, demonize Iran’s system of government so to speak. But I concede that if Iran did not have 40% of the world’s sea borne oil under its guns, then ICBMs with powerful warhead may well be necessary.

    “My point here is that, for every fatwa to be relevant to Iranians, they must first live to realize that fatwa. For a country the size of Iran, no amount of fatwa, Shahabs, Sejils can secure her sovereignty. Only a comprehensive deterrent will assure this. Until then, Iran will continue to be treated like dirt forever.”

    Well, yes, and no. Lets settle for maybe.

    “My two cents!!”

    Without interests I hope.

  37. Irshad says:

    Sineva says:
    October 25, 2013 at 6:30 am

    I agree with what you wrote Sineva. I clearly remember in 2009, Patrick Clawson, on Inside Story on Al Jazeera, clearly mocking Prof. Marandi, saying “yeah yeah right, Iran cannot enrich uranium to 20%”. Prof. Marandi was replied, by saying he has spoken with Iranian nuclear engineers, who told him that Iran had the capability to enrich uranium should the decision be taken. Clawson, then said, “Well if they say they can do it, then why haven’t they done it already?!?!” – again in a mocking manner, the reply to which was, “All in good time”. Later on we have the announcemnt of 20% production and the rest is histoy – which Mr Canning can allude to.

    Before this summer, I never heard or read anything about Arak in Western MSM – now it seems, the Iranians have shown that they can build it, so we now hear about Arak. The sooner the Iranians get on with building Darkhovin npp, the better. Maybe then, Iran can offer to build npp in England to help her with her energy crisis, since Iranian oil and gas is too toxic to be shipped there, hey James…?! 😉

  38. fyi says:

    Sineva says:

    October 25, 2013 at 6:30 am

    I had the same feeling as yourself; these people are unbelievably arrogant and despising of Iranians.

    I think EU’s offer to Iran was to help Iran build sewage treatment plans and thus recover waste water for agriculture – the equivalent of Americans importing donkeys from Cyprus to Iran.

    It is quite clear to me that they Axis Powers wish to keep Iranians backward – at least in nuclear sciences and technologies – using their concern about Iranian nuclearization to deny her that knowledge.

    Iranians wanted to buy a heavy water reactor and no body would sell it to them – “route to plutonium” they would say.

    A canard – a zero output graphite-moderated natural uranium is all that is needed for bomb-making purposes.

    Russians sold the plans to Iran, the way Pakistanis sold the enrichment plans to Libya – never expecting Iranians to be able to build it.

    Note that Arak was not even on radar screen last year, but now its is – the more Iran shows flexibility, the more Axis Powers will demand.

    There is no end.

    Iranian have to complete that reactor, it is a national project – even if it takes another 5 years for them to reverse engineer all that they need.

  39. Irshad says:

    fyi – what do you make of the news that pakistan is getting cold feet on the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline, as the Paksitanis feel they are paying too much for the gas? This all comes in light of the meeting Mr Sharif had with Mr Obama, the outcome of which has also annoyed India (Pakistan is US strategic ally).



  40. fyi says:

    A concerned world citizen says:

    October 25, 2013 at 6:33 am

    I can state with metaphysical certainty that the most useful thing to a human being is another human being.

    It then follows that destroying other human beings is an act of supreme metaphysical error.

    Now, there are times that war is brought to one although one has tried to avoid it – simply because one deals with Fallen Men whose greed and stupidity and ignorance exceeds their metaphysical understanding.

    Islamic Tradition recognizes that and urges that non-combatants be spared; i.e. war and violence be confined to soldiers and combatants.

    In practice, this has not been followed; non-soldiers have been killed en mass by Muslim armies; some where non-Muslims, often they were Muslims.

    That history is rejected as being un-Islamic.

    Up to that point, that is fine.

    There was many points of overlap with this among Christian thinkers until the 19-th Century.

    The American Civil War, the way it was conducted by the North against the South, destroyed the distinction between civilian and military populations. Contemporary situations analogous to the Siege of Vicksburg as well as Sherman’s March would almost certainly be considered war crimes.

    And in World War II, in the Korean War, in Iraq Wars, in Afghanistan, in Viet Nam War, and in Iran-Iraq War, the distinction between civilian and military populations was ignored.

    The reason is that these combatants were organized by the state in such a way that such a distinction could no longer be maintained; Is the person working in a tank-plant a combatant or not? Or a member of the Quarter Master Corps?

    During the last hundred years the entire state/country has been treated as the enemy; victory has been defined as unconditional surrender which, by necessity, entails a long and bloody campaign.

    Nuclear weapons or only another tool in the destruction of the enemy state(s) – they are not germane to the essential feature of the modern warfare – entire populations are combatants and the distinction cannot be made between a soldier and a civilian.

    There is no escaping from this situation unless all the states currently existing be dissolved and other forms of political organization be devised.

    One can argue that nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and biological weapons are “haram”; but how about thermo-baric weapons mated to long-range missile?

    They are not considered “haram” yet.

    For myself, given the Fallen Nature of Man, and the Madness inhering in all human beings to various degrees, I think it wise to commit the sin of arming oneself with nuclear weapons rather than committing the much worse sin of exposing oneself (state/country) to vagaries of fate and savagery of unscrupulous and essentially mad human beings.

    That is, it is less sinful – in my opinion – to be an Agha Muhammad Khan than to be a Shah Sultan Hussein.

  41. fyi says:

    Irshad says:

    October 25, 2013 at 9:49 am

    I think it just noises made to make Americans happy.

    I mean, Iran is already exporting electricity to Pakistan, why not gas?

    Iran has gas, Pakistan needs gas, Iran wants to sell at a certain price, Pakistan wants to buy at a certain price and I should think that just like buying a rug, there could be an agreement.

  42. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 3:57 am


    This is not about if I deny it or not, it’s about what has and is happening, don’t you see what has happened in this last month alone?
    Look with slightest possibility of a détente (not even a rapprochement) between US and Iran the entire western client states in the region including Israel and KSA have become worried for their stability and possible longevity, why should an end of US hostility toward Iran make Israel worried of her stability, the answer to this is because NutnYaboo and also you both know that Israel is an illegitimate entity, is the illegitimacy that deep done makes a country unaccepted and isolated, don’t you feel you want to agree, but can’t ? Look KSA is illegitimate because is an unelected regime.

    Iran is not isolated, majority of people in the world ( excepting you, fyi and Smithy warm up act) are very proud of Iran and her achievements being it now for successfully standing up to a lone hegemonic colonial superpower and for her past as the cultural , scientific center of the near east.

  43. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 10:11 am

    Another dimension might be the inability of these people to understand the basics and fundamentals of nuclear deterrence in context of game theory and its resultant peace and stability.

    For some reason (distrust of science/philosophy/mathematics?) they can not grasp the idea that such a fool proof deterrence is possible. They rather prefer perpetual war specially the one in which fresh young meat is fed into monstrous meat-grinders in largest quantities.

    The ethical and philosophical shortcoming is evident. They rather live in a theory of “humanism” while they are being killed in reality than live in real humanistic society with only a theoretical deterrence of punishment. And even Quran says: “Fight them as they fight you”.

  44. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 10:13 am

    Pakistan looks to Iran to help keep the lights on: http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2013/1024/Pakistan-looks-to-Iran-to-help-keep-the-lights-on

  45. Karl.. says:


    The reason Iran is productive at home is just because of the reason I have tried to tell you, that they are isolated/under great sanctions.

  46. nico says:

    Jay says:
    October 25, 2013 at 9:40 am

    Yes the US neocon strategy of warmongering has miserably failed on various scale.
    The money should not have been spent.
    Or better it should have been spent in infrastructure, science or durable assests.

    Basically military expenditure is neither productive nor durable.
    Meaning once it is spent it provides no direct or derived national organic earning.

    That is imperial hubris and overstretch.
    That is also the result of the mad, idiotic and bankrupt policies of US elite and thinkers.
    The worst of them and most responsible of the current situation being in my view Mr Clinton.
    He is the one who authorized the US idiocy to emerge and to expend at the very start after the fall of USSR.
    He is the one who destroyed all the existing laws which led to press servitude to corporations and interests.
    He is the one who oversaw the destruction for legal defense walls against wild finance.

    Maybe Mr Clinton was only one man in a global process.
    However he was the key leader in the US demise.

    Ms Rice once comptentuously said that the ME crisis were like the birty pang for a new ME.
    One could now return the compliment and state that the current economic crisis in the west is the birth pang of a new world order. One not dominated by the white man anymore.

  47. BiBiJon says:

    Metaphysics of hell

    There’s an area up there, in hell, that has no inferno going on; no unbearable heat, no sensation of burning. This area is for those who are condemned to kicking themselves for an eternity.

    Giving up the high ground, developing nukes, encouraging others to follow your example, and in the process dying of a nuclear blast is a sure ticket to that storied metaphysical area in hell.

  48. Karl.. says:

    New sanctions planned.

    obama havent done anything to get the senate/congress with him on diplomacy with Iran, hes so weak.

  49. Jay says:

    nico says:
    October 25, 2013 at 10:44 am

    “One not dominated by the white man anymore.”

    If “white man” is taken in its broadest context, I am not as optimistic as you are.

    My view is that Iranian leaders have wisely recognized the new modality of war, and they are countering this new modality with reasonable foresight. Traditional wars no longer serve the needs of her masters.

  50. Aletho says:

    Bended Knees: Zionist Power in American Politics

    By James Petras

    … The manifestations of Israeli power over the US are public, visible, outrageous and unprecedented in the annals of US foreign relations. Israeli power is wielded directly through its subordinated political arm, the Zionist Power Configuration, which in turn facilitates the direct intervention of the Israeli state in the internal politics of the US. Let us examine several crucial empirical indicators of Israeli power in the US. … Full article: http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/bended-knees-zionist-power-in-american-politics/

  51. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    October 25, 2013 at 10:45 am

    Well, we can all see your profound grasp of both Metaphysics and Reality.

  52. A concerned world citizen says:

    They are not considered “haram” yet.

    For myself, given the Fallen Nature of Man, and the Madness inhering in all human beings to various degrees, I think it wise to commit the sin of arming oneself with nuclear weapons rather than committing the much worse sin of exposing oneself (state/country) to vagaries of fate and savagery of unscrupulous and essentially mad human beings.

    That is, it is less sinful – in my opinion – to be an Agha Muhammad Khan than to be a Shah Sultan Hussein.

    My point exactly. Just having nukes does not necessarily mean you’re going to use it. Rather, it disarms the enemy’s quest/thirst to destroy you. Call it an insurance policy or whatever. Apart from the Madmen ruling the US, most nuclear weapon states do not have a first strike doctrine. Why is that? They do not intend to use it but only after they’ve been nuked themselves.

    Iran possessing nukes will not be “Haram”. For if it were, Shahabs, Sejils, Khalij Fars, Fajr etc ect will also be “Haram” becasue they’re all designed to destroy(KILL) en mass. What will make them “Haram” is the policy of use – like the US first strike policy.

    I’d even venture to say “God” will not forgive Iranian leaders if they ever allow Iran to be nuked.

    In an ideal world, I’d be the first to promote nuclear disarmament and all the accompanying fantasies. But we’re not living in an ideal world due to, as you call it, the fallen nature of man.

    What if say tomorrow there’s a Wahhabi/Takfiri takeover of Pakistan and they decide to nuke Iran for not sharing their views? Or an extreme Likudnik in Tel Aviv who claims he’s doing “God’s work”, decides to nuke Tehran for the “glory of God”?

  53. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    October 25, 2013 at 10:41 am

    There are strong analogies obtaining between Islamic Iran and the defunct USSR:

    – multi-national
    – a state based on a strong commitment to certain ideals
    – Republican structures based on some of the ideas of Plato’s Republic
    – Oil-based economy with its distortions
    – strong commitment to social welfare and subsequent distortions
    – despised and isolated by Axis Powers
    – widespread cynicism among certain social strata
    – division of the population between the “In” people and the “Out” people
    – surrounded by enemies
    – suspicion of private enterprise and capital accumulation
    – state being more than 80% of the economy
    – strong commitment to the survival of allied states & people
    – strong sanctions regime against them by Axis Powers

    Of course, there are lots of differences as well, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

    But I think my major concern would be that the Islamic Republic risks reprising the history of the Soviet Union – in which cynicism about the state and its policies were everywhere (not yet in Iran)as well as the absence of a sustained campaign of increase in productivity prevented it from using its internal resources efficiently.

    One could contrast this with the Free-ride that both China and Saudi Arabia have received from Axis Powers.

    China, in fact, has been treated in a welcoming manner by the Axis Powers since 1970s.

    Saudi Arabia likewise.

    Iran can never expect to be so treated by the Axis Powers – as long as she is maintaining her strategic autonomy, she cannot expect any better treatment than the way USSR was treated by the Axis Powers in the late 1970s.

    The critical endeavor for the Iranian leaders is to devolve economic power from the state to individuals and corporations; NEP writ large.

  54. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 25, 2013 at 10:36 am

    The problem with Game Theory is that it assumes that Men are Rational Actors.

    What they mean by “Rational” is the ability to calculate costs and benefits and follow the path or strategy that minimizes costs and increases benefits.

    In practice, the goals are non-rational; people choose a certain goal and one man’s goal is often times incomprehensible to another man.

    That is, the choice of goal is not a rational choice; rather, it is an emotional and non-rational one.

    The Americans have chosen to be Champions of Israel and they have set a rational course of sanctions against Iran and others to support that.

    In 2003, at Iran-Iraq border, immediately after the demise of the Ba’ath state in Iraq, there were thousands of Iranian pilgrims who were clearly risking their lives to visit the shrines of Imam Hussein and Imam Ali.

    I think the only rational choice that almost all could agree on would be state survival.

    As long as one could assume that, one is safe in applying Game Theory.

    It was for this reason that so many Champions of Israel tried to portray Iran and Iranians as Mad Fanatical people who crave Death.

    They wanted to destroy the foundations of the deterrence doctrines when it came to Iran.

    That was when Mr. Khamenei addressed them – and the Axis Powers’ leaders – directly and declared the consultative, collaborative, and rational process of decision-making in Iran.

  55. fyi says:

    A concerned world citizen says:

    October 25, 2013 at 11:15 am

    You won’t get any arguments out of me.

  56. A concerned world citizen says:

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 11:44 am
    A concerned world citizen says:

    October 25, 2013 at 11:15 am

    You won’t get any arguments out of me.

    I’m not expecting one from you, either. I just made a statement. I’m responsible for my comment. I’m not responsible for your response.

    There’s a reason this site is a “forum” – so average joes like myself can post freely and other can respond freely. I hope you get ma drift 😉

  57. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 10:41 am

    Do you think that’s why the Israelis and or Germans are also scientifically productive, is this because like you say just because they happen to be are isolated. Do you think you can win this argument?

    Here something new to learn about Iran , today’s whole new Persian proverb, here is the translation “ when the poet can’t ISOLATE the right word to rhyme, ends up resorting to bull shit” do you think there is similar word of wisdom in Hebrew or Dutch?

  58. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 11:42 am

    That is pretty much true, except that with nuclear weapons the game theory rests on punishment. With threat of “sufficiently large punishment”, even animals start behaving “rationally”. Israelis will do the same. At the end of the day, no nation would like to die enmasse.

    Not Iran, not Saudi, not Israel and not the petite whore. Every nation wants to live. The problem with game theory is measuring that “sufficiently large punishment”. In cold war, it was deemed by US and USSR to be complete destruction of earth, while other countries like China believed in “minimal deterrence”. I myself believe in minimal deterrence and even Russia and US have started to shift towards it.

    Though these are theoretical arguments, one thing that is real and for sure, is the fact that without nuclear umbrella a nation is not considered human within current political system of the world. Such a nation is a fair game and its slaughter is perpetually imminent.

  59. nico says:

    Jay says:
    October 25, 2013 at 10:54 am

    “My view is that Iranian leaders have wisely recognized the new modality of war, and they are countering this new modality with reasonable foresight. Traditional wars no longer serve the needs of her masters.”

    To paraphrase Machivelli, there could not be peace when actors’ core goals are different. Only hidden/veiled or differed war.
    As long as the US are in their unilateral moment and after domination while Iran is after strategic autonomy, then there true peace cannot obtain

    However, the issue is about the US ability to wage war, being it openly or veiled.

    The US power is waning as a sole world super power.
    The US are feeling the cost of their more than 20 years idiotic policies.
    And their strategy and ambition need to be revised.

    History is not linear and many things might happen.

  60. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 25, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    I think it is fair to say that Pakistan could not have survived without nuclear arms.

    Over the last 10 years, since the start of Axis Powers campaign against Iran, I have never ever read anything by anyone stating a plausible non-nuclear scenario for Iranian security.

    In fact, none of those interlocutors of Iran in US and EU or in Russia or in China ever stated publicly how Iran was to be secure in a non-nuclear manner.

    Nor their analysts ever ventured such a scenario – not the Chinese, not the Russians, not the Germans, not the Americans.

    I recall Dr. Perkovich actually stating, about Iran, “their security is not threatened.”

    Only an Israeli strategist once stated in an interview that Iran needs nuclear weapons for state security.

    In that interview, he stated that Persians (Iranians) were the only people in the world that he trusted – I imagine due to the fact that longest Jewish presence has been in Iran (2500 years).

  61. nico says:

    History is not linear but there are trends.
    And discontinuty as well. Like majorf wars or economic crash

  62. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 12:16 pm

    Pakistan’s problem was, after East Pakistan debacle, and 1974 Indian nuclear test, they could not depend on their conventional military for their defense. It had been demonstrated to them practically that they would not be able to stop a much bigger, populous and economically larger India. Nukes on the other hand are perfect equalizers.

    As for Iran’s security, there have been a bit more honest people admitting these facts, but the corrupt media and stupid nature of majority of people, has caused this important debate to be left in shadows. For instance, General Odom had elaborated on this and even had said that Iran lives in a bad neighborhood and needs to have nuclear weapons for a robust nuclear deterrence: http://hammernews.com/odomspeech.htm

    Or take the example of much respected professor Waltz who argued that the world will be a safer and much more peaceful place if we had more nuclear weapon states not less: goingtotehran.com/kenneth-waltz-noam-chomsky-and-america-and-israels-real-concerns-about-irans-nuclear-activities

    But then, there is a strong taboo on discussing the matter of an independent colored man nation taking possession of nuclear weapons and its associated benefits and peace. It is not only the white man that will be against such a proposition but also a plethora of slaves who see their house positions threatened by the notion of an enduring peace and equality.

  63. Karl.. says:


    What has Israel or Germany production/industry to do with Iran? Nothing.

    It is like saying we have the same type of cars just because the color is the same.

  64. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 25, 2013 at 12:40 pm

    The late General Odom was a sane man; that his advice – across the board – were ignored by the ruling elites in US is a testament to US degeneration.

    “In the Halls of the Mad King”….

  65. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    So sad. The same with professor Waltz.

    But their degenerate denial, does not lessen the authenticity of the truth. Rather it accentuates it. The mad king, is no more mad with North Korea anymore. In fact, there is hardly any mention of it nowadays. It seems his madness is selective and reserved for only the weak and vulnerable. A really good sign. Meaning he can be cured at least selectively when shown strength.

  66. BiBiJon says:

    North Korea, and the metaphysics of delusion

    Folks under the delusion that they’ve come up with something profound, when in fact their argument is childishly simple:

    You need a big bad gun for self protection
    You need self protection because people are out to get you
    People who are out to get you stop at nothing to destroy you.

    Give it break, I say.

    North Korea has scared no one. It is an isolated, impoverished country with absolutely no influence anywhere in the world. It is being ignored for that reason alone.

    Not only NK has scared no one with her handful of bombs, US also has scared no one with her thousands of nukes.

    People are not out to get anyone. People do, however, play chess. The objective is to win. Right now, US is enticed by the idea that for a variety of reasons Iran’s regional and US’ global strategic interests are coincident. What Iran can provide the US, nobody else in the region can. And what US can provide Iran, including quitting the harassment of Iran, no one else can do for Iran.

    Discuss this a bit, if you get time.

  67. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 12:45 pm


    Would you think it disappointing, if as the result of a possible détente between Iran and US, Israel becomes even more isolated than she is now? Do you think if that happens, based on your theory Israel’s scientific achievements will rapidly increase and that’s a good thing for the Jewish state. So, would you support a possible or an eventual détente between US and Iran, which if we take your BS theory serious will take Iran out of her current isolation and therefore reduces Iran’s current fastest in the world scientific and humanistic developments. Isn’t that what any supporter of the Jewish state should wish and want?

  68. Karl.. says:


    You keep posting comments after comments but arent responding to any of my questions.

    However your questions at October 25, 2013 at 1:51 pm I dont really understand at all, you need to clarify.

  69. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    October 25, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    I have experienced the same thing with him:”keep posting comments after comments but (not) responding to any of … questions.”

    Likely,, he has no answer, or he has to go ask someone else to supply an answer.

  70. fyi says:


    Evidently, Arabs (and Africans) still believe in UN:


  71. James Canning says:


    Obama did not want to intervene in the civil war in Syria. Granted, a number of Obama’s advisors wanted the US to intervene in the Syrian civil war. And, Aipac presded hard for Obama to intervene in the civil war, probably because Aipac hoped intervention in Syria would lead to war with Iran.

    Obama does not want war with Iran, but if no deal is made with P5+1 the additional sanctions will cause an end of Iranian oil exports and this may lead to war.

  72. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    It is useless to engage them. They are not coherent or rational. All these trolls can do, is personal attack and spew sexual profanities. Do not expect anything intelligent coming out of these hypocrites with vested interests.


    By the way your argument that most of Iran’s progress is due to sanctions is correct. German industrial capacity/ingenuity was developed under sanctions and war during the period between mid 19th to mid 20th century.

    Israel/Jews became proficient in science and education largely to compensate for the way they were dealt in Europe (worse than second class citizen).

    Nations are made by hardships. Iran is no different.

  73. Jay says:


    Britain wants friendly relations with the people of Bahrain, but if those pesky Bahraini protestors are unwilling to surrender to their brutal government that will cause an additional tear gas canisters to be shipped by Britain to the people’s oppressors – to the tune of one canister per man, woman and child in Bahrain!

  74. Sineva says:

    Irshad says:
    October 25, 2013 at 9:43 am
    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 9:44 am
    I agree with both of you
    Arak will be completed without any western help,after all thats the whole point of an indigenous nuclear industry,its indigenous.
    The arrogant and patronising attitude at armscontrolwonk does make me sick at times,but I do have to laugh at how wrong these “experts” have been time after time when it came to iran,you`d think they would`ve wised up by now

  75. Smith says:

    Sineva says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:28 pm

    They are well learned. But Divinity has blinded them as punishment for their arrogance. They can not see the truth anymore (Nukes are good for US but bad for Iran!).

    “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

    ~Mohandes Gandhi

  76. Smith says:

    “… but if those pesky Bahraini protestors are unwilling to surrender to their brutal government that will cause an additional tear gas canisters to be shipped by Britain to the people’s oppressors – to the tune of one canister per man, woman and child in Bahrain!”

    It is good.

    Shias learn from oppression and injustice. They are a “nation of tears” as Mr. Khomeini had put it.

    Bahrainis still have a long way to learn.

    They were silent when British separated them from Iran and put a Sunni ruler on them with US making their nation a naval base right after in 1973-4. Not a single protest was held then.

    When Iran is stronger, then their situation will change. An Iran that would be able to stand up to Saudi intervention there (right now Iran is very weak).

    Till that time, they will internalize their learning via suffering, as other Iranic nations who separated from Iran are doing eg. Heratis, Azeris, etc etc.

  77. nico says:

    BiBiJon says:
    October 25, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    “People are not out to get anyone. People do, however, play chess. The objective is to win. Right now, US is enticed by the idea that for a variety of reasons Iran’s regional and US’ global strategic interests are coincident. What Iran can provide the US, nobody else in the region can. And what US can provide Iran, including quitting the harassment of Iran, no one else can do for Iran.”

    There are main threats/enemies/challenges and there are secondary ones.
    As per the US unilateral super power policy paradigm, Iran is the main obstacle to ME dominance.
    However for a financially broken, waning, strategically defeated and has been unilateral superpower, is Iran still the major/primary target and enemy ?

    One interesting news lately was the KSA stating their intention to downgrad their strategic relation with the US.
    The news is important in itself even if it demands to be confirmed by fact on the ground.
    Also interesting is that the king was not sthe one to state that shift, neither the foreign minister or the defense minister, but the spy chief.
    Where is the kind ? Maybe already dead or in coma. The other major minister are not in good shape either.
    What about the succession ?

  78. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    Fyi the problem for you Karl and your warm up act is, if you guys answer the questions you are confronted with in an honest way you wouldn’t be needing to post so many none factual BS in this forum, did you ever thought about that?
    But like I wrote you and your warm up act a while back this will continue (you will be confronted with questions you wouldn’t dare to answer to show your dishonesty) as long as you hide behind a curtain of dishonesty, trying to show your continued BS professed theories are due only because of your care for Iran and Iranians. In that you have failed because of real Iranians posting on this site.

  79. kooshy says:

    BiBijon ,

    The more positive videos and links to a possible détente between Iran and US you post on this site, the more unstable and paranoid you make fyi and his warm up entourage.
    Every time anybody here, positively comments on a possible change on atmosphere of these 34 year old hostilities, these guys will need to go back and work hard rewriting their baseless theories and increase their usual negative Iran comments.
    In no way I am saying that this possible détente may happen, but like you I think and hope if it happens in a win-win way is great for Iran and US. To the contrary so far these guys comments and reaction shows that they despise, and become paranoid even by a mere possibility of a détente to happen.as the result If one connects the dots to see who else (Israel, Arab Monarchs, Neocons) becomes unstable and disgusted with a possible détente between us and Israel, then one would understand why these guys are dishonest when they say why Iran needs Nukes protection against a nonexistent and unproven direct foreign hostility. That is the reason they refuse answering direct questions that will further reveal their dishonesty to this board.

  80. Karl.. says:


    October 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    October 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    Fully agree.

  81. BiBiJon says:

    kooshy says:
    October 25, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    You are right. However, as agents of Israel, or as frustrated composers of an opus that will never be performed, folks could still engage in discussing the contours of how things may shake out. Now Netanyahu and King Abdullah put all their eggs in one basket, because as individuals they will be finished if there were to be detente between Iran and the US. But surely, Israel, Israelis, and Judaism, and Zionsim, and Wahabism, KSA will still be there even after Netanyahu and Abdullah hold hands as they dive into a cosmic toilet.

    But alas one will keep whistling his opus, and the others will not extract their heads out of Netanynahu arse until the bitter end.

  82. kooshy says:


    Do you see how trolls get exposed is just because you are not good at it, fyi is better harder to have him exposed plus he has read more than you , you need a bit more exprince

    Read the trend of the comments bellow, fyi and warm up act came to your help but it was a bit too late.

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 10:41 am
    The reason Iran is productive at home is just because of the reason I have tried to tell you, that they are isolated/under great sanctions.

    kooshy says:
    October 25, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    Do you think that’s why the Israelis and or Germans are also scientifically productive, is this because like you say just because they happen to be are isolated. Do you think you can win this argument?


    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    What has Israel or Germany production/industry to do with Iran? Nothing.
    It is like saying we have the same type of cars just because the color is the same.

    kooshy says:
    October 25, 2013 at 1:51 pm


    Would you think it disappointing, if as the result of a possible détente between Iran and US, Israel becomes even more isolated than she is now? Do you think if that happens, based on your theory Israel’s scientific achievements will rapidly increase and that’s a good thing for the Jewish state.

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:02 pm


    However your questions at October 25, 2013 at 1:51 pm I dont really understand at all, you need to clarify.

    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    I have experienced the same thing with him:”keep posting comments after comments but (not) responding to any of … questions.”
    Likely,, he has no answer, or he has to go ask someone else to supply an answer.

    Smith says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm
    fyi says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    It is useless to engage them. They are not coherent or rational. All these trolls can do, is personal attack and spew sexual profanities. Do not expect anything intelligent coming out of these hypocrites with vested interests.


    By the way your argument that most of Iran’s progress is due to sanctions is correct. German industrial capacity/ingenuity was developed under sanctions and war during the period between mid 19th to mid 20th century.
    Israel/Jews became proficient in science and education largely to compensate for the way they were dealt in Europe (worse than second class citizen).

    Karl.. says:
    October 25, 2013 at 3:53 pm

    October 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    October 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    Fully agree.

    I am LOLing, for Friday I had fun

  83. nico says:


    “Russia is now the number one global oil exporter, and China is the number one global oil importer – importing more from Saudi Arabia than the US. By 2020 China will be importing a whopping 9.2 million barrels of oil a day. So it obviously makes no sense for BRICS members Russia and China to keep using the petrodollar; that’s a crucial feature of Beijing’s recent call to “de-Americanize” the world. And Riyadh knows it.

    The House of Saud also considers two other trends; it has been exporting most of its oil to Asia for years now; and China, inevitably, has become the top exporter – myriad manufactured products – to Saudi Arabia, ahead of the US. Beijing, once again, is playing a discreet, long game, investing in Saudi infrastructure. Aware that Saudi Arabia cannot export more of its heavy, high sulfur oil – because few customers can refine it – China is buildinga massive new refining/export complex. So, long-term, what we have is essentially a US-China confrontation (with Russia and Iran also weighing in) over the petrodollar.”

  84. BiBiJon says:

    nico says:
    October 25, 2013 at 2:48 pm

    “is Iran still the major/primary target and enemy ?”

    Your worst enemies that you have taken delight in harassing to a point of even institutionalizing your enmity, will be your bestest everest partnerest if you need them. History is replete for examples of this.

    “One interesting news lately was the KSA stating their intention to downgrad their strategic relation with the US.”

    So much for the sway 3000 nukes have over satraps’ behavior!

    “The news is important in itself even if it demands to be confirmed by fact on the ground.”

    I think it has been confirmed on the ground. Israelis were fooling around with Jundullah, and KSA was goofing around with Syria all with British and French support to a huge displeasure of the US. In fact their autonomous actions are one of the reasons that Iran and US are eying one another as suitors.

    “Also interesting is that the king was not sthe one to state that shift, neither the foreign minister or the defense minister, but the spy chief.
    Where is the kind ? Maybe already dead or in coma. The other major minister are not in good shape either.
    What about the succession ?”

    These are all indications of a spent reactionary force that is about to implode. They needed Iran as enemy as the answer to the question: what am I?

    You’d think they would look at Iran-US budding relationship with some relief. Not that Iran had any intention of hurting KSA or Israel gratuitously, but with the current good vibes emanating from Washington and Tehran, even that unlikely scenario has become vanishingly implausible. I think an etire generation of Saudi royals will be skipped in favor of a younger guy. And, I think Netanyahu will be forced into calling elections by February and not be returned to office.

  85. nico says:

    BiBiJon says:
    October 25, 2013 at 4:42 pm

    “I think it has been confirmed on the ground. Israelis were fooling around with Jundullah, and KSA was goofing around with Syria all with British and French support to a huge displeasure of the US. In fact their autonomous actions are one of the reasons that Iran and US are eying one another as suitors.”

    I am not sur about that.
    There are report of CIA in Jordan and Turkey training and arming rebels.
    And I do not think that Bandar would have met and threatened Putin without Washington backing.
    But I agree that at some point the US were uncomfortable with Al Qaeda Saudi backed rebels.
    I think the US are taken betwen the rock and the hard place and they comprehend that extremists are not that easy to control.
    I guess there has been a huge internal debate in US strategic circles about the bad and the lesser bad.
    At the end of the day I think that the US could have been repeled by the risk of the Al Qaeda style extremists engulfing all the region from jordan to Syria, Yemen, Iraq, KSA and sheikdoms, Pak, Afghanistan etc…
    My understanding is that 2 schools are infighting in Washington. The first one calling for chaos and strategic denial of ME resources : what the US cannot control, others will not grab. The second one being the pragmatics.
    But that is only my own speculation.

  86. nico says:

    Waning US power ?
    Brzezinski could be categorized as a pragmatic.
    Actually he warns against the exeptionalist school of tought in the US.


    “The concept of global hegemony seems to be dead in the water and the dominance itself pretty much unattainable. The past 13 years of US control over the post Cold-War world has come to an end. These are some of the highlights that Zbigniew Brzezinski, an American political scientist and former US National Security Adviser, made in his speech at University of Johns Hopkins.

    Mr. Brzezinski acknowledged that the US has lost much of the leverage it had a score of years ago, adding Washington was not likely to ever recover its position as the dominating global force, at least not in the lifetime of anyone in this hall, the analyst noted as he addressed the congregation at his alma mater.

    0The ex-security adviser to President Jimmy Carter stressed it was essential for the US to come to terms with a more-than-ever complex modern world, despite its high moral ground. Americans’ credulity in their exceptionality is “premature” to say the least, he added.”

  87. Fiorangela says:

    fyi says: October 25, 2013 at 5:10 pm

    Einhorn’s article is a retread;** Dan Joyner analyzed (eviscerated) the original article in July 2013.


    ** did you ever wonder what remains on the truck after that huge chunk of rubber peels off and lands on the center line?

  88. Nasser says:

    fyi says: October 25, 2013 at 5:10 pm

    The US hasn’t attacked so far because they aren’t confident they can denuclearize Iran through military means.

    The Western Axis assumed instead that they would be more successful in their aims of getting Iran to bend through economic warfare and other destabilization efforts than through any military campaign.

    If Iran decides to show “flexibility,” cries uncle, and makes herself vulnerable again as Mr. Einhorn and his cohorts demand; the US would then pounce. Their aim has always been the destruction of Iran.

  89. BiBiJon says:

    nico says:
    October 25, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    I should have prefaced my comment as a guess. Having said that, whatever the US does, she does for herself. And, I think the US does not like sharing a theater of operations with Saudis, or Israelis if they start to act outside US command. For example, arming/training US-friendly Takfiris only works if US-unfriedly takfiris are not being armed, or provided intelligence that make them more effective, and worse sill, in intra-takfiri clashes, the unfriendlies wind up winning.

    All of this is a product of different aims, objectives, time horizons, etc.. For deeply insecure KSA, and Israel the aim is mindless destruction, the hell with long-term consequences. For the US, considering how she covets her international prestige, the aim is control, and balance.

    As for Bandar-Putin unpleasantness, again it points to another conundrum US faces with her “special relationship” nonsense. People, including Putin can (wrongly) assume that Bandar has US’ seal of approval for everything he says and does. Bandar, and Israelis, and other special-relationship, closest-ally operatives (ab)use this presupposition as a multiplier for their effectiveness. It must be a real headache for US when the closest allies start tugging in a different direction. US has the capacity to dominate existing institutions, and would prefer state institutions be left standing. KSA and Israel can only stand tall above the ashes of total destruction and chaos. US has a longer term set of objectives. KSA and Israel are desperate for results as of yesterday. In this mismatched mix come the colonial ambitions of France and Britain. In short, it is a mess.

    But, you raise very good points and I agree.

  90. M.Ali says:

    A concerned world citizen,

    2 things. First regarding fatwa against nukes, Islam, or I should say, Prophet Mohammad, was very outspoken against “rules of war”, and what is right and what is excessive. For example, one of his rules of wars were, “Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful.”

    However, second, Prophet Mohammad was a very flexible man. With his war against one of the tribes, he did actually cut down trees during a siege.

    Maybe in the future, the fatwa can be changed, if the circumstances changes. But maybe the reason the fatwa is there, aside from the moral implications of it, is that nuclear weapons isn’t as useful as some make it out to be.

    How would have Iran defended itself against the economic siege if it had nukes since the 90s? Would it have nuked USA for imposing an Embargo? Would it have nuked Canada for closing down its embassy? Would it have nuked Korea for cancelling certain contracts? Would it have nuked UAE for its challenges on Abu Musa Islands? Would it have nuked Russia when it didn’t deliver on its promises?

    What happens when you have border scuffles? Such as the occassional fights between IRI and the Taliban in the 90s? Would you nuke Aghanistan?

    What would you do in proxy wars? If a repeat of 2009 protests occur, and USA and Saudia Arabia and the rest of the allies pour in billions and billions in propaganda, bribes, promises, and weapons to a minority group in Iran, how can you defend yourself against nukes?

    People keep bringing up Noth Korea. Nukes hasn’t kept North Korea safe, CHINA has kept North Korea safe. If China joined in the aggression against NK, by sanctioning them or otherwise, North Korea would face a much more difficult situation. They wouldn’t be able to EAT nukes.

    The greatest risk to Iran is not really a direct attack. It is the continution of the economic siege to collapse the market, the isolation of IRI, and the propaganda against it with financial assistance, to encourage certain segments of the IRI to overthrow it. You can’t use nukes for either of these.

  91. Karl.. says:


    Well if China is keeping NK safe, who is keeping Iran safe?

    Likewise who is protecting the US? If not their nuclear weapons?

  92. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 24, 2013 at 1:14 pm

    “I think this speaks for itself”

    I think he parrots Mohammad Javad Larijani Who said this back in November 2010.


    See from 23:53 mark.

  93. M.Ali says:


    “Well if China is keeping NK safe, who is keeping Iran safe?”

    No one is keeping Iran safe, and I’m saying that nukes doesn’t automatically make a country safe. NK’s safety isn’t its nukes, but its big brother ally. Iran’s safety wouldn’t be guaranteed by nukes, and if it places Iran in a NK position without the China help, then here situation will be worsened, not improved.

    “Likewise who is protecting the US? If not their nuclear weapons?”

    Who would benenifit from an attack against USA directly in a conventional war, even if USA didn’t have nukes? Would Cuba wage war on USA? Would Venezuela? Or if it attacked Vietnam or Iraq, would the latter countries be able to attack Washington?

    Also, USA’s position is different than Iran. USA is able to balance its nukes with a strong global network (it can send its navy basically anywhere, and has army bases all over the world), it has an economy that is linked to most other economies, and has allies deep in its pocket sprinkled the world over.

  94. Karl.. says:


    US like any other power is built by their military capabilities.

    Likewise if Israel didnt have great military capabilities they wouldnt have won most of their wars and is the reason why no neighbour try to attack it, because they know it wont work.

    Iraq would certainly have attacked the US if they could reach the US, but they cant just because of their weak military capabilities.

  95. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 26, 2013 at 7:37 am

    Multiple times it has been pointed out to you that Iranian’s sense of nationhood, motherland, etc. primarily protects Iran from aggression. Add to that a very robust missle force that wreak havoc on any aggressor’s economy.

    Does it look to you that Iran behaves in a way that shows she is vulnerable?

    Would a vulnerable, weak, isolated Iran answer unjust sanctions with huge expansion of her nuclear infrastructure?

    Would a vulnerable, weak, isolated Iran stand steadfast in support of secularists against nuclear-armed-western backed takfiris?

    Would a vulnerable, weak, isolated Iran resupply Hezbollah with even better defensive weapons?

    You like to repeat Israeli lines. Fine! Iran needs weapons for survival, and therefore no agreement, no amount of inspection etc will ever be sufficient to dissuade a country from acquiring these weapons. Maybe you don’t realize this. But you could actually get paid spouting Israeli lines. You can even get paid for just derailing sensible conversation threads into mundane arguments. But, I guess you can also do it out of generosity of heart. But, if you need cash, ….

  96. Karl.. says:


    Strong military=power that is a fact.
    Do you see any state actually threatening the US, France, Germany, China, Russia, Israel etcetera with war? No and thats because they have deterrence. Iran does simply not have this.

  97. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    kooshy, BibiJon,

    Even assuming that “detente” doesn’t happen, the US will not attack Iran militarily. As I have repeatedly said, Iran is currently and has been for the last twenty years successfully deterring the US. You know just a minor little fact that might seem relevant, right?

    When challenged on specifics by kooshy and myself…well you know…

    In other words:

    1. The more the people mentioned by the Leveretts- in US and vassals- talk about “nuking” Iran, the clearer it becomes for the world who the enemies of humanity are. In that sense Iranian policy for the last decade- despite the hardships- has been absolutely brilliant (shout out to my homey Mahmud A on that one).

    2. “They might wanna” is very different than “they’re gonna”- a difference lost on ogde-i people who obsesses about “Islamic disaster” (contrary to evidence in the real world) and losers whose every second word is “rape”. No room for subtle arguments with this crowd (which incidentally comes from being purely theoretically and not practical- ever).

    Notice how those who didn’t and don’t want to actually defend their nation are crying wolf whereas those- officials and “normal” guys- who have been through this before are completely freakin’ relaxed. I don’t know about you, but to me that indicates something.

    Imam (r) said that America can’t do a damn thing and it still holds true. He also said that if they treat Iran with respect, we can have relations with them like any other country. Well, apparently they can’t. So be it.

  98. fyi says:

    Nasser says:
    October 26, 2013 at 1:14 am

    I agree with your conclusion but not with the sequencing.

    In my view, the intent behind the US war in Syria was the prepare the ground for war with Iran as the next step.

    There has been a pause, that is all.

  99. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 26, 2013 at 7:58 am

    After US War against Iraq in 1991, the North Koreans started moving their divisions South.

    They dug around the DMZ and too Seoul hostage.

    They also began their nuclear program so as to be able to threaten all of South Korea and Japan as well as reducing the size of their armed forces.

    Emphatically China is not keeping North Korea safe; Mr. Clinton was on the verge of a new war against North Korea during his first term and not protests came out of China.

    The malaise of Iranian economy, reminiscent of the malaise of French economy, is the something that has made that country vulnerable for at least 2 generations.

    Very many Iranian leaders did not expect Axis Powers to use economic siege war against Iran. They did not expect the financial nuclear bomb – sanctioning of the Central Bank; they lived in a dream-world.

    They have no excuse now; not after the events subsequent to August 21 of this year.

    I personally would not test God to see if he is going to protect me; I rather arm myself and be ready for war.

  100. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 26, 2013 at 9:50 am

    As I stated before, they are oblivious to empirical observations.

    The fact remains that for 10 years journalistic threats against Iran have been emanating from Axis Powers.

    They would not have dared make such cavalier assertions about bombing Iran if they knew that retaliation would be swift and certain.

    They make no such noises against Russia or China – in fact, I am metaphysically certain of the extreme fright they would experience if they faced real prospects of war with either country.

    Iranians have been weak for too long and need to be able to retaliate in kind as well as to escalate.

    That Iran does not have the ability to snuff out the House of Saud and remove the source of the scourge of Sunni fanaticism from the world of Islam, she is cannot threaten Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia with military action to spare Syria.

    That is what is needed, the ability to take war to those who have brought it to Iran.

    One must be grateful to the Axis Powers for the valuable lessons they are beating into senseless heads in Tehran.

    Thank you.

  101. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 26, 2013 at 7:58 am

    “Likewise if Israel didnt have great military capabilities they wouldnt have won most of their wars and is the reason why no neighbour try to attack it, because they know it wont work.”

    Since you say Israel won most of her wars, do you know which war(s) she lost and if the war(s) she lost were with any of her neighbors or if perhaps if they were with super extra-terrestrial Martian Terrorists?
    Since we know Israelis and their American sponsors can only lose to super supermen or supper mucho extra-terrestrial creature from out of space, can you explain if in fact they lost any wars what was the reason
    These military strong Israelis lost these wars and to who and with what.

    By the way you picked a perfect subject which upon your reply we will continue exploring further.

  102. Karl.. says:


    Israel have problem assymetric forces, this problem does not Iran have. Iran face threats from state powers.

  103. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 26, 2013 at 11:55 am

    I think you are quite correct in this assessment; Israel has waged many military operations in Lebanon, Syria, Sudan, in Palestine, on the Arabian Peninsula and Iran since the signing of the Camp David Accords since her nuclear weapons have made her invulnerable to retaliation in kind.

  104. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 26, 2013 at 11:55 am

    Karl, you are doing the same thing you did yesterday, in Persian they call this doing “tafreh” meaning diverting ignoring the a direct question asked
    Here is one more time if according to you Israel didn’t win all her wars which wars she lost and to whom and why, if Israel is so military power full why she didn’t or couldn’t use her full power not to lose (THE) war(s).

    Karl don’t be like your buddies fyi and Smithy warm up act, if you want to play you need to answer the question raised directly, otherwise you wouldn’t get to play.
    Since you don’t seem to have enough experience at this, here is a hint one need not to comment on all subjects and issues coming up on the board, if you can’t keep hold of yourself like fyi you end up getting cornered, to get out of the corner you have pushed yourself in to, you will eventually end up resorting to “Tafreh”, that’s where you will get exposed and use credibility.

    Karl any specific wars Israel lost?

  105. Karl.. says:


    Correct, this shouldnt be surprising for anyone thought.

  106. kooshy says:

    “Emphatically China is not keeping North Korea safe


    Emphatically that’s not factual and in fact emphatically it is a BS,.


    You see comments and statements like this, which without thinking, and on the fly one pulls out of his ass are the ones makes him self-cornered, this guy can’t restrain his desire for commenting on every subject even if it cost him being laughed at.

    Look fyi ALAMEH jaan the safety China is giving to NK is not with his or her nuclear bombs it at the UN can you deny that?

  107. James Canning says:


    China, Russia and the other members of the P5+1 are working together in an effort to resolve the Iranian nuclear dispute. We can expect the six powers to continue to work together, and in so doing to seek to protect global peace and stability.

    China and Russia favor quicker relief from sanctions for Iran. Overall unity is being maintained.

  108. James Canning says:


    Obama certainly did not view a US missile strike on Syria, as a result of the CW attack in August, as necessarily leading to a US war with Iran. Obama in fact does not want such a war.

    Aipac, and Netanyahu, and other elements of the Israel lobby, very likely were hoping a US missile strike on Syria would have led to war with Iran.

    Russia is taking the lead in trying to achieve a diplomatic resolution of the Syrian civil war.

  109. kooshy says:

    Alameh fyi says:
    October 26, 2013 at 12:09 pm

    “I think you are quite correct in this assessment; Israel has waged many military operations in Lebanon, Syria, Sudan, in Palestine, on the Arabian Peninsula and Iran since the signing of the Camp David Accords since her nuclear weapons have made her invulnerable to retaliation in kind.”

    Alameh jaan

    Israel was directly attacked by hundreds of missiles made and supplied by Iran, not only Iran publicly said and admitted by his highest auditory that she supplied manufactured and provided these missiles to Israel’s opponents she even reconfirmed she will do again and will cooperate with whom ever is fighting ISRAEL , just this year Iran’s ayatollah Khamenie said that if ISRAEL make the mistake “of retaliating” Iran will level Tel aviv and Haifa.

    Can you answer why ISRAEL and or her nuclear armed supporters didn’t dare to reply and answer or stop Iran ?

    You can’t , not with this continued tiring not thought through statements like this one that on the fly you lament out of your biased ass instead of your head.

  110. kooshy says:

    Alameh FYI this for you

    وی با اشاره به ضعف رژیم صهیونیستی در تهدید نظامی علیه جمهوری اسلامی ایران خاطرنشان کرد: رژیم صهیونیستی که امکانات هسته‌ای عراق و سوریه را بمباران کرد اما به دلیل توانمندی‌های بازدارنده ایران در عرصه نظامی قطعاً‌ جرأت تعرض به ایران را نخواهد داشت.

    رئیس کمیسیون امنیت ملی مجلس شورای اسلامی با اشاره به پیروزی‌های حزب‌الله لبنان در جنگ‌های 33، 22 و 8 روزه و مقاومت مردم فلسطین در برابر زیاده‌خواهی قدرت‌های استکباری گفت: اینها نشان از اقتدار جمهوری اسلامی ایران در منطقه است و غربی‌ها نیز که با تمام دنیا با زبان زور سخن می‌گویند با موضع متفاوتی در برابر ملت ایران قرار می‌گیرند.

    – See more at: http://farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13920804001382#sthash.GLm6YkwW.dpuf

  111. Karl.. says:


    Why would Israel use nukes because palestinians send some homemade rockets that hardly kill anyone? It makes no sense.

    You seems to beleive that nukes are used in every instance. Completely wrong.

  112. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    October 26, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    Keep telling yourself all of that, may be you come to believe that.

    There is no diplomatic resolution in Syria and none in the Iranian nuclear case.

    Blood has been shed and we are past acts of diplomacy with the Mad King and Venal Barons.

  113. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    October 26, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    Mr. Obama was carrying out the steps to initiate the war against Iran – perhaps under his successor – by preparing to attack Syria.

    It was the revolt of the peasants in UK that stopped the war train against Syria.

    As I stated before, I have come to agree with Mr. Richard Steven Hack’s position.

    Axis Powers failed to unroll the increased Iranian power after the 2003 war against Iraq through economic siege war as well as overthrowing Mr. Assad’s government.

    All the strategies formulated by Mrs. Clintion, Mr. Danilon, Drs. Dunn & Slaughter, and Mrs. Power ended in failure.

    When that became clear in April of 2013, Axis Powers leaders decided on a war in Syria followed by the war against Iran.

    This is where things stand at the moment.

    I expect the German, Italian, and Greek Barons to leave the Court of the Mad King – eventually.

  114. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 26, 2013 at 3:22 pm

    Why would Israel use nukes because Palestinians send some homemade rockets that hardly kill anyone? It makes no sense.
    So it was just homemade missiles that were fired by Hezbollah or Fajr 5 missiles that were fired against Tel Aviv by Hamas not to mention the one that nocked Israeli cruiser back in 2006 or you don’t know if they were made in Iran with love?

    “You seem to believe that nukes are used in every instance. Completely wrong.”

    So now you say the big guns the nuclear ones are reserved and will be used for the big war, so they are the one that are protecting Israel’s longevity?, you are purposely completely wrong and out context, here is the secret that people like you know but rather not to think about, publicly talk and admit, that is, if it was not for US protection of Israel, by buying, bullying, and installing Arab dictatorial client states around Israel, all and I mean all far and near Israel Arab states with their full population will invade and destroy Israel in few days, regardless if Israel has or not, uses or don’t, her nuclear arms ( I personally don’t think and history has proven she can’t and won’t dare to use them, and I am sure far before that is even thought of the Israeli elites will run to Europe and US) that’s a fact you should consider for any future personal planning, like this Israeli gate contractor did and told me, recently coming back from Israel, he went back and brought his whole family to LA.

  115. Irshad says:

    fyi says:
    October 26, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    Further from what you wrote above, this should put things in the wider context re: the bloody game Saudi and US aswell as other satraps have been playing since the invasion of Iraq:

    What Did the Qatari Minister Tell His Saudi Counterpart?


  116. Karl.. says:


    Yes homemade and it wasnt an iranian rocket in 2006 it was a russian.

    You still havent told us why Israel would use nukes against those homemade rockets. I dont think you understand why states have nuclear weapons at all.

  117. Irshad says:

    For whats it worth, in regards to te pro-nuclear Iran view versus thw anti – my 2cents is, Iran will in the long run will need nukes, just look at how the Western nations have treated Libya – noone mentions the Libya disarmamnent model for Iran an how they turn a blind eye to Isreals/India/Pakistan nukes. With NK they can afford to make lot of noise as NK is not a threat to England, France or mainland USA. Its a threat to Japan and South Korea – and if they turned a blind eye to NK nukes, then both Japan and S.Korea will be dashing for their own nukes as deterrent, which will upset the balance of power with China, who the US and EU need to help them out of their economic woes.

    Well anyway, with all the high hopes people are pinning on an agreement with Pr. Rouhanis govt and the US, if this does not materialise, then at least Iran can tell the world – for whats it worth – we tried out best to come to terms with the mad king (thanks fyi) – but his too deranged to make a deal with us. Therefore since Iran is paying the high economic and diplomatic price even without a nuke (interestingly NK has a diplomatic relarions with England and her central bank is not under sanctions) then Iran will leave the NPT. She can then set up her own escalation ladder, ie if the war on Syria continues, if Shias are being demonised and killed by Saudi backed takfiris and the mad king is not doing anything ro stop her puppets, then Iran will test a nuke device for scientific research, ala India, and so on.

  118. Irshad says:

    kooshy says:
    October 26, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    There are people who claim that Isreal had nuclear tipped Jericho missles at firing positions to blackmail Mr Nixon to re-supply Isreal with weapons, that she lost/used up in the early stages of the 1973 Arab-Isreali war. When US satelites detected them, the US got the message and the tap was allowed to be fully open, including supplying the Hawk sam system which played a deadly role in shooting down Egyptian Migs. So Isreals nukes did pay off, at her most critical moment pf possible defeat, she got the US to blink and supply her with weapons. The Arabs are aware of Isreals nukes, and ensure their wars are limited in scope and objective as they realise Cairo, Damascus, Amman, Riyadh etc will be turned to radioactive dusts and they rather preserve their own throne then see the re-conquest of historical Palestine. This can be seen today – the Arabs want to sit down and have peace talks with Nethanyahu even though his a thug and lunatic who are killing/wounding/arresting Palestinians and building on their land in WB and desecrating the religious sites in Haram al-Sharif. But they cannot bare to think about sitting down with Bashar Assad to end the bloodshed in Syria, because his shia, a tool of Iran, is an heretic, got blood on his hands etc.

  119. nico says:

    kooshy says:
    October 26, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    Obviously correct.
    Without western support, Israel would be nothing. With or without Israeli nukes.
    Israel is the symbol of the west dominance over the muslim civilization and countries.
    Or put another way Israel is the symbol of muslims humiliation and position in the sewer of the world order.

    That is why Israel as the jewish state is simply unsustainable on the long run. Like South Africa.
    And that is why the zionists and the west are allied, each one for their own reason, in keeping the muslims in the sewer.

    Like bombing back to stone age. Or supporting stone age like regimes.

    That is why nukes are a necessity for Iran.
    However nuclear capable state or nuclear weapon state is not that much a difference.
    Iran is now a de facto nuclear state.
    Nothing will change that.
    The game is over.

  120. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    October 26, 2013 at 1:54 pm
    Is that supposed to be a joke?
    Just how are they “working together” to resolve this exactly,james?,I`ve seen no sign of this “working together” that you talk about apart from them adding more sanctions and trying to destroy syria,indeed it seems to me that it was only because of the failure of these that the west got serious about negotiating an end to the impasse,and even then I remain unconvinced as to the sincerity of the west to pursue good faith negotiations

  121. Rehmat says:

    Michael Hayden, a four-star US Air Force General, visited Tel Aviv as Romney’s adviser in September 2012. He told Israeli daily Haaretz that Iran would not be able to produce a nuclear device before 2014. He also expressed doubts that Israeli Air Force could knock out Iran’s facilities on its own, saying that there were elements required “which only the US Air Force would be able to do”.


  122. Dan Cooper says:

    BiBiJon says:
    October 26, 2013 at 7:47 am


    See from 23:53 mark.

    Charlie Rose sounds like an Israeli agent when he questions an Iranian diplomat; compare his style of questioning when he interviews an Israeli diplomat.

  123. Neil M says:

    Bibi should make the most of his ability to seem interesting and relevant to the MSM echo chamber. He runs a grave risk of inviting Russia to stand up and be counted if his hysterical threats against Iran continue. The last thing US/Obama’s image needs right now is a public warning from Lavrov that Iran is just as big a “Nyet” for Russia as Syria was, and will remain. Doing Israel’s bidding has already cost the USA trillions of dollars and the vast majority of its Superpower and Honest Broker myths. One more GWoT slip like Syria and the US will become as big a laughing stock as “Israel” became when the IDF was sent home from Lebanon in tears and disarray.

    Neither “Israel” nor what used to be the US of A can afford to pursue their trumped up charges against Iran. If there’s any common sense left in the US, now is the time to put it on display.

  124. nico says:

    “Intelligence minister says even at 3.5% enrichment, Tehran could weaponize within months, make 5-7 bombs in first year.”


    Steinitz is obviously correct.
    Once Iran has ten NPP with enough centrifuges to feed them, as it is planned, material for bombs would be easy to get.
    The game has always been to completely deny Iran the knwoledge by discouraging Iran and trough pressure.
    Though, Iran is now a nuclear state and there is no turning back.

    As stated by the general Odon any face off is first and foremost a battle of will.
    Iran has been winning battles of will for years.
    Actually if the US were serious about their will and threat they would have waged war on Iran years ago.
    The US has already de facto accepeted a nuclear Iran.
    That is finished. Case closed.

    Well that is a huge failure for the US and minions.
    After Irak, Afghanistan and the shia crescent.

  125. Karl.. says:


    I was wrong too, the 2006 missiles were chinese.

  126. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    “Islamic disaster” coming to the rescue of rural poor in Mississippi.

    Just watch, I’m certain kos-khol and loser will find a way to crap on this as well. Maybe a little “health care”- of the mental kind- could help them.

    Curing Mississippi’s blues with Iranian care?



    Iran has developed an integrated health system. The foundation of the system is a network of community health houses staffed by locals who create a cultural competency and affinity with the people they are serving.

    “I looked at the numbers of what they were achieving and infant mortality dropped by 70 percent, health disparities between urban and rural populations disappeared and they provide care to the farthest villages in rural Iran. To me this was a remarkable achievement,” said Miller.

    In Iran’s health care system, remote village health houses are the first line of defense, staffed by villagers known as behvarzes.

    The behvarzes are trained to provide basic health services for villages of up to 1,500 people who live within an hour’s walking distance. Male behvarzes take care of sanitation, water testing and environmental projects. The women concentrate on child and maternal health, family planning, vaccinations and tracking each family’s births, deaths and medical histories. There are currently about 17,000 health houses across the country serving 23 million rural Iranians.

    Dr. James Miller, director of Oxford International Development Group in Mississippi, during his recent visit to Tehran, Iran.

    Miller explained why he thinks the Iranian system is so successful: “It provides easy access to primary health care services.”

  127. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Golden quote:

    “While politics have long stymied cooperation, Miller believes now is the time for a breakthrough.

    “I think now, we have a chance to put [the Iranian model] into play and that could be a miracle.””

    I think the good doctor used the word “MIRACLE”- not “disaster”.

    Tu ruhet!

  128. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Meanwhile- instead of providing health care for the rural poor- the US govt was working hard on this:

    US ‘operates 80 listening posts worldwide, 19 in Europe, and snooped on Merkel moby 2002-2013’


    Western civilization and democracy is dead. Long live Islamic civilization and democracy!

  129. BiBiJon says:

    Dan Cooper says:
    October 26, 2013 at 9:14 pm

    Regrading Robert Einhorn’s http://www.brookings.edu/research/speeches/2013/10/24-nuclear-deal-possible-iran-einhorn

    Other than his proposed ingredients of a deal being identical to What Mohammad Javad Larijani, and other Iranian officials have been proposing for years, there was this little glaring contradiction: Use of Force.

    On the one hand, Einhorn maintains Iran’s nuclear advances can not be halted by military action. He explains:

    whether military force is used by Israel, the United States, or both, the risks and uncertainties are substantial. A major uncertainty is whether the setback to Iran’s nuclear program would be short-lived or more durable. Another major uncertainty is the impact of retaliatory measures by Iran or its surrogates. The potential impacts range from manageable provocations to large-scale armed conflict.

    Perhaps the most worrisome potential downside of the military option is that it could trigger an Iranian decision to kick out inspectors, withdraw from the NPT, and move as quickly as possible to build nuclear weapons. It could give Iranian advocates of early nuclear weaponization something they’ve wanted for years – a green light to cross the nuclear threshold.


    But, on the other hand, Einhorn maintains the fantasy that after a deal, the military option is somehow a crucial guarantee.


    If Russia and China resisted such a resolution, the United States and other interested states should make clear that, in the absence of a timely and effective response by the Security Council to non-compliance, they are prepared to take any necessary actions to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.


    Surely, the point at which Iran feels she had better arm herself, is a point where threats of “taking necessary action” is way down the list of imminent calamities that prompted Iran to decide to acquire nukes post haste.

    So, if not logic, then what is making Einhorn want to keep the military threat on the table after a deal? Because, methinks, he does not want a nuclear deal to lead to rapprochement. Completely coincidentally, that is Israel’s real red line, (or fantasy).

  130. M.Ali says:

    I agree with Kooshy. Israel like North Korea, it is not the nukes that are keeping it safe, but the big arms of a protector.

    US’s highest aid is to Israel. Second and third are Egypt & Jordan, is it just a coincidence that they happen to be Israel’s neighbors?

    Refer to:

  131. nico says:


    Much likely Israel has a first strike nuclear doctrine.
    Like the US first strike doctrine which was openly directed to Iran and NK.
    Make no mistake if Iran is under attack and retaliate by sinking US ships ane closing the SoH then there is good chance for Teheran to be nuked.

    Is the Iranian nuclear program supporting Iran independent stance and power position.
    Obviously yes.

    Is it the only medium for Iran to gain and keep its independence
    Obviously not.
    For the moment the US are still bogged down in Afghanistan as they were in Irak. That is the main reason for not waging war againdt Iran.
    Another reason is Iran strategic depth and China as well as Russia being against further chaos and regional war in the ME.

  132. fyi says:

    Neil M says:
    October 27, 2013 at 12:35 am

    I think Russian leaders made a serious mistake when they sanctioned Iran in 2010.

    They failed to comprehend that the US position vis-à-vis Iran was always one of regime change.

    Even after the debacle in Libya, they refused to change their tack on Iran – bilateral trade is less that $ 1.5 billion a year.

    The events in Syria subsequent to August 21th 2013 might have served to wake them up from their assumptions.

    Or not.

    They have now in a position in which they have helped undermine their own security by undermining Iran’s.

    They gave too much credence to Americans’ protestations that their beef with Iran was primarily due to her nuclear program – which the Russians opposed out of nuclear envy.

    Now Russian leaders have to make a choice on the quality and quantity of aide they are willing to render Iran to prepare her for potential war with US and her allies.

  133. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:
    October 27, 2013 at 6:57 am

    Mr. Einhorn’s demands on Iran cannot be met; may be the Larijani brothers have agreed with his demands, but others in Iran do not.

    For what he is saying is a permanent mothballing and further dismantlement of key nuclear sites and a pledge not to innovate and not to improve things.

    Some others in the West have mentioned “10 years” instead of the word “permanent”.

    So, Iran is to dismantle Arak HWR as well as the Heavy Water Plant itself and rely on the dubious promises of Axis Powers to supply a light-water reactor as well as fuel for it?

    Like the “Agreed Framework” which Americans the reactor parts of which they never intended to fulfill?

    And how about the fuel?

    Is Iran to be permanently dependent on the good-will of Russia and Axis Powers for the fuel supply?

    Will Iran be permitted to import uranium from her own mines in Africa?

    The reactor of Darkhovin would be the other national Iranian project which could not be realized as Iranians would no longer be working on developing the needed technologies for its construction.

    And even with all of these disadvantages for Iran, Mr. Einhorn considers this not a good deal for Axis Powers.

    No, I suppose not.

    The good deal would come when Iranians are essentially left with a toy enrichment plant – after 15,000 of the existing centrifuges have been destroyed per this agreement – and Axis Powers ponce on her under this or that made-up excuse, just like in Libya.

    You are entitled to your opinion if you think this deal, which unrolls Iranians’ nuclear achievements and permanently abridges their ability to develop their unclear industries is a good one.

    I think it is garbage.

  134. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 27, 2013 at 5:26 am

    “I was wrong too, the 2006 missiles were chinese.”

    Do you think China will supply Hezbollah with land based anti-ship missiles? You agree that line above you wrote is pure stupid
    The Noor missiles were manufactured in and by Iran of a chines design (C802) it is called Noor, here is a prediction for you, as Ayatollah Khamenei said in his Norooz speech, Iran will do it again if and when it becomes necessary. Like what Israel is for US, Hezbollah is part of Iran’s Strategic Depth, it can’t and wouldn’t be abandoned, again like the case of Israel for the west, Iran wouldn’t have created Hezbollah if she was going to give it up, ironically Hezbollah was not created and strengthen just to standup against Israel and west, it was created to safeguard the western shieh communities against all possible security difficulties as it was just shown in case with Syria or in 2006 in case with Israel or 1982 with hegemonic US/France. Everyone including you should agree they have done an outstanding job.

  135. Karl.. says:


    Who said China gave it to Hezbollah? I said the missile itself is chinese.


  136. kooshy says:

    Spy vs. Spy: Iran, Turkey, and Israel Edition

    Turkey is fertile ground for Iran-related intelligence operations, and Israel recently blew one.
    By Philip Giraldi • October 22, 2013

    All of which is to say that in the world of smoke and mirrors there are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. Ignatius reveals a tale likely fed to him by his Israeli contacts that seeks to exonerate their own failings while casting Turkey in a negative light for exposing an operation against nearly everyone’s preferred enemy of choice, Iran. But, of course, it is more complicated than that. Israel’s increased regional isolation makes a working relationship with it less of an asset than it might have been 20 years ago, while Iran appears to be moving towards an enhanced international role and relevance.

    The Turks understand that very well.

  137. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 11:21 am

    Yes, there are elements of Einhorn’s wish list which are unlikely to be agreed to by Iran. At the end of the day both sides need to be satisfied. The main element of P5+1’s satisfaction are:

    a) AP and additional AP, i.e. full transparency
    b) Amount of stock piles of material in a ready-to-enrich form
    c) Whether or not Iran reprocess byproducts of heavy water reactor(s)

    The rest of what is said is not impertinent, and rude. They get away mouthing it off in their own think-tank bubbles. At the negotiating table it is very different.

    I don’t have an opinion on what would be a good deal for Iran. But I think Iran agrees with Kerry that no deal is better than a bad deal, and also that, as per Einhorn, failure to agree on something is not an option.

  138. BiBiJon says:

    I meant is impertinent, and rude.

  139. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 27, 2013 at 12:09 pm

    Was it manufactured in Mars, do you think Israelis can ever be defeated by any one less of Martians?
    If they did or you accept that they have, will that be against what you have ever imagined?
    Have you finished high School yet?

  140. Karl.. says:


    Just told you how it is, C802 is a chinese missile.

    You have yet to respond why Israel would use nukes at that instance.

  141. fyi says:


    Russian American cooperation against Iran – accurate in my view:


  142. Karl.. says:


    October 27, 2013 at 11:10 am
    October 27, 2013 at 12:59 pm

    I agree, this will hurt russia in the end though because nato/US are coming nearer and nearer the russian border. Russia had its chance with Iran and also with Syria but no they didnt take it.

  143. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 27, 2013 at 1:12 pm


    And this only feeds into the sense of strategic isolation in Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, and Beirut; that they are on their own and masters of their own security and well-being.

    I think it will be a good idea for Iranian leaders to agree to a worthless and strategically meaningless agreement sometime in 2014.

    It could buy sometime for Iran until US attacks.

  144. kooshy says:

    Irshad says:
    October 26, 2013 at 5:47 pm

    Irshad Jaan

    Even if this story be taken at face value for what it is , is obvious the countries at war with Israel in 1973 were not scared of Israel’s nukes nor Israel’s nukes scared them not to lunch an out all multi front attack.
    Now if according to what you allude if US was scared of Israel and bought them off that’s US’s preference of problem, obviously not Egypt’s or Syria before they were bought up by camp David .

    Besides what I said I stand by if Israel is not protect by US specially buying up Arab elite tyrant neighbors of Israel, Israel will throw in the sea by the real Arab street in matter of few days, that’s a fact that one state two state ten state will not change for foreseeable future, one day the capitalist specially the western Jewish capitalist will see that this is a not a good investment and capital return on investment no longer holds.
    Besides, historically this is nothing new and has happened several times before and can and will happen again. I have learned, from real history professional that analysis and recounting of historic events cannot be based only on various varying statements by people with possible biases , or just written accounts of events by who knows who, motif and common sense at the time and in the environment of the event should also by heavily considered. I believe in her current position, in this time an assembled working nuclear bomb is not in Iran’s interest, Iran’s major threat is not US or Israel, Iran’s major threat is scarring the Arab Sunni street in a major provocative way. Unfortunately that threat will always be there and nuclear bomb will not solve it, if it did it would have solved Israel’s alienation in her neighborhood, which as you say the nukes she had didn’t prevent Arab armies attacking her in 73 and only US was able to help her and not her nukes scaring any Arab away, or even scaring Hezbollah and Iran taking her soldiers and firing missiles at her.

    Now you tell me why Iran that doesn’t have an assembled nuclear bomb (according to all major intelligence services) has been successful in deterring a US direct attack on her, when US was the lone superpower controlling the UN, and Iran was at her weakest in all manners of economic (oil at less than $10) Militarily (no major missile manufacturing) and politically (with one real distant neighbor, Syria). When one can prove and conclude that Iran’s security situation has since changed to worst, is when one can and should start recommending and spending financial and POLITICAL resources on newer more capable deterrence.

    For now this line is part of a campaign by MKA and Israelis to demonize Iran as Iran is lying since that’s the only way she has in maintaining and establishing her long term security, which is completely false in fact it will increase Iran’s insecurity in many different ways.

  145. fyi says:


    I find this article to provide a useful analytical framework for thinking about the Near East:


  146. fyi says:


    The way I read this article, Mr. Obama’s war plans against Syria were understood to be preparations for a future war with Iran.

    And as Mr. Beinart observes, a path for ending Iran-US Cold War has not been taken.


  147. fyi says:


    North Korea’s Central Bank is not sanctioned.

    And we have the “Red carpet treatment of Pakistan”:


    As I said before, NPT, UN, and other vestiges of the Peace of Yalta are dead.

    Let the Arabs and Africans continue believe in them – there were Cargo Cults in South Pacific for decades after the end of World War II as well.

  148. kooshy says:

    Irshad says:
    October 26, 2013 at 5:47 pm

    Irshad Jaan

    Upon reading your yesterday’s comment to me again in home and on a larger screen, your comment is not sensible. Here is what I think don’t make sense
    As you wrote, are Arabs aware and scared of Israel’s nukes capable of destroying their cities, Cairo Damascus etc. that they won’t attack Israel?
    Or is it that they weren’t and are not scared therefore they did attack Israel in a multi front major way that Israel ends up to threaten and ask for US help to defend herself?
    Thirdly which Arabs are the ones who want to sit down and have peace talks with Nutnyaboo? If I’m not mistaking no independent Arab is asking or willing to have a peace talks with Israel except elite Arab western client states, which ironically as you know even that hasn’t worked and will not work and not now there exist any peace . What is value of having peace with Abbas or Sisi, when no peace is ever possible with the Arab streets.

    This statements can’t be in same sentence, and swallowed down even with a jar of honey

  149. nico says:

    kooshy says:
    October 27, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    “Now you tell me why Iran that doesn’t have an assembled nuclear bomb (according to all major intelligence services) has been successful in deterring a US direct attack on her, when US was the lone superpower controlling the UN, and Iran was at her weakest in all manners of economic (oil at less than $10) Militarily (no major missile manufacturing) and politically (with one real distant neighbor, Syria). When one can prove and conclude that Iran’s security situation has since changed to worst, is when one can and should start recommending and spending financial and POLITICAL resources on newer more capable deterrence.”

    Attacking Iran has been on US agenda for a while as General Wesley Clark publicly denounced.
    American policies have been conducted according to the plan for more than a decade.
    One would say for 20 years or so.

    Circumstances saved Iran up to now. Fate or god if it has your preference.
    First the US strategic defeat in Irak and then the Qagmir in Afghanistan saved Iran.
    Now the window for unilateral intervention has been closed in Syria just because of China and Russia rise and western economic woes.

    Iran has been embargoed for year, like Irak before, to be soften up.
    And the Iran nuclear case has been cooked up in order also to build a case for war according to Mr Ross confidences.

    Iran strategic depth is an important element but that much of a problem for the US.

    Again the real issue, like in Irak and Afghanistan is the issue of will and ideology of resistance.
    That can not be destroyed by conventional weapon but only by mass murder and genocide like Hiroshima or Dresden bombing.
    The issue for the US is to have a way to control the war aftermath and avoid an uncontrollable whole ME a la Lybia with ensuing problem in oil shipment.

    As a conclusion my take is that nuking Iran is obviously a desirable outcome for mad neocon and other supremacist but the circumstances are not ripe and such conjonction of circumstances is not likely go obtain in the future.

    Obviously the next question is do you want to be subject of “likely” circumstances or do you want to manage your own future.
    When history and geopolicy show that we are in a time of global economic crisis, civilizational power shift, near end of the USD status as a world currency, hatred and sectarianism, and so on…?

    I agree with you that – for time being and foreseeable future – having a peacefull and powerfull nuclear program without weaponization is in the best interest for Iran. And the line needs to be treaded carefully.
    But the Japan option is in my view mandatory and it would be criminal against one own interest and intellectual bankruptcy to discard it.

  150. James Canning says:


    We should bear in mind that all Arab countries agreed to accept Israel within its “1967” borders.

  151. James Canning says:


    Russia is trying to prevent a war with Iran from erupting, if possible. You should be glad for this. In turn, Iran should pay close attention to Russian advice on how to resolve the nuclear dispute.

  152. James Canning says:

    Neal M,

    Obama has made it clear he is not seeking regime change in Iran. One can conceive, however, that Obama could be forced to change his position.

  153. James Canning says:


    The US in reality does not have a policy of using nukes on a first-stike basis. Your assertions on that score are quite wrong, because you fail to consider the demands of the Israel lobby and other lobbies for agressive statements that do not reflect reality.

  154. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    October 27, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    “Kooshy,We should bear in mind that all Arab countries agreed to accept Israel within its “1967″ borders.”

    The issue is that Israel do not that, whatever they lie about it.
    And the zionists want Jerusalum for themeselves alone.
    And Israel is an apartheid state.

  155. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    October 27, 2013 at 3:29 pm

    “Nico,The US in reality does not have a policy of using nukes on a first-stike basis”

    Who cares about what the US lies are ?
    Anyway Oboma publicly declared the opposite.

  156. Karl.. says:


    Do you seriously people here believe the lie that obama doesnt seek regime change?

  157. Smith says:


    Serbia manufactures these wonderful patrol vehicle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_EVS1rs_p0

    Iran smuggles in the second hand Toyota pick-up trucks from Afghanistan and Iraq and uses them as border patrol vehicles, jamming them with young sarbaz sefr.

    All the while gardan koloft corrupt basijis smuggling in those second hand Toyotas selling them at twice the price of new ones roam in Tehran harassing young girls wearing colorful dresses.

    Yesterday, terrorists killed 14 Iranian soldiers and seriously injuring half a dozen more who were travelling on the back of rusting Toyotas in the open at one of the most dangerous places in Iran bordering Pakistan. It is said, that it was a slaughter. Not even a single terrorist was injured. Almost the entire Iranian border squad was wiped out.

    Iranian government registered its mild protest with Pakistani ambassador (Iran will not retaliate by supporting separatist Baloch in Pakistan since Pakistan is nuclear armed and Iran is not and the escalation is fatal). Iran remains impotent. Weak. When Saddam used to play such games, Iran escalated by supporting Kurdistan regional government which caused Saddam to lose control of Iraqi Kurdistan eventually. There is no such plan for nuclear armed Pakistan obviously. Iran is being increasingly caught between American-Saudi-Pakistani-Indian games.

    Do you think the corrupt and inefficient Iranian industry will be able to produce 5000 vehicles similar to the Serbian one above for border patrols, say in the next two years? After all Iran is going to need them from next year as the border with Pakistan and Afghanistan is going to become even more dangerous with American exit.

  158. Smith says:


    Yesterday after the slaughter of almost unarmed and completely unprotected and minimally trained Iranian soldiers put as border guards on one of the most dangerous borders in the world, Iran hanged 17 mostly sunni baloch prisoners in retaliation.

    Don’t you think, this shows the weakness of Iranian government and military to the point of complete impotency? Do you think a modern state that is in control, should behave this way?

  159. Smith says:


    Do you think Iran has the capability to use armed drone strikes inside Pakistan and send in its army and special forces to take down the sunni terrorists?

    In case of escalation with Pakistan, do you think Israel/USA/France/UK are going to protect Iran by extending their nuclear shield over Iran?

    Do you think a non-nuclear IRI will beg and start sucking Israel’s dick to protect Iran if a “lose” Pakistani nuke/chemical/biological weapons was detonated inside Iran by one of such groups?

  160. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    October 26, 2013 at 1:14 am

    Welcome back.

    That is pretty much it.

    Only nuclear weapons can save Iran now.

    It is too late to go back in history and beg America to take Iran back in her arms.

    For negotiations to be successful IRI must quit and Shah must raise from the dead and become king of Iran again.

  161. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 3:06 pm

    200 years and the Iranian people have not yet understood that “the political legitimacy comes out of the barrel of gun” as Mao had put it.

    My fear is that, Iran will sign several “Golestan” “Treaties” this decade if Iran did not become a nuclear armed state.

  162. Irshad says:

    kooshy says:
    October 27, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    The Americans and the Isreali were fully aware that an attack on Isreali occupation forces in 1973 was limited to the Sinai and the Golan Heights. This was not a war, whose objectives was to recapture Jaffa/Tel Aviv and Al Quds. If you read the writings of Arab military and diplomatic officials (current or former) you will realise that Arabs are mentally defeated and have accepted Isreal in its pre-67 borders. If Isreal ever felt that her investments in Tel Aviv was threathened, and no miltary backing from US is fortcoming, then she will not hesitate to threathen to atleast use her nukes, maybe first letting one explode in the dessert of an Arab country to show she has the means and capability to nuke the Arabs back to the stone age. This will force Arabs and Americans to rethink. Remember Masada! Nasser was aware of this whilst he was planning the 1973 war. As was Gaddafi – in fact he was so incensed he asked Nasser, why dont the Arabs just buy a bomb from Russia or China to offset the Isreali nuke threat, to which Nasser replied, that no one will sell you a nuke bomb. Anyway, this was the time of the Cold War, and the use of nukes will draw in the superpowers .

    You ask, why did Isreals nukes not stop Hezbollah or other Arabs attacking them- my understanding is these attacks is not a threat to Isreal, as a political entity, they are battles either fought on Arab land or WB/Gaza. The rockets attack are a nuisance and maybe at times may kill Isrealis but thats the cost of war.

    You also ask why has Iran not been attacked yet? Again my understanding is, the wars on Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq part 1 and 2, Afghanistan, at the same time the possibility of war in Korean peninisula has kept the Axis powers too busy to engage in a war with Iran. You then had the 2011 financial collapse, which has delayed a possible attack. This has given Iran the breathing room to develop her military capabilties to deter an attack. This also gave time for Russia and China to develop their capabilities – as a attack on Iran is a threat to them both. We are currently at a juncture where the Axis Powers have decided to delay their attack on Iran and maybe a temporarily ceasefire can be agreed. Look how incense the Saudis and Isrealis are. However this can easily change once the Americans/Nato are out of Afghanistan and they may feel they need another foriegn adventure. You do not realise how demonise Iran is – I come across many english people who have a negative view of Iran. I am not Iranian, but seeing what I have seen and said about Iran over the years, including the threats and sanctions (more sanctions on Iran then North Korea, UK govt justifying updating her nukes because of danger “from Iran”) Iran will need to atleast test a nuke device to put some sense in to the minds of Westerners. Better to be ready for the worst and protect your population then hope on the good wishes of two-faced western nuke power.

  163. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    Nuclear weapons are the most beautiful peace keeping instruments.

    There will be no peace without them on planet earth.

    No law, no UN, no court, no ideology can ensure peace on earth.

    Cargo cult is still well and alive kicking and pushing. Even in Iran. Even on this forum.

  164. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    A battle is being fought for domination of this planet and beyond.

    Since ages ago.

    Those who do not fight or reject the necessary tools for this fight, are doomed for destruction and extinction.

  165. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 2:01 pm

    More like Iran vs. US.

    Both Turkey and Saudi are puppets of US.

    They can not survive on their own.

    They take their orders on daily basis from a spectrum of power centers in the west.

    Kurds will never side with Turks. Enmity between them is too large to even be filled with MB ideology, no matter how many non-Sunni Kurds are killed by Sunni kurds and Turks in order to become united.

    Turkey is playing a very dangerous game. Playing sectarian American games in a society like Turkey filled with sects is dangerous. As any sane Pakistani will testify to it.

  166. Karl.. says:

    Glenn Greenwald just twitter that tommorow he will present another NSA-spying-on another-big-country. If only the puppet western states could begin to take a stance against this, that could stop west accepting and following US middle east policy for example.

  167. Smith says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 27, 2013 at 5:24 pm

    Small time whore-barons can not be expected to confront the big bad mad king. It is too much to expect from them.

    The emperor is intentionally naked, standing in his glory with his organs full aroused signalling threatening the world with rape.

    It is just the world does not want to see and admit the emperor is so sick. They rather make fantasy of clothes.

  168. Karl.. says:


    Yes unfortunately, west will keep bending forward for the US, and this nsa-scandal will be buried..

  169. Irshad says:

    kooshy says:
    October 27, 2013 at 2:58 pm

    Thank you for your thoughtful words. Last week Arab FM, Mr Kerry, the FM of various EU states were at a meeting of the “Arab Peace Initiative” – on trying to get Isreal and the Palestinians on the negotiating table. The badis of this is the Saudi 2002 plan and UN Resolution demanding Isreal withdrawal from WB. There is no way the Arabs will be able to get back historic Palestine. Even if their populations wanted to. The will maybe there, but not the means. The dynamics of this has changed and is changing into a religious war. But the Saudis feel they are the champions of Islam and the controller of takfiri terrorism, so they assume they can control this if only Isreal gets out of WB.

    In regards to Iran and nukes – the SL has decided that Iran does not need nukes – now. I will defer to his wisdom and authority but Iranians need to know how hated and despised their system of governance is and the warmongers are not too far off to start something off. She needs to be ready to to build and test a nuke to bring some sense to Western policy makers ( the head of MI6 was a former negotiator with Iran and he has no love for Iran).

  170. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 2:10 pm

    Peter Beinart is smart, and wrong.

    Obama must gave known how unpopular an attack on Assad was both in the US and among Europeans. He knew before Cameron knew how the House of Commons would vote, after all is there an MP whose phone is not tapped?

    AIPAC (and Netanyahu) were deployed in the corridors of congress, not because Obama was serious about a Syria+Iran war, but because there was a rare opportunity to throw AIPAC and Netanyahu under the bus. Obama had no intention of hitting Assad and continues to have no intention of helping the Takfiris.

    If Elliott Abrams is worried about the “New” Middle East Policy, then you know it is real, it is gaining momentum, and all those in its way have been flung way out of the circle.


    You insist on theorizing geopolitics predicated on an unalterable nature of man. Well man is very adaptable. Despite an unchanging nature, he can turn his list of priorities upside down if the need arises. We are in the 13th full year of wars US has fruitlessly waged or got involved it. Just today Juan Cole says over 21,000 Americans have been killed or wounded in Afghanistan. It was time for a course correction, they have corrected, come to private agreements, and are half way through implementing.

    It does involves winking at a threshold nuclear weapon state status for Iran. But that is just the beginning.

  171. kooshy says:

    Irshad says:
    October 27, 2013 at 6:15 pm

    Irshad Jaan

    With all due respect we have difference of opinion on both these points
    1-Possibility of a lasting peace in form of 2 states between Israel and street Arabs (not Arab rulers)
    2-Necessity of fielding an assembled nuclear weapon to deter and protect Iran from her enemies.

  172. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:

    October 27, 2013 at 3:17 pm

    “We should bear in mind that all Arab countries agreed to accept Israel within its “1967″ borders.”


    You guys talk about “Arab Countries Agreed” like these agreements are by and with heads of states that are legitimate, freely elected, representatives of Arab people, what is it worth having an agreement
    We Mubarak, King Abdullah, King of Jordan, Kaddafi, Saddam, etc. who agreed? How representative of his people he she is? There is an agreement called Camp David how likely is it that this agreement will last if a different government comes to power in Egypt. Do you know what is the usual excuse used for throwing an agreement in garbage can; it was forced up on the country by an illegitimate unelected government.

    For a lasting peace there will be a need for a true free referendum which means the Jews will lose since they are the minority among the eligible Palestinian voters, that’s why they wouldn’t agree to a referendum there in Palestine. They are even so scared of Arabs voting that they even don’t permit Arabs to vote in Israel. With that in mind, tell me why and when an ordinary Arab will and should accept Israel as a legitimate state “side by side”? Would you accept Northern Ireland as legitimate independent state? You didn’t, did you Gav.

  173. Irshad says:

    kooshy says:
    October 27, 2013 at 8:18 pm

    1. Hamas has offered a 99 year truce (hudna) to Isreal if 1. She fully pulls out of occupied land including East Jerusalem and 2. Right of return of refugees. Hamas has not demanded historic Palestine. If this deal is good enough for Hamas, as representing the more extreme of Palestinian views as opposed to the spine-less, corrupt PA, then I do not belive Arabs elsewhere will ask for more. This is what I hear Arabs say themselves when this question is asked. In some ways they find Irans involvement in this issue as upsetting this balance that Arabs have come to realised and accept.

    2. Iran’s security needs to be predicated not just on assymetric warfare, electronic warfare, missle force or Hezbollah – she needs to be ready to at least carry out a test explosion ala-India to show the regional nuclear powers and the Axis Powers, we have the means to fully develop a nuke – this is what we can do, dont push us around. Now that will be an extea factor in the Axis Powers calculation if they want a war on Iran. Again I am saying what I say as the demonisation of Iran is now set on the minds of many people in the West. Their leaders can say whatever they like or sanction whatever they want, and their will be no opposition to it. Currently, the Peoples of Us/UK want no more wars hence a temporary truce. Look, England is suffering from high gas prices and will affect millions of peoples income as winter approaches. Iran can easily fill the shortage but noone is suggesting that. Better to let old grannies suffer the cold weather then have let their homes be warmed by gas from Iran. Anyway, lets see how things develop over the next few months.

  174. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 2:01 pm

    I find this article to provide a useful analytical framework for thinking about what the Near East could have been if a long list of devastating mistakes had not been committed by ksa and turkey over the past several years.

    There’s no rivalry. there’s jealousy. Iran is the only power capable of shaping the future of the region. the other 2 are reduced to begging for outsides help which is not forthcoming.

    both countries are reduced



  175. Rehmat says:

    “Iran is currently Israel’s major objective of death-dealing slaughter in the Middle East. The efforts Israel makes to convince the world that Iran has nuclear weapons or wants to develop them have been non-stop. Israel’s propaganda campaign is as constant and effective as anything Herr Goebbels put together in Nazi Germany. Currently, Iran and the P5+1 nations are looking for a way to avoid the “Arab Spring” becoming a dark winter. Until a fair and reasonable solution can be negotiated, Iran will suffer from undeserved sanctions while Israel benefits,” says Paul J. Balles.


  176. fyi says:

    Mr. Irshad:

    You may like to look at Dr. Gerald Schroder’s book: “The Science of God” in which he tries to demonstrate convergence between the Torah and Empirical Sciences.

    I think that his criticism of Darwinism and Neo-Darwinism are both sound.

    He also puts a bold hypothesis forward that there were morphologically identical creatures to Man which were not human – that Adam was the first to be endowed with נשמה neshama (“breath”), i.e. نفس ناطقه.

    This is consistent with Shia Tradition in which to the question: “Who preceded Adam?” is replied: “There was another adam before him.”

    I caution you that Dr. Schroeder is selective in his approach, never elucidating the relationship between nephesh, rauch (روح), and neshama.

    I also think that his writings are uneven and he is one of those who looks for the “God of Gaps”; where there is absence of an explanation based on known scientific methods and models, he sees God’s intervention.

    But over all I think it is an interesting books with useful ideas – although at times it is too contrived, in my opinion.

  177. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    October 27, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    That road was not taken in 2007.

  178. fyi says:

    Irshad says:
    October 27, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    There are now more people in the United States that receive government hand-outs than people working.

    Americans hate Islam and hate Iran, if US leaders attack Iran, vast numbers of them would be ecstatic – until the price of that war starts sinking in.

    The fact remains that Iran has been invaded 3 times in the last hundred years.

    She has been subject to economic siege warfare, both times by the Axis Powers.

    She has been attacked by WMD.

    I should think that it is clear that security of Iran cannot be maintained by any other means than nuclear weapons.

    US or Israeli attacks will only confirm that; not obviate that need.

    The historical Iranian leaders who presided over the loss of historical Iranian territories, I should hope, are now residing in the deepest sections of Hell.

    Regardless of how devoted these leaders were to the Muslim rituals, their inaction, apathy, stupidity, ignorance, and incompetence has condemned millions of people since their time to a beggar’s life.

    I do not care if a brick layer appreciated their Muslim piety; just look at Afghanistan and consider how much the people of Afghanistan could have benefited by being able to partake in the oil wealth of Iran.

  179. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:
    October 27, 2013 at 7:05 pm

    I doubt that Mr. Obama or Mr. Cameron expected the across the political spectrum revolt of the peasants in UK.

    Now, this revolt actually has made Iran’s security worse since US and her allies would no longer be involved in an unwinnable war in Syria for years.

    Axis Powers thus is left with potentialities that could be realized against Iran.

    Withdrawing from NPT is not useful; exploding a nuclear device to dig a big ditch between Iran and Pakistan border to block the border – in the light of the repeated cross-border attacks – is.

  180. fyi says:

    Smith says:
    October 27, 2013 at 4:17 pm

    Actually I think the ruthlessness demonstrated by Iranian Government was essential to her deterrence strategy.

    These men had been condemned to death but their execution had been stayed in order for them to serve as hostages against any future attacks.

    Once the soldiers were attacked and killed, the hostages were killed as well.

    There was no other way – Men are in State of Fall and most cannot grasp either Metaphysics or Economics.

  181. kooshy says:

    I believe Professor Walt has a good analysis on US’s strategic necessities in ME

    Washington and Tehran would maximize U.S. influence and leverage over time. It’s also a useful hedge against unpredictable events: when you become too strongly committed to any particular ally (as the U.S. was once committed to the Shah of Iran), you suffer more damage if anything happens to them.

    Because the United States is not a Middle Eastern power — a geographic reality we sometimes forget — and because its primary goal is the preservation of a regional balance of power, it has the luxury of playing “hard to get.” That’s why it’s not such a bad thing if our present regional allies are a bit miffed at U.S. these days. Remember: they are weaker than the United States is and they face more urgent threats than we do. And if they want to keep getting U.S. protection and support and they are concerned that our attention might be waning a wee bit, they might start doing more to keep U.S. happy.


  182. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 11:48 pm

    If they were convicted and were to be hanged, they should have been hanged. I do not agree that a state should keep hostages. That is just not stately. Even as per Islam, this wrong and laughable.

    A state should create instruments of control and exercise them. The solution is not retaliatory execution (all executions must be as per law unto themselves).

    But then an impotent state, that can not provide its border guards with armored infantry fighting vehicles, a state that shakes in its boots because the state harboring the terrorists is nuclear armed, a state whose custom, police etc are corrupt, I guess has no other choice but take hostages.

    Meanwhile terrorists smuggle cheap subsidized Iranian fuel to Pakistan and barter it for heroin and make huge profits (eg a liter of diesel costs 1.1 dollar in Pakistan) through which they finance their operations: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au3UzkuqACw

    All thanks to corrupt elements, taking their bribes.

  183. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    After the “Mississippi Miracle”, score another one for the “Islamic disaster”…

    Chinese investor converts to Shia Islam in Iran’s Qom



    “He added that following his communications with his Iranian friends, he concluded that no religion is more perfect than Islam and no tradition better than Shia Islam.”

    Closet-case IQ 147 said,

    “That is just not stately. Even as per Islam, this wrong and laughable.”

    1. Somebody who doesn’t follow the command of his wali and is in love with somebody who thinks the Prophet (sawas) should have kept quiet about the revelations has no business telling us what Islam is or is not. Please whatever you do, don’t issue fatwas, OK genius.

    As a matter of fact, holding hostages during war is not a problem and was done by the Prophet (sawas) who exchanged them for ransom.

    Also once convicted, the method and time of execution is at the discretion if hakim shar- in our case the judiciary of the Islamic Republic.

    Good to know what Islam really says, as opposed to just pulling it out of your ass like you do.

    The way shaytan fools intelligent robots like you- who haven’t worked on their akhlaq and nafs- is by making them think that they know everything about everything.

    What’s “wrong and laughable” is your sorry ass.

    2. Where did you do your military service? I doubt that you have the balls to serve even one freakin’ day in any of the border posts anywhere- forget about S and B border.

    As long as this is the case, it’s better that you keep your mouth shut about things that you have zero practical experience with.

    Now get off from behind the computer and go out and play with the other kids.

  184. Nasser says:

    Smith says: October 27, 2013 at 4:37 pm

    Thank you for your response.

    I am afraid I have been too busy lately to meaningfully participate in this forum. But I still try to read comments made by you and fyi whenever I can manage some internet time. So I sincerely hope that you will continue to offer your insights on this forum and not feel discouraged by the trolls, liars and the brain dead amongst the commentators.

    And yes, of course I agree with you that strategic understanding with Washington is no longer possible and only nukes can keep Iran safe. The Americans aren’t softies at heart, and they don’t believe in forgiveness. They wish to punish Iran and have the whole world of Islam burn. I think the biggest benefit that can come out of Dr. Rouhani’s election is to drive this point home to the segment of Iranian society that was always hopeful for a modus vivendi with Washington. The biggest danger has always been in Iran surrendering away her vital security needs and nuclear rights for temporary relief of pain. I am confident that the Supreme Leader will not allow this to happen. The Americans think (or hope) that the election of Rouhani signals that the Iranians are ready to cry uncle. I think they are wrong.

    As I have said many times before, Iran needs to cement her current alliance structure with nuclear weapons. And then try to bribe Pakistan to their side or at least to neutrality. This is the only way to prevent mass slaughter of all these people in the Muslim world suffering encroachment from the twin evils of Western imperialism and Wahabism.

  185. Nasser says:


    Confirming your viewpoint:

    How long before the rest of the world wakes up and catches on to their lies?

  186. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 11:24 pm

    “I doubt that Mr. Obama or Mr. Cameron expected the across the political spectrum revolt of the peasants in UK.”

    EU’s earlier revolt against arming the rebels, Public opinion surveys, and NSA gathered/”vacuumed” intelligence, and a very public insistence of Parliament to be recalled to debate launching missiles at Assad, had made it crystal clear that answering KSA, Turkey, UK, and France’s pleas could at most be an “unbelievably small” token military response.

    Obama had already established his disinclination to be involved in Syria. The exaggerated cries of “Assad brutality” over the years failed to move the WH to order arming of the rebels with weapons heavy enough to tip the balance. This necessitated the first false flag CW episode, which were met with ‘doubts about chain of custody’ excuse for inaction.

    By September, it was so clear that Obama needed help to get out from under UK/France pressure that Russia had to oblige with dispatching a carrier killer, and ultimately a chemical weapons deal.

    “Now, this revolt actually has made Iran’s security worse since US and her allies would no longer be involved in an unwinnable war in Syria for years. Axis Powers thus is left with potentialities that could be realized against Iran.

    By this logic, failure to attack Iran (a metaphysical certainty) will only add to the available dry powder to launch an attack on Russia, which in turn, because that too won’t happen, will make available a mountain of potentialities to toss in the direction of China.

    “Withdrawing from NPT is not useful; exploding a nuclear device to dig a big ditch between Iran and Pakistan border to block the border – in the light of the repeated cross-border attacks – is.”

    Plain silly!

    Look, fyi, US has only but one choice: leave, and wait to be invited for partnership by a regional actor who is credible. That regional actor is not KSA, is not Turkey. They are both washed up. Everything they do. achieves nothing but chaos. The only levers at their disposal are a bunch of cannibals they can barely control, let alone being able to guarantee a favorable outcome from all the strife they cause.

    There is only one credible actor in the region, and that is Iran. Period.

    Resorting to notions of ‘popular hatred for Muslims’, and ‘popular hatred for Iran’ just shows that you do not have any realpolitik basis for RSH’s any-day-now war.

    Both sides realize war is prohibitively expensive. US is persuaded that she can work with Iran to establish a positive agenda for the region. Read what Wendy Sherman has to say. Take a peek at Susan Rice’s new ME policy. The train has already left the station.

  187. M.Ali says:

    Refute by logic:

    “Iranian government registered its mild protest with Pakistani ambassador (Iran will not retaliate by supporting separatist Baloch in Pakistan since Pakistan is nuclear armed and Iran is not and the escalation is fatal). ”

    Two arguments are made.

    1) Iran registered a MILD protest
    2) Will not retaliate by supporting Baloch.

    The reason for this is given that Iran is Pakistan is nuclear armed.

    So, let us look at it again with a cause and effect, and go from effect to cause.

    The effect is,
    1) Iran registering only a MILD protest
    2) Iran not retaliating by supporting a proxy

    The cause for this is that the other state is Nuclear Armed.

    As no other reason seems to be given for the reasons why for Iran’s actions, one can easily test this hypothesis given by Smith.

    So, lets test logic by applying it to other situations.

    First we start with Iran registering only a mild protest.

    During the IRI’s history, Iran has registered HEAVY protests against USA, Britian, France, Canada, Russia, and Israel over various situations and incidents. All the previous countries are nuclear armed. If the first part of Smith’s reason was accurate, than it would mean that Iran would mean that Iran would only registered MILD protests against those countries.

    So, lets now look at the other point, the use of supporting groups which are against a nuclear state. Iran has supported both Hezbollah in Lebanon and groups in Palestine, which were in a conflict with nuclear-armed Israel. If the thesis held true, then it would mean that Iran would never support Hezbollah and Hamas and other groups in Palestine, because Israel was nuclear armed.

    Therefore, I think I have shown with simple reasons that the causes of Iran’ actions are not directly related to nuclear armed Pakistan

  188. M.Ali says:


    Two questions.

    1) Are you Iranian?
    2) Are you in Iran?

  189. fyi says:


    Two items from late Mr. Khomeini – as related by Mr. Saeq Tabatabie (in Persian)

    در همان اوایل دهه ۶۰، تلاش ها و زمزمه هایی برای جداسازی فضاهای آموزشی دانشجویان دختر و پسر در دانشگاه ها شروع شده بود. امام(ره) می گفتند مگر دختر و پسر در سر کلاس درس استاد چه می خواهند بکنند که باید میانشان پرده باشد و سپس افزودند نباید به جوانان و دختران و پسرانی که دو سه سال دیگر وارد فضای اجتماعی و مدیریت جامعه می شوند، این گونه توهین روا داشت و تخم بدبینی را نسبت به آنان در دل پاشید.

    آیت ا… خامنه ای که در آن زمان علاوه بر ریاست جمهوری، امام جمعه تهران نیز بودند در خطبه نمازجمعه به این موضوع و بیان نظر امام پرداختند. با وجود این یک روز آقای دکتر شیخ الاسلامی که استاد راهنمای خواهرم بودند، هنگامی که وارد کلاس می شوند مشاهده می کنند که وسط کلاس پرده کشیده اند. در جواب اعتراض ایشان، گفته می شود که به دستور انجمن اسلامی این کار صورت گرفته است.

    آقای دکتر شیخ الاسلامی می گویند اگر این پرده را جمع نکنید، درس نخواهم داد. فایده ای نداشت. از این رو ایشان به اتاق رئیس دانشکده برمی گردند و از طریق تماس با دفتر امام به خواهرم زنگ می زنند که ماجرا را به امام بگوید و از ایشان کسب تکلیف کند. امام با تندی زایدالوصفی می گویند به این کار ها خاتمه دهید و ببینید این افراد به کجا وصل هستند و توسط چه جریان منحرفی تحریک شده اند. در مورد دیگری فکر می کنم سال۶۲ یا سال ۶۳ بود.

    چند روزی به ماه رمضان مانده بود. امام آقای محمد هاشمی رئیس وقت صدا و سیما را احضار کردند. وقتی ایشان آمد، من هم در دفتر امام حضور داشتم و آقای هاشمی که قدری نگران بود از من علت احضار خود را جویا شد. من هم خبر نداشتم و با هم نزد امام رفتیم. امام به آقای هاشمی گفتند: شنیده ام به مناسبت ماه رمضان دستورالعمل داخلی صادر کرده اید و گفته اید در ایام ماه رمضان در طول روز، موسیقی از رادیو و تلویزیون پخش نشود و دیگر اینکه مجریان مرد در تلویزیون در این ماه ریش خود را نتراشند. آقای هاشمی تلویحاً تائید کرد و گفت بله مسئولان شبکه ها ظاهراً این کار را کرده اند.

    امام با حالتی تند ولی آمیخته با محبت گفتند چرا اصرار دارید ریاکاری و دورویی را رواج دهید؟ کسی که به فتوای مجتهدی تراشیدن ریش را بدون اشکال می بیند، چرا مجبورش می کنید در ماه رمضان ریاکاری کند؟ درمورد پخش موسیقی هم گفتند موسیقی یا حرام است یا حرام نیست. اگر حرام است، روز و شب ندارد و اگر حرام نیست، چرا به گونه ای عمل می کنید که شائبه حرمت دینی بوجود آید؟ اگر امروز این کار ها را وارد دین کردید و لعاب دینی به آن دادید، چه کسی باید فردا اینها را از دستورات واقعی دینی جدا کند؟ مواردی از این دست زیاد است که در این مجال اندک جای بازگویی آن ها نیست

  190. fyi says:

    Mr. Smith:

    Corruption and criminality and bad governance was much worse under the Monarchy of the late Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

    I will try to illustrate with a few examples.

    I think it was sometime during the Cuban Missile Crisis that Iranian divisions were ordered into field, in anticipation of a military thrust by USSR into Iran.

    As long as the divisions were stationed in their camps, opportunity for embezzlement was not present, once they were in the field, their commanders had full authority on how to dispense the funds allocated by the War Ministry.

    So, in the field, the ration of the ordinary soldiers was a quarter of a “loaf” of flat bread for the entire day – while they were carrying – on their shoulders – heavy equipment up and down the mountains in Azerbaijan.

    And if you were an officer and tried to do something about it, your career in the Imperial Iranian Armed Forces would have come to a quick end.

    Then there was the case of the late Dr. Ezatollah Negahban – “The Father of Iranian Archeology” and the Dean of College of Literature and the Arts of Tehran University – who was repeatedly stabled by the goons sent from SAVAK in Tehran University.

    He only survived because some students ran to his help and the goons fled. His American wife and his attendance at diplomatic receptions at US Embassy in Tehran evidently did not confer any protection on him.

    The attack on him was due to his repeated refusals to dismiss the late Simin Daneshvar from her post.

    And many many more such cases.

  191. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 28, 2013 at 9:47 am

    Thank you for that narration. Very informative. I am amazed how a few goons are corrupting the Shia religion trying to make every one a hypocrite.

  192. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    October 28, 2013 at 10:15 am

    Iran is sandwiched among a number of Sunni states, one of which, Pakistan, has 23 million young men with little to do and few prospects.

  193. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 28, 2013 at 10:11 am

    Exactly. But the Revolution happened to put an end to such stuff. I am not sure we have reached there yet.

    You see, they had sent kids for the protection of one of the most dangerous borders in the world without giving them any proper arms and protection (they were riding almost unarmed on the back of a rusting Toyota pick up): http://media.farsnews.com/media/Uploaded/Files/Images/1392/08/06/1392080613215435_PhotoL.jpg

    This is what I wanted to illustrate.

    Billions and billions of dollars each year are wasted in Iran to keep “IN” people happy and fat. Maybe they should have invested a billion on manufacturing a few thousand infantry fighting vehicles for the border protection. Since Iran’s border with Afghanistan/Pakistan/Iraq are going to remain problematic in this century and even beyond.

    Anyways, the sunni radicalism that Pakistani military is promoting in Pakistani Baluchistan will eventually spill into the Iranian Baluchistan. This is going to be a long term problem now. If Iran had nukes, this was the time to move to support secular nationalist Baluchis fighting for secession from Pakistan. But unfortunately Iran is defenseless and even does not have the technology and resources for manufacturing 5000 MRAP IFV’s so obviously fresh young meat have to be thrown into the meat grinder in the hope of jamming it.

    It is an old story.

  194. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 28, 2013 at 10:24 am

    “Only in Pakistan (69%) and Indonesia (55%) do majorities express a favorable opinion of Iran.” http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/11/global-views-of-iran-overwhelmingly-negative/

    fyi, I’d hate to think you’re losing sleep over this type of thing.

    Pakistan does not have the money to provide basic military training to 23 million idle youth. And, even if it did, it would not have the resources to provide adequate logistics for an invasion of Iran.

    Please. A little self respect.

  195. Smith says:

    Nasser says:
    October 28, 2013 at 5:01 am

    Thank you for your support. Hope you will join the discussion whenever you get time.

    It is exactly as you say. Iran will not be safe without the protection of nuclear weapons.

    This is becoming more obvious every passing day.

  196. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 28, 2013 at 10:24 am

    And almost everyone in Pakistan is armed. Specially among the Baloch and Pathan cultures, every boy at puberty gets a gun and training. It is kind of ritualistic for them. It is an unstable sectarian country with nuclear weapons and has a long border with Iran.

  197. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 28, 2013 at 10:32 am

    There are no secularist Baluchis in Iran or in Pakistan.

    During the first war in Afghanistan, some Baluchis from Iran left to participate in jihad against the Communist Government there and then they came back.

    If Iran were nuclear armed, I should think that the proxy war against her would continue.

    Look no further than the way a proxy war against Russia in the Caucasus is maintained.

    But the difference for Iran would have been that she could send commandos into Pakistan as well as drones.

    At the moment she cannot.

    This recent attack must be considered another provocation to cause Iran to react during these current ongoing negotiations with the Axis Powers.

    I guess.

  198. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 28, 2013 at 10:39 am

    Pakistan is not just sectarian in the way that Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, and Lebanon are.

    It is not a mentally comfortable country.

    You see, in all the above countries, there is a very considerable common linguistic culture – Arabic, Turkish, or Persian.

    That does not obtain in Pakistan.

    The dominant ethnic group, the Punjabis, has no literary tradition, it is where Italian was 600 years ago.

    Likewise for the Sindhis and Baluchis and people of NWFP who are becoming linguistically Punjab-ized.

    Only the Muhajir in Karachi speak Urdu and can tap into its literary tradition.

    For everyone else, Urdu is a foreign language that they have to learn.

    There is no comfort, in the mental universe of human beings, in that country.

  199. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    October 28, 2013 at 10:36 am

    Saudis could give money to Pakistanis to fight Iran in an analogous manner to what they are doing in Syria.

    One has to prepare for the worst and base one’s analysis on capabilities and not soley intentions.

  200. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 28, 2013 at 10:41 am

    I have to disagree on this one.

    Actually there are secular nationalist Baloch, and they are the majority. Much like Kurds.

    Late Mr. Akbar Bugti who was killed by Pakistani military was one of the leaders of their nationalist movements in Pakistan. His death started the current Baloch insurgency in Pakistan. There are many more like him. Nationalist struggle of Pakistani Baloch has a long history and though majority of them are sunnis but for all practical purposes are secular (in political sense). In order to combat this (and other secessionist movements), Pakistani military dominated by Punjabis and Pathans is promoting radical sunnism in order to religiously “bind” Pakistan under the banner of a sunni power.

    The insurgency inside Pakistan Baluchistan is secular-nationalist much like the way Kurds were fighting against Saddam. The religious dimension you see is creation of Pakistani intelligence in order to weaken the nationalists.

  201. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 28, 2013 at 10:47 am

    I agree completely. Your observation on the matter is acutely sharp and I appreciate it.

  202. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 28, 2013 at 10:52 am

    Saudi money, plus US military support, plus a gazillion other moving parts that make up nightmarish scenario is not complete without balancing it against outcomes. How would KSA like a nuclear armed Pakistan in control of Iran’s Persian Gulf coast? Please try and be plausible.

    “One has to prepare for the worst and base one’s analysis on capabilities and not soley intentions.”

    Now that is sage advice, so long as assessments of ‘capabilities’ aren’t woefully exaggerated, and some sane calculation of probability, risk and costs of defense are not too much of a burden for the paranoid preoccupied mind.

  203. Rehmat says:

    Earlier this month, 10 USraeli Amigos sent a letter to Barack Obama – setting the guideline for the coming P5+1 and Iran meeting to resolve Israeli concerns over Iran’s nuclear program. “We should be prepared to suspend the implementation of new sanctions, but only if Iran suspends its enrichment activities,” said the letter.


  204. BiBiJon says:


    The idea that Iran needs nuclear weapons, and/or as per Kenneth Waltz, world stability requires a nuclear-armed Iran, are perfectly respectable positions.

    You are an old-timer on this site. I urge you not to throw half baked ideas to see if it sticks. It brings down the level of discourse.

    Pakistani youth attacking Iran, and any other such scenarios are WW III stuff. Now, you might be coming up with this stuff to plant a seed in some idiot Pakistani’s head to go ahead and do such a thing. But, I just cannot imagine that even the stupidest blood thirsty Pakistani would not realize that they’d have India, China, Russia and whole host of others to contend with in the unlikely event that Iran was not able to repel the attack within a 24 hour news cycle.

    Be reasonable, so that your main position: Iran needs nukes, does not get lost in meaningless crap.

  205. Smith says:

    This is a good one.

    South African freedom founding fathers who resisted apartheid are still considered terrorists by United States government including until very recently Nelson Mandela himself: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24709294

    Still expecting US will remove sanctions against Iran?

    US has not yet removed people who had resisted the rule of white man apartheid in 1960’s from its terror list. Expecting US will remove sanctions tomorrow or next year is a folly.

    Only nuclear weapons can breath some sense into the white man and protect Iran from his sickness.

  206. Smith says:

    Pakistani Baluchistan secession war: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQZIk3pc7UI

    Iran should make friends with these guys; much like Iran as a matter of policy made friends with Kurds in 1970’s onward with the understanding that Kurds will leave Iran alone.

    If Pakistani intelligence wants to play sunni card against Iran, then of course Iran has no other choice.

  207. Smith says:

    No matter what Iran does, the sanctions are going to be toughened up: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/10/28/18745529.php

  208. kooshy says:

    More important than lack of money, Pakistan lacks a national cohesion for a required national unification to field any major military operation against anyone except India, Pakistan was created with one purpose and that purpose was to prevent India dominate the Indian ocean, Pakistan was not meant, her military has not ever exercised and doesn’t poses a military doctrine and the necessary readiness for operation against any other adversary beside India.

    For a major military operation, a Nation will firstly need the necessary military doctrine enabling her for military preparations against possible adversaries, this military readiness will need a national cohesion and a supportive economy to make possible a long term military exercises, otherwise the faith of the war will be like last few wars US has got himself involved with.

    Pakistan and Iran don’t have

    A military doctrine or have ever exercised a military preparedness against each other, that means they don’t see each other as enemies in their current structure.
    There is no national cohesion in Pakistan or Iran against the other side this means both countries don’t consider each other as enemies
    Pakistan and Iran see each other as complimentary economic partners.

    Shiehs are attacked and killed in Pakistan like they are in Iraq, but like in Iraq this is being done by countries and groups that are scared of Iran’s ascendency in the region, they see Iran’s rise a threat to their ruling elites existence (like KSA or Israel)
    I would think this killing of innocents will increase a bit longer, the key is that the Shieh didn’t and doesn’t bite the bait for sectarianism as this is the only real effective weapon Iran’s enemies have.

  209. Smith says:

    One of the largest Uranium exporters in the world supplying the white man nuclear reactors which is also one of the poorest and most energy deprived countries in the world has this news today about its manimal citizens trying to escape their fate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24713609

    White man wants this for Iran.

  210. Smith says:

    Good read: http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2013/10/131028_l44_golestan_treaty_tradition_modernity.shtml

    Though the author forgets to mention that Russia did not become democratic but still accumulated large amounts of power (after all it is BBC).

    Lesson: Iran needs nuclear weapons.

  211. Smith says:

    Joint Statement of Obama with Prime minister of Pakistan; http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-210047-Joint-statement-by-US-President-Obama-and-PM-Nawaz-Sharif

    We read:

    “… President Obama appreciated Pakistan’s constructive engagement with the Nuclear Security Summit process and its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and other international forums, while acknowledging Pakistan’s efforts to improve its strategic trade controls and enhance its engagement with multilateral export regimes….”

  212. Smith says:

    Pakistani Shia political party says talks will only result in more bloodshed: http://tribune.com.pk/story/623240/must-not-negotiate-with-taliban-says-head-of-shia-political-party/

  213. Karl.. says:

    Found this clip with Flynt and Hillary.


  214. James Canning says:

    BiBiJon & FYI,

    David Cameron was well aware of considerable opposition, even in his own party, to British intervention in the Syrian civil war. He should be applauded for bringing the matter before Parliament.

  215. Karl.. says:


    Doesnt he have to (bring the matter before parliament) according to UK laws?

  216. James Canning says:


    While you obviously do not like it, the Arab leaders who have agreed to accept Israel within its “1967” borders are simply accepting the unpleasant fact that there is no means available for forcing Israel to cease to exist. This being the case, Arab leaders see the best way forward for the Palestinians is to try to get Israel out of the West Bank.

    I expect Egypt will continue to adhere to its treaty with Israel, no matter what changes of government take place.

    The validity of a treaty does not depend on “democratic” election of the leader of the country that ratified the treaty.

  217. Ataune says:


    While you obviously don’t like it (since you don’t display any sign of pushing for it in this forum), almost all muslim and arab countries in the region, not withstanding the government in place, have always defined a denuclearized middle-east as one of their foreign policy principles. This being the case, these countries see the joining of the NPT by Israel and her being completely stripped of the nuclear weapons arsenal the best, and I would add the only, way forward for the region to leave in a minimum of peace and harmony.

    I excpect Egypt continuing to adhere to this principle, no matter what changes of government take place.

    The validity of a policy principle does not depend on the nature of the regime in place but on her following of the fundamental interests of the nation and the state. A treaty can, and should, be cancelled if it doesn’t respond to the interests of the state. You cannot find any treaty in the history of the nation-states not having a clause to rescind it unilaterally.

  218. fyi says:

    Ataune says:

    October 28, 2013 at 4:32 pm

    His positions are those of the Arabs of Southern Persian Gulf.

    CSIS (www.csis.org) and MEPC (http://www.mepc.org/) are 2 of the many bastions of Arab influence in US.

    The fact is that (Sunni) Arabs are impotent; politically, militarily, and intellectually.

    They are supplicants at the Court of the Mad Kind, begging for the fiefdom that they lost on the field of battle to be restored to them.

    Over the last 1000 years, twice Arab Armies defeated foreign armies : once was Mamluks defeating Mongols.

    The other when Hezbollah defeated Israelis.

    In both cases the Arabs in question were Shia.

    My advice is to ignore the noises that Sunni Arabs and their supporters make – they are irrelevant.

  219. Kathleen says:

    Andrew Bacevich really takes a swipe at Washington Post Jennifer Rubin and other warmongers.

    link to tomdispatch.com

    ” Reflecting on “where isolationism leads,” Jennifer Rubin, the reliably bellicose Washington Post columnist, was quick to chime in, denouncing those hesitant to initiate another war as “infantile.” American isolationists, she insisted, were giving a green light to aggression. Any nation that counted on the United States for protection had now become a “sitting duck,” with “Eastern Europe [and] neighbors of Venezuela and Israel” among those left exposed and vulnerable. News reports of Venezuelan troop movements threatening Brazil, Colombia, or Guyana were notably absent from the Post or any other media outlet, but no matter — you get the idea.

    Military analyst Frederick Kagan was equally troubled. Also writing in the Post, he worried that “the isolationist narrative is rapidly becoming dominant.” His preferred narrative emphasized the need for ever greater military exertions, with Syria just the place to launch a new campaign. For Bret Stephens, a columnist with the Wall Street Journal, the problem was the Republican Party. Where had the hawks gone? The Syria debate, he lamented, was “exposing the isolationist worm eating its way through the GOP apple.”

    The Journal’s op-ed page also gave the redoubtable Norman Podhoretz, not only still alive but vigorously kicking, a chance to vent. Unmasking President Obama as “a left-wing radical” intent on “reduc[ing] the country’s power and influence,” the unrepentant neoconservative accused the president of exploiting the “war-weariness of the American people and the rise of isolationist sentiment… on the left and right” to bring about “a greater diminution of American power than he probably envisaged even in his wildest radical dreams.”

    Obama escalated the war in Afghanistan, “got” Osama bin Laden, toppled one Arab dictator in Libya, and bashed and bombed targets in Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and elsewhere. Even so, it turns out he is actually part of the isolationist conspiracy to destroy America!

    Over at the New York Times, similar concerns, even if less hysterically expressed, prevailed. According to Times columnist Roger Cohen, President Obama’s reluctance to pull the trigger showed that he had “deferred to a growing isolationism.” Bill Keller concurred. “America is again in a deep isolationist mood.” In a column entitled, “Our New Isolationism,” he decried “the fears and defeatist slogans of knee-jerk isolationism” that were impeding military action. (For Keller, the proper antidote to isolationism is amnesia. As he put it, “Getting Syria right starts with getting over Iraq.”)

  220. Rehmat says:

    On September 22, 2013, in a speech at the Henry Ford Community College, Arab League’s ambassador in Washington, Dr. Mohammed Al Hussaini Al Sharif, said that Israel is the only beneficiary of the so-called “Arab Spring”.

    The ambassador added that Israel and the United States succeeded in distracting Arabs from the Palestinian issue, by convincing them that Iran is the biggest threat to the Middle East.


  221. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:
    October 28, 2013 at 4:03 pm


    I think I must have pinched a nerve or something your comment above was unusual of you long almost 6 lines, I am honored your Excellency.
    Gav do you have any red line that you honor’s subject shouldn’t cross, KSA peace plan? Israel’s existence as a Jewish state? Monarchy not lasting forever? Ok, ok, now I remember it’s the 20% stupid.

  222. BiBiJon says:

    Dr. Jerrold D. Green will be on c=span today

    He wrote:

    “U.S. policymakers should be cognizant of how this outlook informs Khamenei’s aversion to negotiations and compromise. The Leader harbors a deep-seated distrust of U.S. intentions—a sentiment that holds throughout Iran. Compromise, according to Khamenei, will only be seen as a sign of weakness, encouraging the United States to
    exert greater pressure on the Islamic Republic. For the Leader, justice, Islam, independence and self-sufficiency are paramount, and ultimately intertwined. For Iran to safeguard social justice and promote Islam, it must be politically independent; and it cannot be independent unless it is economically and technologically self-sufficient—hence the importance of an indigenous nuclear fuel cycle.”


  223. Karl.. says:


    October 28, 2013 at 5:41 am
    “Both sides realize war is prohibitively expensive. US is persuaded that she can work with Iran to establish a positive agenda for the region”

    US arent bluffing about war.

    “positive agenda”? Thats why US have rejected comprehensive deal multiple times past 10 years?

  224. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 29, 2013 at 5:44 am

    “US arent bluffing about war.”

    I don’t pretend to be in anyboy’s heads. They are bluffing, not bluffing, half bluffing, who knows?

    There’s no guarantee of course. US may well want to continue it’s path of the last 13 years. It is difficult for me see why? What have they gained? What is the extent of US losses?

    I think a rational policy is what Susan Rice has come up with this last Summer. It puts the relative importance of the ME compared to other regions of the world in perspective. The conclusion is that US policy makers, diplomats, and the US military is consumed by affairs of the Mid East in disproportional to its modest importance compared to the far east, for example.

    Have a look at Susan Rice’s interview in the NY Times. Tell me what you think about it.

  225. Karl.. says:


    They view that they have gained alot (iran more isolated then ever, under most sanctions, Iran/Rouhani have begun to talk etc). Besides as mentioned before nuclear issue is only 1 of maybe 5 issues US/Israel have with Iran.

    Please link those interviews, I have missed those.

  226. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 29, 2013 at 7:00 am

    “They view that they have gained alot (iran more isolated then ever, under most sanctions, Iran/Rouhani have begun to talk etc). Besides as mentioned before nuclear issue is only 1 of maybe 5 issues US/Israel have with Iran.”

    Like I said, there is no guarantee that they are not complete morons, and you could apply to get paid for repeating Likud lines as you do. Sure, They have only lost trillions, 30,000 dead and injured in Iraq, 21,0000 in Afghanistan, Iran elected as president of 120 nation NAM, conference in Tehran, Iraq lost to Iran, Syria lost to Iran, Hezbullah defeating IDF, Iran spinning more centrifuges, stock piling more enrinched uranium, sanctions judged illegal in European courts, US popularity down the tubes.

    “Please link those interviews, I have missed those.”


  227. Karl.. says:


    It doesnt matter what you think, it matters what US/Israel thinks one could post 100s of arguments why US/Israel shouldnt attack but US/Israel could also say 100s argument why they should attack and that is what matters.

    What was it that was so positive with Rice interview?

  228. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 29, 2013 at 8:03 am

    Sorry, I find you too enamored of the fantasies of Likudnik’s presumed freedom of action to allow any nuance in the conversation. US/Israel will attack! Brilliant; let them attack; this afternoon if they like; what more is there to say?

    Regarding Rice, and Obama’s speech at the UN which Rice says reflected the new Mid East policy orientation, it is a rational policy for US, and therefore positive for the US. It is not particularly positive for KSA and Israel, that is why they are so upset.

  229. nico says:

    Why a war is not in card with Iran.
    Because there is no middle ground.
    It is either full blown regional war if not world war with heavy civilian casualties of genocide proportion like in Japan or Germany, which circumstances are not ripe for right now, or no war/military intervention at all as Iran would retaliate and escalation would be inevitable.
    However, did the US leadership come to term with that reality ?


    “Tiny wars still don’t work
    Every significant US military action of this century has demonstrated that boots on the ground and force, no matter in what form, are incapable of achieving even Washington’s most minimal goals. In the face of spilt blood and lost treasure, the US has turned to drones and assassins as a new micro-force. US leaders still don’t grasp that war doesn’t work.”

  230. Karl.. says:


    There havent been any change besides the speech by barack was the same type as earlier ones. Did you watch that speech?

  231. BiBiJon says:

    Pass the joint

    First we had the unprecedented ‘joint’ Iran+P5+1 statement, and now the also unprecedented ‘joint’ Iran+IAEA statement.


  232. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    October 29, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Leader lie.

    You are correct, nothing has changed and will change.

    The regime change policy remains fully in place; they have spent too much effort and too many resources to turn around and admit defeat.

    In Iraq, they had the fig leaf of proclaiming victory and going home.

    Not in Iran – that policy will persist.

    As for positive agenda: “Polio is back in Syria…” – the Axis Powers, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey took Syria back decades in public health.

    I hope God has prepared special place in Hell….

  233. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 29, 2013 at 10:19 am

    Yes, fyi. Here’s another one:


    Denis, who took such umbrage at being fingered by Walt and Mearsheimer as part of the Israel Lobby, is now part of the Gemunder Center Iran Task Force, which is part of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, or JINSA.

    As I said before, these characters are now flung so far out of the inner circle they’re reduced to writing Opeds that only convinces the already convinced, and agitates the already apoplectic.

  234. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 29, 2013 at 10:06 am

    Karl might be correct about his own worldview/wishlist, but You are not correct

    “The regime change policy remains fully in place; they have spent too much effort and too many resources to turn around and admit defeat.”

    What you are talking about is a rudimentary and well known institutional resistance to ‘calling it a day’, and ‘moving on.’

    As Prof Walt describes http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/10/28/leaving_afghanistan_not_with_a_bang_but_a_whimper

    All things are reversible. And, if not, so what? Keep your shirt on.

  235. Karl.. says:


    October 29, 2013 at 10:06 am

    Exactly, regime change is what all is about. As you say, these people wont back down, why would they? US have done everything possible to suffocate Iran, there is no return.

  236. kooshy says:

    fyi says:
    October 29, 2013 at 10:06 am

    “You are correct, nothing has changed and will change.”

    Wow, like US policy never has changed in the past, why guys are you so uncomfortable with a possible détente?
    If it ends up good for US and good for Iran and bad for Israel do you really care? If a détente turn out to be good for Iran and divert a war with the Iran you so much that you want her to make nukes to protect her against an attack, why then you refuse to “give hope a chance”, and are so negative even before anything may get done?

    You really need to clarify your position to be credible

  237. BiBiJon says:

    kooshy says:
    October 29, 2013 at 11:04 am

    You know the funny part is that the maybe-detente won’t be bad for Israel. It will be bad for Netanyahu. But, leaders come and go.

    An influential and feared/respected/effective US is crucial for Israel. US’ influence, and effectiveness will be hugely enhanced through a detente.

  238. Karl.. says:


    Lets look at Iraq up to 2003, Libya up to 2011, Syria present, Yugoslavia up to late 90s, Cuba present, North Korea present. To answer your question – NO, US NEVER change its policy on these issues.
    US wont even lift embargo after 60 years on Cuba because just like in Iran its about regime change.

  239. BiBiJon says:

    “The great blame-game never ends on how the Obama administration’s foreign policy, whatever course it takes, is always failing because the Middle East hasn’t been pacified. In my view, the President has a lot to answer for in American weakness towards China and Russia but it’s time, in our global priorities, to move the Middle East toward the back burner. While we thrash around there, Russia has largely taken back its Soviet-sized empire while China looms up in our rear-view mirror economically around the world.”

    From http://www.forbes.com/sites/melikkaylan/2013/10/29/the-president-understands-its-time-to-get-out-of-the-middle-east-altogether/

  240. BiBiJon says:

    Arshin Adib- Moghaddam has a dream

    “If Iran seeks to be accepted as a regional powerhouse it can’t act in isolation from major players in international society. And if the United States is serious about playing a major diplomatic role in West Asia and North Africa, it can’t afford to ignore the influence of Iran. The diplomacy of both countries has been seriously impeded by an irrational aura of ignorance. Once both countries accommodate their self-perceptions, they will be able to enact their roles. At that stage, Iran will gain the international recognition that it seeks and deserves and the United States will be more effective in dealing with regional crisis from afar. I can envisage, allow me to dream a little, a regional order that would sustain peace for all countries concerned, if the current moment of hope is carried forward. In this scenario the future looks bright for Iran and the region.”


  241. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    October 29, 2013 at 12:24 pm

    Mr. Adib-Moghaddam is incorrect; Iran does not need “to be accepted as a regional powerhouse” to act.

    Everything Iran has gained over the last 34 years has been due to her own efforts and owes nothing – absolutely nothing – to the so-called “major players in international society”.

    In fact, those “major players in international society” have been actively harming Iran and the Iranian people for over 100 years.

    As long as we have people under such delusions we cannot advance in Iran, no doubt.

  242. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 29, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    Again, it is you who is incorrect, and myopic, not Moghaddam.

    There is a time to move from ‘resistance’ and accept acknowledgement. That time may be now.

  243. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 29, 2013 at 11:17 am


    Nice, that you ended up writing more than the usual one sentence, you are now doing more worthy work.

    But again even on Cuba you are wrong why? Because you don’t thin if you do, US did change her policy on Cuba after out of a disaster policy she made a deal with USSR, the irony is she kept the deal even after USSR fell.
    Karl- Do you need me to teach you more history or that really should be FYI’s job, that is if he really had planned and thought of a possible sudden annoying discomfort.

    Karl who knows, he might be right, I might be right but me and him we both know you are not right

  244. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    I think that it will remain a dream…

    Nobody “normal” is against peace, but empirical analysis of history shows otherwise and the “maraz” in the hearts of the kufar- like American elites and vassals- usually outweighs their rationality.

    I’m afraid “peace” will be in heaven and this world is “darul ebtela”.

    That’s why “realists”- and the Holy Quran- say that such “dreams” are in fact dangerous.

    This doesn’t preclude a detente in the current state of relations between US-Iran- which might be beneficial for both sides.

    They are however, engaged in a Cold War in a struggle about about fundamental beliefs and world-views- and Iran will be the victor ultimately.

    I think like many good, honest well-meaning “liberals” (sorry for labeling based on your comments- if you don’t consider yourself as such please say so), you underestimate the deep structural, moral and intellectual crisis in the US and western civilization.

    In such cases historically, the end is always- always- accompanied by war.

    And one of the beautiful things about Islam is that it doesn’t consider war- which is done defense- as a “necessary evil” like in western civilization, but the very embodiment of acting justly and truthfully.

    I think if you look at the reality of the US itself you will see that it is the main barrier to such “dreams”.

    Interesting blog by Buchanan:

    Is Red State America Seceding?

  245. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    “There is a time to move from ‘resistance’ and accept acknowledgement. That time may be now.”

    “Ba eshge velayat zendeyim, ta zendeyim razmandeyim…”

    No “moving” on from resistance while we are alive…I think you also misjudge the realities in Iran. This struggle has been conducted by real people who made real sacrifices in these decades- regardless of what the honorable Dr Zarif may or may not have to say in his negotiations (I sincerely wish him good luck in the negotiations).

    Again this doesn’t preclude a detente, but there will be no “strategic” peace. Only if US shifts it’s center of gravity AWAY from Saudi and Israel and towards Iran will there be such a peace. It’s a zero-sum equation. And this will- “never”- happen while the Israel lobby owns US politics and the value US dollar is dependent Saudi oil sales.

    Remember that many of the gentlemen in the Iranian diplomatic corps and their Iranian expat friends did not fight in the war and don’t really get “resistance”.

    It’s OK, we let them have their negotiations and meetings for the benefit of the revolution…the real business is conducted elsewhere.

  246. Karl.. says:


    Sorry I have no idea what you are trying to say, I cant comprehend your text. You need to elaborate if you want to make yourself understood here.

  247. BiBiJon says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    October 29, 2013 at 12:43 pm

    I don’t want to spout profundities beyond my comprehension. Instinctively, I abhor conflict. That pretty much sums it up.

    US is in dire straights. According to my grasp of arithmetic, you cannot imperially overreach to a tune of trillion$ and not come up short domestically.

    I agree it is a zero-sum game for KSA/Israel. We’ll just have to see how much sway they have left with US. They may well be playing their very last cards, and soon will learn to go with the flow.

  248. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    “Instinctively, I abhor conflict.”

    You shouldn’t. Conflict can be good. Work on yourself in this regard.

    It’s not about KSA/Israel in themselves. It’s about the US political process being owned by the Israel lobby- as a matter of American life- and about the value of the dollar being supported by Saudi oil sales- as a matter of American life.

    This is primarily an American matter, not an Israeli or Saudi matter.

  249. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 29, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    Karly- which is it you don’t understand, is it about Cuba or is it FYI needing to teach more history to you? Let me know if I can help, opening it up a notch for you.

  250. Karl.. says:


    It was your argument about Cuba, please elaborate.

  251. Fiorangela says:

    Iranian American Identity and Cyrus the Great: Looking to the Past and Moving into the Future
    Tuesday, October 22, 2013
    By: Shadi Moayedi


    Reza Zarghamee, author of Discovering Cyrus: The Persian Conqueror Astride the Ancient World, outlined the historical significance of Cyrus’ rule. Although Cyrus lived before the tradition of written history, it is believed that he ruled from around 559 BC to 530 BC. Zarghamee explained how Cyrus was “born the heir to two kingdoms,” which later facilitated him becoming the King of the traditionally conflicting communities of the Medes and the Persians. Unifying these communities under his rule, Cyrus became the founder of the Persian Empire.

    Exemplifying the uniqueness of Cyrus’ regime, Zarghamee noted how the regime had “this respect for different cultures, and this willingness to communicate with people on their terms, not to just strictly dictate the dialogue.” Cyrus’ approach to power and rule was, and to this day continues to be, very rare, Zarghamee said, because he did not rule through the traditional means of force and might.

    Rabbi Marc Gopin, Director of the Center for World Religions, explained how Cyrus is similarly “unique in Jewish literature” and how he is “the only king in biblical history that receives only praise, honor, and a messiah quality.” According to Gopin, Cyrus “reversed all of the expectations of the world outside, which was a world of oppression, a world where you expected ethnic cleansing.” Contrary to the norm, Rabbi Golpin said, Cyrus ruled by “winning people’s hearts and doing business with them.”

    . . .

    “moderator Nadereh Chamlou, former Senior Advisor to the Chief Economist for the Middle East and North Africa Region of the World Bank, stated that “today, Cyrus has become the connecting point between the Iranian diaspora everywhere in the world…and of course the Iranians inside Iran.” Chamlou further explained that unlike other kings, Cyrus is unique in the fact that he is a point of pride for all Iranian communities.

    Given this identification with Cyrus, Chamlou questioned why he is minimally reflected upon in Persian literature, even compared to other kings and rulers in Iran, and unlike other historical figures, such as Julius Caesar in Western literature. Dr. Karimi-Hakkak, Chair of the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Maryland, attributed this to what he said was the tradition among Muslim Iranians to “somehow connect back, when they want to revive their past, more to the legendary and mythical past, than to the historic past.” He explained how this connection to a mythical or legendary past is a reason why many “modern Iranians rediscover him [Cyrus] through Jewish traditions, Greek traditions, and now modern European scholarship,” and not through genuine native narratives. . . .

    “Iran analyst Dr. Bijan Khajehpour articulated what he sadi are three major components that compromise Iranian identity: an Islamic identity, a pre-Islamic identity, and a modern identity. Dr. Khajehpour explained that, for the past century, “one of these components have tried to impose itself on the other component, and has not succeeded.” He explained how, currently, the Islamic identity is forcefully being imposed in the political arena in Iran and thus many youth have developed a heightened modern identity in their personal lives. This modern identity, Khajehpour said, is primarily classified through technology and western fashion. Thus, Iranians and Iranian Americans, have a dynamic and fluctuating relationship to all three of these identities that must be further examined.

    “Agreeing with Dr. Khajehpour’s analysis, Dr. Karimi-Hakkak claimed that “all too often we make binaries of these as if they have always been in opposition of each other, they have not, and the process of give and take is the logic of change and civilization development.” Khajehpour and Karimi-Hakkak agreed that, although Cyrus is an exemplary model of true and benevolent leadership, there must be more reflection on building other figures and moments that Iranians can be proud of.

    In his concluding remarks, Dr. Karimi-Hakkak stated that Iranians must “face their past, the good, the bad, and the ugly…This is prideful nation, this is a very important nation, it is not an innocent nation… they need to face and recreate their past, that past happens to also be a more truthful past, and definitely a more balanced past, a past that will really wake us all up, it may not wake up Cyrus the Great, but it will definitely resuscitate his memory, the memory of his benevolence.” Whether it is the successes of Cyrus the Great or the complexities of the Islamic Revolution, Iran’s long and complicated past remains deeply ingrained in the mind of its people. The question remains what the future of Iran and its people holds. An honest and integrated view of Iran’s past accomplishments and failures may be the necessary method to help pave a way to a brighter future.”

  252. Fiorangela says:

    A few years ago Avi Shlaim, one of Israel’s so-called “new historians,” or “historical revisionists, explained that an honest assessment of Israel’s foundational history was also necessary for that state to move toward “a brighter future.”

    Shlaim said that the “old” zionist narrative/history was not based on documents, facts, and evidence, as is the “new history,” but on ideology. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XfTJ3Njk5o

  253. kooshy says:

    But again even on Cuba you are wrong why?
    Because you don’t think if you did,
    US did change her policy on Cuba,
    As a part of a deal with USSR, US changed her previous policy on Cuba, her new policy on Cuba was part of a deal she made in Cuban Missile crises.
    The irony is US kept that deal, even after USSR fell and is gone.

    Karly- The point is, foreign policies are and should be dynamic, based on states best interests, US is no different, if states interest change, so does her foreign policies.
    Who knows like Bibijan says, US policy on Iran might have changed, if so Israelis might want to make new arrangement like what President Ahamdinijad suggested may be in Alaska plenty of oil there.

    “Lets look at Iraq up to 2003, Libya up to 2011, Syria present, Yugoslavia up to late 90s, Cuba present, North Korea present. To answer your question – NO, US NEVER change its policy on these issues.”

    Karly – My point was that you wrote your comment in an elementary way stating “NO, US NEVER changes her policy on these issues” the way you reacted is same as those who fear a change in US’s Iran policy.

  254. Fiorangela says:

    The NIAC Conference (see comment at October 29, 2013 at 2:31 pm) was decidedly oriented toward detente with Israel, if not rapprochement. And as the referenced comment stated, at the Conference, a very sophisticated discussion of Iranian identity took place, an attempt to honestly assess the past and present, the good and the bad.

    Now, when will the USA engage in a “new history,” an honest exploration of its real history as against its propagandized “American dream” history as “exceptional” and always the killer in the white hat, not the killer in the black hat.

  255. Karl.. says:


    Sorry I cant comprehend what you are trying to say. Besides, you didnt respond to the Cuban embargo still alive today, you didnt approached ANY of the named countries I stated earlier. Dont bother giving me another reply.

  256. James Canning says:

    Financial Times reports today that Iran will be seeking 100 billion in Western investment in Iranian oil over the next three years. Contract terms will be improved to entice investors.

  257. James Canning says:


    You make good point, that the US continued its agreement not to invade Cuba even after collapse of Soviet Union. The agreement obviously made good sense.

  258. James Canning says:


    Foolish U.S. policy toward Cuba has helped to keep the regime in power. This counter-productive policy is the result of excess leverage held by Cuba lobby due to peculiarities of Florida in context of U.S. presidential elections.

  259. James Canning says:


    Dennis Ross claims he remains an important adviser to Obama on Middle East affairs. There seems little reason to doubt this. Ross boasts of his strong connections with numerous rich Jewish campaign donors. Ross may have offered a lot of bad advice to Obama in recent years, but I think we can be sure Obama will continue to listen to him.

  260. Smith says:

    The games continue: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115394/new-york-times-story-spells-disaster-afghanistan

    The story comes in back drop of Pakistani prime minister “meeting” Afghan president under the watchful eyes of colonial masters in London today.

  261. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    October 29, 2013 at 2:31 pm

    Iranian Muslims in America are almost all against religion, Islam etc.

    Far be it for them to admit the centrality of Shia, Ali & Hussein to ethos of Iranian people.

    They live in a fantasy world in which Ancient Iran was the paragon of culture and virtue until she was so wantonly raped and humiliated by the lizard-eating Arabs and their awful Semitic religion.

    That the entire corpus of Persian Poetry is built upon Arabic poetic forms, that the most respected and renowned poets of Persian language have their poetry informed by the Quran and Islamic Tradition, that Persian rugs reflect the Muslim Cosmogony is lost on these people.

    They have selected Cyrus rather than Imam Hussein to be their ethos – breaking with all other Iranians in Iran.

    And who was Cyrus; another world-devouring conqueror the likes of which the world has seen so many times and – indubitably will see more.

    Zoroastrians and Jews are the vestiges of Ancient Iranian populations for whom Cyrus would be a Hero – no doubt for varied reasons.

    Without Shia Religion Iran could not exist.

  262. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    October 29, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    Mr. Dennis Ross is an enemy of Iran.

    Mr. Obama, to the extend that he heeds Mr. Ross’s advice, is an enemy of Iran.

    In fact, the events subsequent to August 21, 2013 leaves no doubt as to Mr. Obama’s posture vis-à-vis Iran.

    Evidently, Mr. Obama, like so many other American’s inside and outside of US Government, thinks that he can somehow manage to salvage Israel’s position in the World of Islam by making enemies of Israel to be the enemies of the United States.

    He could not be more wrong.

  263. Karl.. says:

    Ross and Obama actually have very similar views.

  264. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 29, 2013 at 2:57 pm
    “you didnt approached ANY of the named countries I stated earlier.”


    US policy with NK invasion and war in 50’s changed to accepting fact on the ground which is existence of an armistice.

    US policy with Iraq from lovey dovey days of 1980’s against Iran to sanctioning him in 90’s to invading his ass on 03 to accepting and conceding Iraq to Iran.

    Karly- You think these are not policy changes? Karl what kind of stuff are you taking? Is it worth twisting history, so like Karl Rove you can claim that you are now “making your own reality”.

  265. BiBiJon says:

    James Canning says:
    October 29, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    If Ross has Obama’s ear, why does Netanyahu come to town and shoot his mouth off so often, and so indelicately (towards Obama)?

  266. Rehmat says:

    Zionist justice minister Tzipi Livni has confirmed what many people have been suspecting for years. She says Riyadh and Tel Aviv are united in their stance against Iran. It is not just Iran that the two seem to be in agreement on, but also they are on the same side of the Syrian situation, supporting Salafist extremists. Watch video below.

    American Jewish writer and blogger, Stephen Lendman, describes this alliance, saying: “Israel and Saudi Arabia are rogue states writ large. They’re two of the world’s worst. They deplore democratic values. They spurn rule of law principles. They commit horrendous human and civil rights abuses. They’re responsible for daily crimes against humanity.”


  267. Karl.. says:


    Yes no changes have occured, North Korea is threatened today just like they were 50 years back.

    Iraq got invaded, if there were any change, Saddam would have ruled today.

    You see there is no changes on these issues.

  268. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 6:03 am

    Karl, you have a good point.

    But you may be confusing the consistency of ‘interests’ with consistency of policy. In the case of Iraq, you would be right if you said US has never had, and will never have an interest in allowing a militarily strong, prosperous, democratic and politically independent Iraq. That is not unique to Iraq, of course. The very definition of a hegemonic superpower is to make sure no one becomes independent, or be in a position to militarily challenge her hegemony. That is why, such a power spends what it spends on her military might. Such a hegemonic power would not even want to take the risk that her European “allies” think/act too independently; tapping a few allies’ phones here and there gives you an early warning of a potentially unacceptable independent streak developing in France, or Germany for example.

    However, broader regional, and even broader global interests necessitated complete policy reversals vis-a-vis Iraq from time to time. So, as Kooshy is telling you correctly, there was a time Iraq was removed from the list of prohibited states to receive American military aid, lots and lots of it; 10 years later they fell into the ‘dual containment’ hole; Then containment policy changed to regime change; then changed again to invasion; and now has changed to calling Iraq an ally. None of these superficial changes mean anything other than a temporary change in the direction of the wind.

    Regarding Iran, if your point is the global hegemon will not accept an independent, strong Iran, you would be half right. Half right, because under circumstances where the hegemon’s position in the region was collapsing before her very eyes, and the only way to stop China, and Russia from filling the vacuum, were to bite the bullet and accept exactly such an Iran, then it is perfectly consistent with the hegemon’s global interests, even though it might look like a 180 degree shift vis-a-vis Iran.

    In short, common sense tells me everyone, US included, will gladly pay a lesser price, to avoid much larger costs.

  269. Rehmat says:

    The US-based Christian radio talk-show, The Ugly Truth’, has set-up a very informative Facebook page for Ahmadinejad’s fans to wish him 57th Birthday.


  270. nico says:

    Why the KSA is a slave country and will remain a slave country no match for the US.
    And why stone age like regimes are supported and put in power by imperialists

    King Faisal suspicious death after the oil crisis and defense of the holy land.
    For that kind of suspicion, one only needs to be aware of the numerous historically PROVEN political assassination carried out by UK, France, Israel and the US all around the world directly or indirectly and specially in Southern America, Africa and MENA.
    Sure the survival of the KSA regime as a slave regime is likely to be a major US priority.
    Now more than during the last 4 decades.


    “When King Faisal cut off oil supplies and deprived the west from oil in October 1973 and said his famous quote “We and our ancestors survived on dates and milk and we will return to them again.”
    On that day Henry Kissinger – Minister of foreign affairs visited him to try to pull him back from his decision. He said in his memoirs that when he met King Faisal in Jeddah he was sad , so he made a joke and told King Faisal, “My Plane ran out of oil, so will your majesty order it to get supplied with oil and we are ready to pay at International rates?
    He continued in his memoir saying that King Faisal didn’t laugh and raised his head and looked at him and said: “And I’am an old man who wishes to pray in Al-Aqsa before I die, so will you help me in my wish?”

    On 25 March 1975, King Faisal was shot point-blank and killed by his half-brother’s son, Faisal bin Musaid, who had just come back from the United States. The murder occurred at a majlis (literally “a place for sitting”), an event where the king or leader opens up his residence to the citizens to enter and petition the king.In the waiting room, Prince Faisal talked to Kuwaiti representatives who were also waiting to meet King Faisal. When the Prince went to embrace him, King Faisal leaned to kiss his nephew in accordance with Saudi culture. At that instant, Prince Faisal took out a pistol and shot him. The first shot hit King Faisal’s chin and the second one went through King Faisal’s ear. A bodyguard hit Prince Faisal with a sheathed sword. Oil minister Zaki Yamani yelled repeatedly to not kill Prince Faisal.
    King Faisal was quickly taken to the hospital. He was still alive as doctors massaged his heart and gave him a blood transfusion. They were unsuccessful and King Faisal died shortly afterward. Both before and after the assassination the prince was reported to be calm. Following the killing, Riyadh had three days of mourning and all government activities were at a standstill.
    One theory for the murder was avenging the death of Prince Khalid bin Musa’id, the brother of Prince Faisal. King Faisal instituted modern and secular reforms that led to the installation of television, which provoked violent protest, one which was led by Prince Khalid, who during the course of an attack on a television station was shot dead by a policeman.
    Prince Faisal, who was captured directly after the attack, was officially declared insane. But following the trial, a panel of Saudi medical experts decided that Faisal was sane when he gunned the king down. The nation’s high religious court convicted him of regicide and sentenced him to execution. Despite Faisal’s dying request that the life of his assassin be spared, he was beheaded in the public square in Riyadh. The public execution took place on 18 June 1975 at 4:30 p.m.—three hours before sundown—before a throng of thousands at the Al Hukm Palace (Palace of Justice).”

  271. Karl.. says:


    No one has denied that US supported Iraq, I am talking about the issues US had with IRaq that came after, regarding this, US never changed its policies. Its the same with Iran.
    Of course US would call Iraq an allied today, they removed Saddam just like the goal was all about.

    Russia and China have bigger ties to US and Iran today so obviously US dont fear them more than Iran.

  272. Karl.. says:


    “Russia and China have bigger ties to US THAN WITH Iran today”

  273. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 9:23 am


    “No one has denied that US supported Iraq, I am talking about the issues US had with IRaq that came after”

    Good to see we agree. The policy was consistent until the very moment it became inconsistent. Even though, “the issue,” an Iraq too big for her boots, was and is consistent all along. Not to nitpick, but even regarding Saddam, at one time cuddled by Rumsfeld, and at another time clobbered by Rumsfeld, tells me neither ‘Saddam’ nor ‘Rumsfeld’ per se were the issue.

    On China and Russia you are repeating a prevalent stance born out of ‘globalization.’ But, there are limits to how useful that yardstick is in predicting state behavior.

    One could argue that on a percentage-of-GDP-basis, Iran is more tied to western economies than is China. Take as an example the fact that China is the biggest customer of Saudi oil. It is not hard to imagine a question being raised in Beijing and Riyadh that “do we really have to price our bilateral trade in US$?”

    Basing an analysis on purported “fear” of Iran only gets you so far. US, and Israeli officials say what they say, but is it realistic? Who sent a Carrier Killer to Eastern Med? Iran, or Russia? Who blocked anti-Syrian resolutions in UNSC?

    So again, if you want to peddle Israeli talking points, well yes, we all read them in MSM on a daily basis. But if you want to engage in conversation then you have to move beyond absurdities like a global superpower fears Iran. Obviously she doesn’t as proven by how “fearlessly” US harasses Iran. US does fear loss of control and influence in the Mid East. However, she is not likely to lose her privileged position in the ME to Iran who does not have the military ability to project force beyond her borders, nor the economic means to coerce regional, political outcomes. Compare that to what China and/or Russia can bring to the table and you’ll soon see “fear of Iran” is a meaningless phrase.

  274. Karl.. says:


    US never changed its policy on Iraq, you agree on that?

    That Russia and China have more ties to US is a fact, on Iran, go figure why they accepted the UN sanctions.

    Yes its realistic that US and Israel could start wars, again they arent bluffing.

  275. Karl.. says:

    Iran talks and what happen? More sanctions


    Just more proof that its about regime change.

  276. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 10:50 am

    Maybe we (you) are arguing about meaning of words. A ‘policy’ as I understand it, and I think most would understand it is a ‘considered best approach’ to achieve an objective. So, to me, things like help Iraq, sanction Iraq, Invade Iraq, Plan to stay in Iraq, pull out of Iraq, etc. are all policies, and of course they change over time. Why, and here I need a pat on the back for being patient, because cost/benefit calculation change, or a better avenue opens up for achieving one’s objective which leads to an old policy to be discarded, or a policy is proven to be counterproductive to some other equally important objective, etc. etc.

    Objectives tend to change less, but priorities can change, objectives can be moving back and forth on the proverbial burner; they are not forgotten about, but even a superpower can only do so many things at the same time, and has to prioritize.

    Now, don’t get me wrong. For whatever reason the security of your beloved Israel is a very very important objective for the US. However, having experienced Iraq, US might consider attacking Iran not be the smartest way of achieving security for Israel, in fact it might be existentially counterproductive. So, again you see the objective is the same, but the ‘policy’ might need fine tuning, or even abandoning. If you’ve tried, and tried for decades to no avail, then thinking out the box might be in order.

    “That Russia and China have more ties to US is a fact”

    Again, ‘percentage of GDP’ in normal usage denotes a proportion, not absolute quantities. “the fact” you point out of course is undisputed. But, and another pat on the back please for being patient, Iran losing $50 billion in trade with the west proportionally creates more difficulty for Iran’s economy than say China losing exact same absolute dollar amount.

    “on Iran, go figure why they accepted the UN sanctions.”

    The P5+1 to various degrees are all hostile towards Iran and have found a common platform. But interestingly, part of the reason that Russia and China accepted the sanctions resolutions were to avert a war which they were led to believe is a real possibility.

    Take a peek at http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/24/the_genius_of_neoconservatism

    It explains how if one’s real intention is stringent sanctions, then by pretending war is on the cards one is able to ‘market’ sanctions as a reasonable middle ground.

    “Yes its realistic that US and Israel could start wars, again they arent bluffing.”

    Now if this was 2002/3 then I would say take threats of war seriously. But, in 2013, when multiple wars have failed to achieve even a minimalistic stated objectives of the aggressor, reducing them to pretend all along they just wanted to unseat Saddam, etc., then I would say to you and your Israeli friends that you’d have to be crazy to contemplate yet another war. But hey, like I say, after all these years of threats, Israel should show some conviction. Go for it already!

  277. Karl.. says:


    Great that you used that word – “Policy” – that is were you are wrong, there is no “policies” there are strategies. For Iraq it was regime change, for Iran its regime change (as for Korea, Cuba etc).

    Apparently you dont know that Russia/China/US shares stronger bilateral interests compared to Russia/China/Iran, it has nothing to do with “wars”. Syria, Libya are proof of this. Even Iraq.

    If you dont take threats seriously I am not sure you know too much about wars in general. If US and Israel attack, what will you do? After all you didnt take their threats “seriously”?

  278. Neo says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says: October 27, 2013 at 5:36 am

    Basiji jan

    great article!

    Long live democracy indeed. But why does it have to be Islamic? :)

  279. Sammy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    “”If you dont take threats seriously I am not sure you know too much about wars in general. If US and Israel attack, what will you do? After all you didnt take their threats “seriously”?””

    May be this would be an answer to your question:
    ‘A bodyguard of Sheikh Nasrallah was asked whether he would kill himself if Nasrallah would give the order and he replied , that sure he would kill himself upon the order.
    Then the same bodyguard was asked what he would do if Ayatollah Khamenei would give him the order to kill Sheikh Nasrallah and without hesitation he answered that he would execute the order on the spot.’

  280. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    “If US and Israel attack, what will you do? After all you didnt take their threats “seriously”?


    Did you know Alaska has the best fishing in the world, can you imagine fresh lox and bagel in the morning while reading Post Jerusalem.

  281. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    ‘Great that you used that word – “Policy” – that is were you are wrong, there is no “policies” there are strategies. For Iraq it was regime change, for Iran its regime change (as for Korea, Cuba etc).’

    Actually you said “US never changed its policy on Iraq, you agree on that?”

    See your own comment at October 30, 2013 at 10:50 am.

    If you don’t mind I won’t go over what “strategy” means or what a tactic means. There are free dictionaries online, even English-Hebrew dictionaries. Anyways, bottom lime is unaltered regardless of misuse of words. You don’t want Iran to cut a deal, warning Iran that US/Israel’s strategy/tactic/policy/wish/dream is regime change.

    On the other hand, you want Iran to be afraid of an attack so that with luck Iran preemptively surrenders.

    Keep saying it. It is good to hear it, repeatedly, in pigeon English.

    Iranian officialdom earn their living to be prepared for responding to threats. I guess they must have figured out what to do if Israel, or US attacks. I suspect it won’t be pretty.

    But, as a hobbyist, I am just in the business of predicting things, (usually wrongly). I put the chance of US and/or Israel attacking Iran at less than zero. I give Israel/US figuring out a modus vivendi considerably more chances. However, don’t confuse this as folks who are responsible and trained for defending Iran against an attack in any way, shape or form sit on their laurels on my say so. Another words, Karl, take the other threat also seriously.

  282. Karl.. says:


    Correct, thats what I asked and later showed that the strategy is the same for all these states mentioned earlier.

    You seems to believe that Iran is omnipotent against powers like Israel and the US. This is foolish.

  283. fyi says:

    Sammy says:

    October 30, 2013 at 12:44 pm

    Almost certainly a fabrication; Mr. Khamenei has no legal authority on this person and in any case – even if he were the Captaine Generale of the Shia/Irani forces from Hindu Kush to the Mediterranean Sea – he could not issue an illegal order.

  284. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    “You seems to believe that Iran is omnipotent against powers like Israel and the US. This is foolish.”

    Do you know what omnipotent means?

    “powers like Israel?” What do they put in the drinking water in Haifa these days?

  285. Karl.. says:


    Yes you seems to belive Iran is omnipotent, or am I wrong?

    You seems bigotted on your views on Israel which derail the conversation. Use facts instead of emotions.

  286. Sammy says:

    fyi says:
    October 30, 2013 at 1:03 pm
    “Almost certainly a fabrication;…

    May be , that’s why I wrote may be :-)
    It’s ALL about the manifestation of bloodlines , if you know what I mean and I have no doubt in my mind which bloodline will prevail in this unjust battle.
    It’s somehow fantastic to follow this Divine scenario unfolding in front of our eyes.

  287. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    “Yes you seems to belive Iran is omnipotent, or am I wrong?”

    No, I assume Iran has ‘adequate’ defenses. Meaning that it is able to make the costs of an attack very high, its ramifications completely uncertain and outside the control of the attacker, and make sure that a war’s “end” is a date of her choosing, not that of the aggressor.

    “You seems bigotted on your views on Israel which derail the conversation. Use facts instead of emotions.”

    Yes, that is the usual canard. Any and every criticism of the right wing of Likud is equated with bigotry. I’m not the only one at least. John Kerry is in the hot seat too.


  288. Karl.. says:


    Unfortunately, “adequate” defenses mean nothing facing powers like Israel and the US. IRaq also thought they had good defense, but maybe you think Iraq could beat US too back in 03?

    You havent brought any criticism on Israel thats why I said you should stop using your emotions in this conversation.

  289. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 1:23 pm

    What are Israel’s powers?

    Emotions? What like, patience?

    I owe the board an explanation. By keeping you, Karl, engaged in a conversation for a couple hours, I hope it has saved a few Palestinian olive trees.

    Meanwhile, I’ll be sure to refer to the apartheid pipsqueak as a “power” from now on. Regulars will know who I mean.

  290. Karl.. says:


    Israel is a power in every sense. Denying this isnt helping when analyzing this issue.

  291. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 30, 2013 at 11:44 am

    Regarding http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/iran-at-saban/posts/2013/10/28-einhorn-iran-nuclear-good-deal

    Maloney is telling us to ignore Einhorn at our peril.

    I think she represents a fairly sizable part of think-tank land who are seriously worried about the risks of diplomatic failure. I look forward to what she comes up with regarding sanctions.

  292. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    Karl, yes, Israel is a ‘relatively’ powerful country in a few senses.

    That is by design. US, by law, guarantees her military edge in the region. That, in part is part of the reason Rouhani has argued in 2006 that possession of nukes will not improve Iran’s security.

    But, careful you don’t wind up costing your country $4 billion of annual aid. After all, if folks start to believe Israel is powerful in every sense, it might get folks wondering if Israel shouldn’t start paying US taxpayer money back.

  293. Karl.. says:


    Its not 4 billion of annual aid that makes Israel powerful when it comes to economic principles, rather their domestic production.

  294. Smith says:

    More propaganda from official british propaganda channel supporting wahabis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjqLTQ_jU40&feature=youtu.be

    They want nothing short of complete destruction of Iran. All negotiations are british deceptions. Only nuclear weapons can save Iran now.

  295. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 2:05 pm

    At the risk of seeming bigoted, do take peek at


    You will notice that Israel is in 40th place, and Iran is at 22.

    Show a bit of gratitude for all the financial and military help you get from US taxpayers.

  296. Sammy says:

    ….While Uri has a long record for fighting for a peaceful resolution for Palestinian rights, and often at great danger to himself, having been attacked several times, there are still ‘red lines’ which he observes and does not tread. We have always been baffled by his refusal to discuss the key issue, Israel’s WMD, and the threat it represents to all the rest of us, as it is currently in the hands of crazy people… Jim W. Dean ]


  297. Sammy says:

    A realistic view :


    ‘US rapprochement with Iran will pave the way for the emergence of a new alliance where Iran, Iraq, al-Assad’s Syria and Hezbollah will be the new allies of United States and West with Zaydi Shi’ites in Yemen and Ithna-Ashari Akhbari Shi’ites of Bahrain.

    Washington foresees the inevitable collapse of the decades-long status quo and is working to create a new Shi’ite-based Middle East where Shi’ite-led regimes will be its future allies. The days of axes of evil and resistance are now numbered as the new alliance between the US and Shi’ite regimes emerges in the energy-rich region….

  298. James Canning says:


    Obama, while obliged to listen to advice from Dennis Ross, is not obliged to follow that advice. Obama does not want a U.S. war with Iran, if one can be avoided. Obama is trying to avoid a war with Iran even though Netanyahu apparently wants such a war.

    American and European public opinion is not in favor of western military intervention in the Syrian civil war.

  299. Sammy says:

    And of course on the loser side we have :

    ***Saudi suicide***


    ‘The second hypothesis recalls the behavior of camels, animal fetishes of the Saudi Bedouins. They are reputed to be capable of carrying a grudge for years, not finding peace until they have satisfied their revenge whatever the cost….

  300. James Canning says:


    Dennis Ross has Obama’s ear due to his strong connections to powerful Jews whose support Obama needs. Netanyahu obviously feels free to make demands on the U.S., and he feels free to pressure Obama openly. Obama, however, will resist Netanyahu’s demands (for war with Iran) provided a deal of some sort with the P5+1 is achieved.

  301. James Canning says:


    Obama entered the White House hoping to improve U.S. relations with Iran. It appears that Dennis Ross intentionally blocked Obama from achieving his objective. Obama, in fact, does not have the same views as Dennis Ross. Obama, however, must listen to Ross even if the advice Obama receives in often very bad.

  302. Sammy says:

    And here we have the EX -‘heroic’ fighters of the IDF , ‘relaxing’ from olive tree poisoning and other PERVERSION :


    ‘From the perspective of one former soldiers who has been living in India for more than six years and served as a commander of an Israeli elite unit there is a fine line between sanity and madness, a borderline condition that can be discerned in the portraits of this documentary. There is a frenzied look of people, incoherent statements suspending the reality context and rapid motion activities. Yet at the same time others seem to be in a state of drug induced bliss, totally cooled out, and regressed to childlike states The former commander suggests that, military service destroyed the identity and meaning of life, and that staying on drugs rehabilitates former soldiers by getting ‘the crap’ out of their system. In the army he faced disgraceful things and his hand caused death and destruction. Yoav Shamir presents none of the female ex-soldiers who live in Israeli communities in India and also take drugs and seems to imply that females adapt better to the stress of military service…

  303. Sammy says:

    I could not withstand :

    ‘Israel tells Chinese workers sign no-sex contract or else…


    ‘Chinese workers at a company in Israel have been forced to agree not to have sex with or marry Israelis as a condition of getting a job.

    According to a contact they are required to sign, male workers may not have any contact with Israeli women – including prostitutes, a police spokesman, Rafi Yaffe, said…

  304. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    October 30, 2013 at 3:19 pm

    The security of Iran cannot be entrusted to what Champions of Israel feel at any given day of the week.

    The King must be assumed to be Mad until credibly demonstrated otherwise.

    There is no way that a sane man could mollify a psychopathic cunning mad man except through the power of inflicting unbearable harm.

    That is where we are at this moment, 2500 hundred years after Plato stating: “Only the dead have seen the end of war” and a year away from the centennial of World War I – the “War to end all wars.”

  305. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 2:53 pm

    “You need to check Real GDP”

    Then why do you link per capita income lists?

    “Using a PPP basis is arguably more useful when comparing generalized differences in total economic output between countries because PPP takes into account the relative costs and the inflation rates of the countries, rather than using just exchange rates which may distort the real differences in income. Economies do self-adjust to currency changes over time, and technology intensive and luxury goods, raw materials and energy prices are mostly unaffected by difference in currency (the latter more by subsidies), however this is taken into account by the price comparison surveys, such as the International Comparison Program, which are used as the basis for PPP calculations. These surveys include both tradable and non-tradable goods in an attempt to estimate a representative basket of all goods”


    The PPP improves on the sanctioned Iran’s position, raising it to 17Th, and aggravates the aided Israel’s position to 49th.

    Anyways, though. Karl, tell us what makes Israel powerful other than her incredible economy and GDP?

  306. Sammy says:

    Always an excellent information source :


    …“Many of those who awaited the Tomahawk missiles, as a punishment to the Syrian regime and a letter to the nuclear enriching Iranian regime, were trembled by the “phone call” news.” This is what General Manager of Al-Arabiya news channel Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed wrote in the Saudi Asharq Al-Awsat, clarifying that the “phone call” trembled decision making centers in the Gulf, Jordan, Turkey, Israel, and others.”….

  307. Karl.. says:


    Because thats the (real) index for the world. In that Iran comes at 78 and Israel 27.

  308. Karl.. says:


    I already told you that the domestic industry in Israel is the reason for this. Apparently your negative emotions for Israel keeps you from accepting that Israel is a powerful state.

  309. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    October 30, 2013 at 4:05 pm

    Karl is correct.

    Israel has the limited ability to attack Iran from air by airplanes.

    Iran does not have that ability.

    Israel has better intelligence gathering capabilities – some through technology transfers, some through stealing from US and others, and some through Americans giving them information.

    Iran’s power is less than Israel’s in this arena.

    Israel can annihilate major Iranian cities.

    Iran does not have that ability.

    Israel is scientifically and technologically more advanced than Iran – no doubt.

  310. Sammy says:

    AHA , dirty as always :


    ..In particular, it was the private message that Brahimi brought to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani that suggests the Algerian career diplomat is acting more as an interlocutor for Washington’s nefarious political agenda, rather than as an honest peace broker..

  311. nico says:

    Another interesting (conspiracy ?) theory.

    “Air India Flight 101 was a scheduled flight from Mumbai to London; and on the day of the accident was operated by a Boeing 707, registration VT-DMN and named Kanchenjunga.[2] After leaving Bombay, it had made two scheduled stops at Delhi and Beirut and was en route to another stop at Geneva.[2] At Flight Level 190, the crew was instructed to descend for Geneva International Airport after the aircraft had passed Mont Blanc.[2] The pilot, thinking that he had passed Mont Blanc, started to descend and flew into the Mont Blanc massif in France near the Rochers de la Tournette, at an elevation of 4,750 metres (15,584 ft).[2][3] All 106 passengers and 11 crew were killed.[3]”

    “Among the 106 passengers were the chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission Dr.Homi Jehangir Bhabha.[3] and Amrit Prasad Pradhan, founder of the Amrit Science College in Nepal.[citation needed] G. Bertoli, Air India’s regional director for Europe, died. G. V. Divaswami, the airline’s superintendent of technical operations, perished. Two Americans and a French woman on the airline’s United States staff also died.[4]”

    “Assassination conspiracy

    Many possible theories have been advanced for the air crash, including a conspiracy theory in which Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is involved in order to paralyze India’s nuclear program.[14] In 2012, an Indian diplomatic bag containing newspapers, calendars and a personal letter was recovered near the crash site.[15][16]”

    Well yes only a conspiracy theory like the assassination of Iranian scientists or Iraki nuclear physicists.

    “Abdul Rasul was an Iraqi nuclear engineer and a nuclear scientist. He was the central figure in Iraq’s nuclear weapon program and is considered a nuclear weapon technologist. He was the head of Iraq’s nuclear program from 1973 until 1981. He was heavily involved in France-Iraq nuclear cooperation deal. During his visit to France, he was poisoned at a Paris lunch by Mossadand died in 1981. Tzipi Livni, Israel’s prominent and powerful politician is believed to be involved in his murder. He worked at Osirak, which was a nuclear reactor site reportedly involved in the development of nuclear weapons.”

    Once upon a time the axis powers were against India getting nuclear tech.
    Once upon a time France helped Saddam to get a nuclear program.

    And guess what ?


  312. fyi says:

    Sammy says:

    October 30, 2013 at 4:23 pm

    Mr. Brahimi was never an honest peace broker; he was sent to do a hatchet job on Mr. Assad and his government – something that Mr. Anan refused to undertake.

    I personally give very high likelihood to the content of Mr. Brahimi’s message; Axis Powers trying to extract yet another concession out of Iran; getting what they could not obtain on the field of battle.

    If this report is accurate, it indicates that Axis Powers are estimating that Iran is acting under duress and he current policy is one of weakness ready to surrender.

    They are wrong and if they persist this last station before Iran pulls of NPT will be missed as well.

  313. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 30, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    I think you might have missed the origin of this back and forth with Karl, who, by the way, to his credit, admits and is proud of being an Israeli, unlike other trolls.

    The origin was the unfortunate phrase “powers like Israel and the US.” Notice how US takes second position on Karl’s list of 2 “powers.”

    All I can tell you fyi, is that if you have no legitimacy, nor an agenda of coexistence, nor a narrative of social justice, then you’d better have quite a bit of wiz bang electronics, useless bombs, and what not. These will never save you from manifest destiny, but will keep you busy amassing irrelevancies.

  314. nico says:

    Another interesting (conspiracy ?) theory.
    From wiki Air_India_Flight_101

    “Air India Flight 101 was a scheduled flight from Mumbai to London; and on the day of the accident was operated by a Boeing 707, registration VT-DMN and named Kanchenjunga.[2] After leaving Bombay, it had made two scheduled stops at Delhi and Beirut and was en route to another stop at Geneva.[2] At Flight Level 190, the crew was instructed to descend for Geneva International Airport after the aircraft had passed Mont Blanc.[2] The pilot, thinking that he had passed Mont Blanc, started to descend and flew into the Mont Blanc massif in France near the Rochers de la Tournette, at an elevation of 4,750 metres (15,584 ft).[2][3] All 106 passengers and 11 crew were killed.[3]”

    “Among the 106 passengers were the chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission Dr.Homi Jehangir Bhabha.[3] and Amrit Prasad Pradhan, founder of the Amrit Science College in Nepal.[citation needed] G. Bertoli, Air India’s regional director for Europe, died. G. V. Divaswami, the airline’s superintendent of technical operations, perished. Two Americans and a French woman on the airline’s United States staff also died.[4]”

    “Assassination conspiracy
    Many possible theories have been advanced for the air crash, including a conspiracy theory in which Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is involved in order to paralyze India’s nuclear program.[14] In 2012, an Indian diplomatic bag containing newspapers, calendars and a personal letter was recovered near the crash site.[15][16]”

    Well yes only a conspiracy theory like the assassination of Iranian scientists or Iraki nuclear physicists.
    From wiki Abdul_Rasul_(Iraqi_scientist)

    “Abdul Rasul was an Iraqi nuclear engineer and a nuclear scientist. He was the central figure in Iraq’s nuclear weapon program and is considered a nuclear weapon technologist. He was the head of Iraq’s nuclear program from 1973 until 1981. He was heavily involved in France-Iraq nuclear cooperation deal. During his visit to France, he was poisoned at a Paris lunch by Mossadand died in 1981. Tzipi Livni, Israel’s prominent and powerful politician is believed to be involved in his murder. He worked at Osirak, which was a nuclear reactor site reportedly involved in the development of nuclear weapons.”

    Once upon a time the axis powers were against India getting nuclear tech.
    Once upon a time France helped Saddam to get a nuclear program.

    And guess what ?


  315. Karl.. says:


    So your problem was that I put Israel before the US? Now you are just childish.

  316. Sammy says:

    fyi says:
    October 30, 2013 at 4:31 pm

    In addition we need to see what Russia ( & China) are planning , may be this is not related directly to your comment , however this article from Israel Shamir really got my attention and it reflects the positions of Russia/China quite well :


    ..None of this could’ve been achieved without the support of China. The Asian giant considers Russia its “elder sister” and relies upon her ability to deal with the round-eyes. The Chinese, in their quiet and unassuming way, played along with Putin. They passed Snowden to Moscow. They vetoed anti-Syrian drafts in the UNSC, and sent their warships to the Med. That is why Putin stood the ground not only for Russia, but for the whole mass of Eurasia.

    The Church was supportive of Putin’s efforts; not only the Russian Church, but both Catholics and Orthodox were united in their opposition to the pending US campaign for the US-supported rebels massacred Christians. The Pope appealed to Putin as to defender of the Church; so did the churches of Jerusalem and Antioch. The Pope almost threatened to excommunicate Hollande, and the veiled threat impressed the French president. So Putin enjoyed support and blessing of the Orthodox Patriarchs and of the Pope: such double blessing is an extremely rare occassion..

  317. fyi says:

    Sammy says:

    October 30, 2013 at 4:58 pm

    I am not surprised.

    The Champions of Israel, Protestant or Jew, destroying ancient Christian communities would not go down well with the Pope or the Catholics.

  318. kooshy says:

    As it been mentioned by Iran’s political and military leaders in numerous times, Israel is too small to be counted in Iranian war calculations. Because of her size and just like US military as it was evident in 06 wars with Hezbollah her military is not designed for a long war. But the bigger problem Israel is facing is not Iran or Hezbollah. Younger Israeli generation due to insecurity and loss of hope for Israel to be accepted in the region believes the prospect of war with newer younger Arab regimes has been elevated. As a result of this increased insecurity younger generation is migrating as soon as an opportunity arises returning military service aged members of IDF has been very unreliable.

  319. nico says:

    Sammy says:
    October 30, 2013 at 4:58 pm

    “The Pope almost threatened to excommunicate Hollande, and the veiled threat impressed the French president.”

    I am not sure that is related to Syria.
    What does mean ALMOST threatened ? Any source ?
    Some were talking about that on the web but related to the law related to gay marriage.
    Sure that is not that catholic a law !
    Anyway, should the pope and roman christianity have balls, honor, dignity they would have excommunicate Hollande. And surely that would be a sign of revival.
    But you know with Vatican II the church pledged not to interfere with the real life of people and political stuff.
    The church has been neutered and is now totally irrelevant.
    Even on such matter as gay marriage (even if said as secular it is a major social and civilizational shift in familiy organization and status) the church has not been that vocal.

    But this is the kind of fyi freemason nihilistic thinking and degeneration that is leading the western social transformation for the worse.

  320. Sammy says:

    fyi says:
    October 30, 2013 at 5:15 pm

    Again not related , I expect Ayatollah Khamenei to come up with crucial and sharp announcements within the next days ( before or within Ashura )
    Generally in a current mad mad world , I consider Ayatollah Khamenei and president Putin the wisest of all ‘politicians’ , as both are ‘revolutionists’ more than politicians and only God knows , as He wrote the ‘screenplay’.

  321. nico says:

    But I am surely wrong in that like the majority which were followers of Hitler and Mao.
    The kind of infamous argument used by fyi.

  322. Sammy says:

    nico says:
    October 30, 2013 at 5:41 pm

    ‘The church has been neutered and is now totally irrelevant.’

    I agree with you and if you go to Western Europe , the people don’t even remember God.

    However the assumption that the planned NWO is functioning without a ‘religion’ would be a total misjudgment , as you would surely agree.
    ‘They’ propagate secularism , but strict according to ‘Their’ slogan ‘ By Deception , thou shalt do War ‘ they act the exact opposite.
    If you will they even are extremely religious , however their religion is ‘ Zionism , Fascism , radical Protestantism and USD magic money creation (FED).
    Meanwhile the fake ‘Emperor’ is naked and we have to see what the real ‘Director’ has planned.

  323. masoud says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 30, 2013 at 4:14 pm

    I’m not really following your and bibijoon’s argument, but what your saying is that countries like Israel and Luxembourg are more economically powerful than China, India, and Brazil.

    Do you see any problem with that ‘real index for the world’?

  324. nico says:

    Sammy says:
    October 30, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    “However the assumption that the planned NWO is functioning without a ‘religion’ would be a total misjudgment , as you would surely agree.”

    I agree with that.
    The western “NWO”: I would rather call it the western civilization struggle to impose itself and its transendancy and model through violence and corruption.
    That is truly a clash of civilization.
    And Islam is obviously one directly antagonistic in term of world views, transendency and religiosity.

    “If you will they even are extremely religious , however their religion is ‘ Zionism , Fascism , radical Protestantism and USD magic money creation (FED).”

    Wow, even my usual rants are not that direct.
    Would you call it a secularist disaster ? I think that we can agree on that.

    The issue with zionist judaism and radical protestantism in the west is that others do not care anymore about religion, moral and principles. Thus the formers face no resistance and have the free ride and easily impose their will.

    As I said time and again the zionist and radical protestant think they are god chosen people and above others.
    That is not in line with catholicism world views which does not exist anymore and rathet morphed into the current degenerated secularist enlightment.

    The issue with fyi and smith is that they equate a society external/relative material power to its intrinsic internal legitimacy at the expense of moral and principles.
    That is simply wrong and in practice that is the source/origin of the US unrestrained exeptionalist hubris.

    The truth of the matter is that originally western secularism was a progressive movement against a corrupt church.
    Nowadays secularism is a corrupt and regressive movement that goes against moral and principles.
    Suffice to see the secularist surveillance “inquisition” and the technological and blind “drone” murderers.
    Siffice to see the western social degeneration. The worst being in the US, UK and France.

  325. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    October 30, 2013 at 3:27 pm


    In past few weeks with the publications of material from Mr. Snowden Mr. Obama and his lieutenants have been caught in untruths after untruths (that is the polite form of the statement).

    On what basis do you assign any credibility to their campaign and political speeches about “friendly relations”? What credibility do they have on any topic be it Iran, Egypt, Syria, Israel, …

    Do you have any factual basis – any at all – beyond “they said it so it must be true” – to support your views? Anything?!

    After repeated attempts to insult your intelligence by trying to convince you that they don’t spy on you, why do you allow them to insult your intelligence even more?

    My southern friends here say: it is one thing to give someone the benefit of the doubt, it is another to give someone benefits because you have the brain of an alpha alpha sprout!

  326. Sammy says:

    nico says:
    October 30, 2013 at 9:18 pm

    nico a nice comment , us usual ( I follow your posts for quite a long time )
    The other day I was thinking whose ‘natural/genuine’ right it would be for total surveillance and ‘death from above’ and the clear answer would be God Almighty since eternity and look what these false pack of Zio-Fascists have done , they think that they are in a position to replace God , the punishment for this attitude would be most severe , trust me on that.
    On a Federal Reserve fake/magic money note it’s printed : “IN GOD WE TRUST”
    Which God ??
    Of course the god of the founding families of the FED and we know what kind of god they worship.
    In order to impose their system of usury , compound interest etc. centuries ago ‘They’ had to eliminate ‘classical religion’ and they started in Europe with great success and replaced it with their own religion.
    Heinrich Heine a brilliant German/Jewish thinker and poet said this 1848 !!

    “Money is the god of our time, and Rothschild is his prophet.”


  327. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Otherwise we’ll go to hell. In fact you’re in it right now, you just can’t see it.

    The moment of death…all the veils are lifted…in your current state, that moment will really suck for you.

    Inshallah we’ll all die as Muslims under the velayat of Ameerul Mo’meneen (a.s.).

    Muharram is starting in a few days, another chance Allah (swt) is giving you to get real.

    Use it.

  328. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Not a fabrication. Jurisdiction of wali-faqih is wherever and by whomever it will be followed regardless of territory.

    In fact Hezbollah’s own manifesto states that its leader is the wali-e faqih.

    It would be nice to have actual knowledge of things before opening one’s mouth.

    Kos-khol and closet-case have a mental disorder that forces them to be experts on every freakin subject in the universe. Just nod and smile…

    In other words Imam previously and Rahbar currently is Sayyid Hassan’s boss and can order his execution.

    Following such an order would be wajib.

    As usual kos-khol is talking out of his ass when it comes to religion.

  329. nico says:

    Sammy says:
    October 31, 2013 at 5:37 am

    “Money is the god of our time, and Rothschild is his prophet.”

    At some point it is striking to see that this is the exact same corruption that was denounced and condemned in catholicism and islam centuries ago and praised by judaism and protestantism.
    That is the golden idol and usury against human development, Justice and dignity.

    That being said extremism is the main enemy.
    I mean one need to recognize that fair interest rates and independent private banking have been a natural and usefull evolution which enable the allocation of capital for human development.
    It encouraged and supported the creation of wealth and value.

    Private Central bank like the FED is another issue and surely is a robbery of the common good for private interests.
    That is an issue of governance and privatization of state policies and distribution of income that should have neever occured
    Another larger issue is the abuse and the uncontrolled finance as we are experiencing it for 40 years now with the ultra liberal doxa. That is finance supporting and feeding finance at the expense of the real/material economy.

    Ultra liberalism and wild globalization are experiencing their last gasps and such degenerate system will collapse like the USSR collapsed.

  330. fyi says:


    This is Hezbollah Manifesto:


    There is no mention of the Wali-i Faqih of Iran also being the Commander-in-Chief of the the Hezbollah Forces in the Field.

    [That such a thing might be a fine idea is not in dispute but for that at least an act of Majlis would be needed; otherwise the Wali-i Faqih would be raising his own foreign armies illegally.]

    The Office of the Supreme Jurisprudent does not have the constitutional perogatives to extend its reach to non-Iranians.

    You either follow the Iranian Constitution or something else; you cannot serve 2 masters.

    In any case, a death sentence cannot be uttered by the Wali-i Faquh within the Iranian Constitution – were every article of her constitution explicitly invokes the “Law” for its further elucidation and implementation.

    Nor the Wali-i Faqih – in his personal capacity as a Marj’a – can legally utter death sentences against this or that person or issue followers this or that orders. That would be illegal.

    Now, other Muslims outside of Iran can elect to invoke the ancient Muslim tradition of Beyat and commit & pledge themselves to Wali-i Faqi as their political leader.

    But then that pledge will be to the person occupying the Office of Vali Faqih and not to the Office itself.

    Iranian Law is absent in this case and must be further developed. As a minimum, I should think both the Majlis and the Expediency Council must approve such an arrangement, lest the Wali-i Faqih raise his own armies for his own purposes.

    I personally believe that just like the English Constitution, that forbids the creation of a King’s Party – there should be a ban on the creation of a “Wali’s Party”.

  331. BiBiJon says:

    PS October 27, 2013 at 6:57 am

    Regrading Robert Einhorn’s piece

    I wrote:

    Surely, the point at which Iran feels she had better arm herself, is a point where threats of “taking necessary action” is way down the list of imminent calamities that prompted Iran to decide to acquire nukes post haste.

    So, if not logic, then what is making Einhorn want to keep the military threat on the table after a deal?


    Prof Walt has a piece today about how unnecessary, counterproductive and DUMB non-stop saber rattling is.


    But, the good professor is being too polite about America’s tourette syndrome. Uncontrollably mouthing off threats incurs its cost not with the militarily weaker nations whom the threats are meant for.

    Just imagine a Chinese or Russian general advocating bigger military slice of the economic pie. All he has to do is to point at the latest “all options on the table” idiot phrase rolling off the tongue of one or other ‘influential American’ within the preceding 10 minutes. When Einhorn picks up a megaphone and issues threats of force against Iran, it is not just Iran who hears it. Everybody does.

    Poor Einhorn might not mean it. The subculture is such that if the ‘finger on the trigger’ metaphor is not somewhere within your memo/article/speech/interview, etc. your colleagues will ignore everything else Einhorn might have to say.

    And, just in case the “threat” was too many paragraphs down in the article to be sufficiently visible, Ms. Maloney advertises it on Einhorn’s behalf in the very opening graph of her article.

    Watch your mouths/pens, I say. Too many unnecessary threats = more insecurity for the threat monger.

  332. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    October 31, 2013 at 10:29 am

    With regards to Iran specifically, US has no positive inducements.

    She is left with “Absence of War” as her only inducement.

  333. Karl.. says:


    No what I said was that Israel is a power and that it has a greater GDP p.captita than Iran.

  334. Karl.. says:


    Ross was elected by the administration, of course they had the same views.

  335. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 31, 2013 at 10:46 am

    Did you graduate high school?

  336. Sammy says:

    nico says:
    October 31, 2013 at 8:48 am
    “Ultra liberalism and wild globalization are experiencing their last gasps and such degenerate system will collapse like the USSR collapsed.”

    True statement !
    Ironically this very system that you describe above collapsed the USSR and is destined for its own self-destruction because of its evil nature , 2 birds with one stone so to say.
    In a sense for example the US ‘imperial’ army was good ONLY for one thing and that was to take out 2 of Iran’s worst enemies in 2001 and 2003 , without Iran firing one bullet.
    If you deprive yourself from teleological thinking ( In Divine sense ) these days you’ll miss a lot of things.

  337. Karl.. says:


    Still sour?
    You deny Ross was elected now?

  338. Irshad says:

    fyi says:
    October 27, 2013 at 10:46 pm

    Thank you fyi for this update. As always, your pov is always good to read and
    hear! :-)

  339. Smith says:


    Why do you think Iranians behave like this (Iranians objecting to this lady’s wear): http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/tvandradio/2013/10/131030_u07_chamedan_roza_khorshidi_radio.shtml

  340. Smith says:


    (also the black and white vision)

  341. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 31, 2013 at 12:02 pm

    We have no tolerance; Either Islamic Disaster or Secular Disaster and with nothing in between.

    No Moderation, No Thinking, No Respect.

  342. Ataune says:


    Like Massoud, just following your discussion with Bibijon. You said:

    “No what I said was that Israel is a power and that it has a greater GDP per captita than Iran.”

    I think you are factually and rationally wrong on both Israel being a power and “GDP per capita demonstrating” it:

    As per Bibijon quote, it is the PPP which is the closest measure of the economical power of a country not the GDP or GDP per Capita data. One might say that even the PPP is not the only index to be considered. The military power, natural geography, population size, under and over the ground resources, technology, debt, growth rate, and yes ideology and soft power are among other factors that make a country strong or weak. In all these areas, except one portion of the military and maybe part of the technology field, Israel is either way behind Iran or barely on par with her.

    But even on the nuclear weapon side, it is obvious to any outside observers that Israel doesn’t have the freedom to exercise her will when the time for decision to push the button might arrive. Basically, regarding the most “powerful” instrument she illegally and criminally built to ward off the “existential threats” against her, Israel doesn’t have the free will to exercise the Decision. And, as you might know, any country in this kind of situation judged by any reasonable and fact oriented person will qualify such a country a surrogate or a protectorat or a vassal or a colony etc…

    It looks to me that you are the one that is avoiding the facts and being driven by emotions here.

  343. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    It is all in the eyes of the beholder.

    I’m surprised James didn’t mention this FT piece yet.


  344. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    October 31, 2013 at 1:22 pm

    You are reading too much into this.

    The Shia/Irani power has been successful in maintaining its coherence and the Will-to-Fight both in the economic war waged against it as well as the military one in Syria.

    The fact remains that the agents of chaos & destruction have been Americans; from their revolutionary project in Iraq to the one in Libya and now in Syria.

    As I stated last year, in situations of chaos – which really means human beings being brutalized and murdered wantonly – those who promise security and tranquility will prevail.

    That is what is happening; the governments of Iran, Syria and even Iraq – together with Hezbollah – stand for Law & Order & Concorde.

    US, EU, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar stand for the opposites.

    Look no further than Pakistan to what Axis Powers and Saudi Arabia have done; their latest achievement has been the scuttling of the gas pipeline to Pakistan; condemning tens of millions of people to extremes of heat and cold in the coming months and years.

  345. Smith says:


    No single index can gauge military power of a state. You may wanna take a look at this index: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_Index_of_National_Capability

    The combined economies of Arab states who went to war with Israel twice was several times that of Israel. So was their population. But they were soundly defeated. Iran fought several battles with Russia. In some of these battles, Russian army was a meager of a thousand men, while the Iranian army comprised of over 50,000 men. The Iranian army was soundly defeated and humiliated. Indexes have to be analysed accordingly.

    The per capita GDP PPP is important from the guy’s point of view living in the country in question. GDP PPP is more important from a state’s point of view.

    At any rate, Iran is a weak state. Its economy is based on old bazar traditions. Iran’s economy still can not produce internal combustion engines, electronic microprorcessors and moxifloxacin on its own. It is a third world economy that has to export oil pistachio and carpets in order to import internal combustion engine components from Taiwan and France, Dell Computers powered with Israeli electronic microprocessors and moxifloxacin from China and Germany.

    This is the reality. The truth. In Iranian market place it is a matter of high pride and honor when the seller and buyer claim the product being exchanged is American, German or Japanese.

    Let’s not forget, that air and naval power are equalizers. Iran’s air and naval power is a joke. Not considering the three Kilo class submarines in service, Iran’s navy is basically a boat navy. And Iran’s airforce is almost dead with their most sophisticated fighter jet being from early 1970’s. Modern battles as even Mr Khamenei had noted are mostly naval and air battles. And then the biggest equalizer of all is nuclear weapons. Which again, Iran’s enemies have but Iran does not.

    Even if Iran’s GDP was to become doubled in the next 10 years, something that would require a miracle, still Iran would be vulnerable. Iranians had a higher GDP per capita in 1978 than in 2010. But that did not help them when Saddam attacked Iran.

    The questions are these:

    If today a country decides to nuke Iran what deterrence Iran has that will make the attacker to think twice?

    If tomorrow a country ABC or XYZ nukes Iran, what would be Iran’s response?

    Iran’s economic woes are structural and will not go away even if all sanctions are removed. It is completely unrelated to issue at hand.

    PS. As I told you, it is useless to argue with liars and hypocrites. Engaging only encourages them to lie more. In Farsi we say, jawab ablahan khamoshist (the [appropriate] reply to [intentionally] ignorant is silence). In English it would be as Sahw put it: “Never wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”

  346. Smith says:


    I forgot to mention that the index I put there only measures the military capability a state can derive from its economic and population size. It does not take into account, the military capability that state derives from science, technology, innovation, industrialization, alliances and more importantly nuclear weapons.

  347. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 31, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    I think one of the missing elements in such measures is the organizational technology which is a form of technology as well.

    I think the Tsar of Russia’s income was 10 times that of the Shah of Persia when Iranians attacked Russia.

    The late Ghaem-magham advised the Shah against initiating hostilities with a monarch whose income exceeded his by a factor of ten.

    To no avail, first the Shah wanted to have him executed for speaking his mind against the prevailing opinion of the notables surrounding the Shah. Later he was dismissed from his position and sent into exile.

    When the Iranians were soundly defeated, he was brought back to negotiate the peace with the Russians.

    But I still believe that both the Russian Empire and the Israelis were better organized than Iran and the Arabs respectively.

    I am grateful for the Axis Powers sanctions that is kicking Iranians were it hurts and causing them to alter their chaotic ways and re-organize to survive.

    I agree with you regarding the internal combustion engine – Japanese seem to have cornered the market on the small engines and they will not share that technology with anyone.

  348. Karl.. says:


    Per Capita is derived through the GDP therefore GDP p. capita as my index showed, Iran is way below Israel. Military capabilites (“The military power, natural geography, population size, under and over the ground resources, technology, debt, growth rate, and yes ideology and soft power are among other factors that make a country strong or weak. I” have nothing to do with GDP p. capita which was the question.

    Israel have never used it (close to in 73 as far as the public know), Israel havent been attacked by any state just because of their power, nuclear to name one.

  349. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 31, 2013 at 1:52 pm

    I think the index is not an accurate measure of industrial power.

    You probably want to replace the ISPR (iron and steel production of country ratio) with 2 indices; one measuring the production of sulfuric acid and one measuring the production of liquid nitrogen.

    The index does not include fuel cycle and nuclear weapons – it is a very big omission.

  350. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 2:16 pm

    Yes, I agree. That is why in my explanation to Karl, I noted its weakness. Sulfuric acid actually used to be the ultimate industrialization benchmark in 19th century and still is exceedingly important. Steel replaced it in 20th century simply because, most of military armor and gun manufacturing now depend on it. But now such an index in 21st century has to be more complex and would need to take into account, university/technical education literacy rates, total computational power at disposal of a society, internet bandwidth availability, energy consumption, population, economic size, technology status, etc etc.

    I think the reason nuclear weapons are not included in that index is because it would be meaningless. Nuclear weapons are near perfect military equalizers. Nation Z, having an economy just 1% that of nation B has 150 nuclear weapons. Nation B has 1500 nuclear weapons plus an economy 100 times bigger than nation A and a population 10 times bigger. But militarily speaking, due to equalizing effect of nuclear weapons, the theoretical difference between them is going to be small and realistically almost non-existent. As a war between them would be suicidal for both. That is why such an index would not work (is not needed) when talking about nuclear armed parties. Nuclear weapons are the most egalitarian instruments human beings have ever made/will ever make.

  351. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 2:07 pm

    One of the weaknesses of third world countries including Iran, is their extremely low capability in management sciences/decision sciences. So it is not surprising.

    The proper/modern state tax/revenue collection systems were developed in western countries (even in Russia) very early one. In Britain they used to execute anyone by hanging who even had made small mistakes in his/her submission of tax returns. Iran simply had no such system. The writ of state was weak. And still is weak. Still in Iran, the richest people do not pay any taxes. The tax is usually only for the very poor or for the government employees. The smugglers, the “IN” people, the bazaris, the speculators, the import mafia are all exempt from tax. Officially.

    But then in a culture that scorns thinking and threatens any body who speaks his mind with death and torture, not much rapid development can be expected. Iran today is no more advanced relative to the world than it was during Qajar. It is all patchwork. Noting fundamental has been done to change the destiny of Iran and Iranians. After 35 years, we are still looking to America/Russia/EU to see us as friends, and protect us and feed us (including food, medicine, technology etc.). As it appears, Iranians are still not ready/incapable of taking their destiny in their own hands.

  352. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    So shameful. I wish there was more room for those who think in such societies. Unfortunately thinking is regarded as a high sin unforgivable and punishable by death.

  353. fyi says:


    Dr. Cordesman’s opinion:


    I must say, one starts feeling sorry for US diplomats – so many contradictory objectives, so little time or resource….

  354. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 31, 2013 at 2:52 pm

    The legacy of 800 years of emotionalism cannot be overcome by 34 years of the nationalistic governance of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    I believe that at the highest state levels, there is awareness of the issues that you are raising.

    I am satisfied with the progress of Iranians, they entered the 20-the century with hoes and now they are going toe-to-toe with their former “Betters” in US and EU and Russia.

    I think much of that owes to the opposition engendered to Islamic Republic of Iran from its inception.

    Axis Powers, USSR, and Arabs made a fundamental miscalculation to go against Iran instead of leaving her alone to meander from one fantasy to another – being involved in themselves and their own problems for decades.

    But no, they could not leave that one well alone and had to go out of their way with Iran-Iraq War etc.

    Axis Powers, USSR, China, Israel, and Arabs brought about something that had not existed since the days of the Great King: Iranian power from Hindu Kush to the Mediterranean Sea – which they are now earnestly trying to destroy.

  355. Sammy says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    Nice , nice comment…

  356. fyi says:

    Mr. Smith:

    این دیدار که از طرف دکتر احمدی توسط سایت ابن عربی منتشر شده است به شرح ذیل است:

    …حضرت آیت الله که پیدا بود از پیچیدگی ، دشواری و اهمیت علوم انسانی و پیوند آن با مسائل اسلامی نیک آگاه و سخت نگرانند و برای هشدار دادن به ما و مسئولان ذیربط احساس مسئولیت می کنند فرمودند :

    « بررسی مسائل دینی و بردن نتیجه آن به دانشگاه ها و حوزه های اجرایی کاری است بسیار دشوار. آیا طلبه ای که شرایع و لمعه و مکاسب و جواهر را خوانده می تواند بر مسند قضاوت بنشیند و کار حقوقی و قضایی انجام دهد؟ من از مشکلاتی که در دادگاه های ایران هست خبر دارم. مسائل باید همه جانبه و با توجه به آراء دیگران هم بررسی و سپس با وقوف کامل به فقه و حقوق خودمان نظر نهایی اعلام شود.

    از باب نمونه دکتر کاشانی فرزند آیت الله کاشانی استاد حقوق در باب شفعه نظر حقوقی فرانسه را ترجیح داده … اما اگر دکتر کاشانی به فقه احاطه داشت می دید که در روایت امام جواد علیه السلام این مطلب با وضوح آمده است ، روایت این است که : اگر صاحب حق شفعه در همان شهر است شریک سه روز به او مهلت می دهد و اگر می خواهد برود پول را از شهر دیگری بیاورد به اندازه رفت و برگشت و سه روز پس از بازگشت به او مهلت می دهد. اگر در این مدت رسانید سهم از آن اوست و گرنه حق شفعه ندارد .»

    حضرت آیت الله فرمودند : « اگر صاحب حق شفعه در شهر دیگری باشد ، باید به او اعلام کنند و پس از دریافت اعلام هم سه روز مهلت دارد تا قیمت سهم شریک را بیاورد ، اگر نیاورد حق شفعه اش ساقط می شود.

    سپس فرمودند : نتیجه بحث و بررسی و دگرگونی در علوم انسانی باید این باشد که در قالب عمل و اجرا درآید و از طریق دانشگاهها به سرتاسر جامعه سرایت کند و تحول ساز باشد و گرنه چه فایده ای دارد؟ مثلا تدریس فلسفه که عموما هم تدریس فلسفه ملاصدراست و آن هم با آراء منحرف محیی الدین آمیخته است و در باب معاد هم مشکل دارد چه نتیجه ای دارد؟»

    معظم له از نفوذ و رسوخ افکار خرافی در جامعه ایران با نقل خواب و … در باب مهدویت و ارتباط جامعه علمی دانشگاهی با این قبیل افکار ، بیمناک و نگران بودند که چگونه بین این دو شیوه تفکر میتوانید هماهنگی ایجاد کنید؟

    به گزارش پارسینه این مرجع تقلید همچنین افزوده است: نمی دانم با توجه به مشکلاتی که گفتم چگونه می خواهید مشکل معارف اسلامی و کتاب های حوزه علوم انسانی را به گونه ای که مورد قبول دانشگاهیان باشد حل کنید فکر میکنم اگر به دنیا بگوئیم ما پاسخ بسیاری از مسائل را هنور نیافته ایم بهتر است تا این که ادعا کنیم همه چیز را می دانیم ولی درعمل نتوانیم پاسخی قابل ارائه به غرب و به روشنفکران بدهیم.

  357. Sammy says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    ‘Axis Powers, USSR, and Arabs made a fundamental miscalculation to go against Iran..

    In reality one of the main reasons for the miserable demise of the USSR was the fact that for the first ( and last ) time since WW2 the USSR was a strategic partner with the US to destroy the IRI and we remember the words that Imam Khomeini told to Shevardnadze right into his face.

  358. James Canning says:

    Iran’s oil production in September was the lowest for a month in almost 25 years. More attention should be given to proposals in Iran as to how to foster greater foreign investment in Iran’s oil industry.

  359. James Canning says:

    David Gardner in the Financial Times today has interesting comments about Saudi unease with some aspects of current U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. (ft.com)

  360. James Canning says:


    Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the two countries that have provided more support for the insergency in Syria than any other countries. The Saudis and Qataris are not backing the same insergent groups, however. Obama himself clearly has wished to avoid getting sucked into the Syrian civil war.

  361. James Canning says:


    You were ahead of me regarding David Gardner’s comments today in the Financial Times.

  362. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    I agree. One can only hope that those in position in power are aware of these realities and combined with stick of sanctions and threats mobilize Iran’s potential to make an Iran that is scientifically and technologically self sufficient.

    I remember Mr Khamenei had said once that we should seal our oil wells and have an economy completely independent of oil.

    This oil business has destroyed Iran. The sooner, Iran stops exporting oil and gas completely, the better.

    The economic engine of a nation should be its human resources producing knowledge.

  363. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 3:29 pm

    نمی دانم با توجه به مشکلاتی که گفتم چگونه می خواهید مشکل معارف اسلامی و کتاب های حوزه علوم انسانی را به گونه ای که مورد قبول دانشگاهیان باشد حل کنید فکر میکنم اگر به دنیا بگوئیم ما پاسخ بسیاری از مسائل را هنور نیافته ایم بهتر است تا این که ادعا کنیم همه چیز را می دانیم ولی درعمل نتوانیم پاسخی قابل ارائه به غرب و به روشنفکران بدهیم.

    It is heartwarming to know that atleast some have the courage to admit the truth.

    Personally I do not believe Iran or for that matter all Muslims have a chance until a massive, government sponsored (preferentially from office of Vali Faqih) and well organized effort to research the western civilization/philosophy in context of/for creating an Islamic civilization/philosophy encompassing the foundations of a modern society and state is undertaken.

    Unfortunately, as like the issue of science among Muslims, wherein alot of Muslims claim the formula for all scientific discoveries and technologies etc are in Holy Quran, the ignorants still think that formula for basic societal rights of man and woman are also written in Holy Quran. It is just a matter of reading between the lines of the Holy Quran (to paraphrase Dr. Hoodbhoy).

    Unfortunately they still live in times of Jaheliat. Denying has been a solution for their problems since long.

    In other news meanwhile WHO has confirmed that the strain of Polio virus that has re-infected Syria has been imported there from Pakistan. Most probably via a Jehadi from Pakistan joining anti-Assad forces. The Islamic scholars in Pakistan have issued Fatwa declaring Swedish/American/Indian/Russian made polio vaccines being unIslamic. Way to go.

  364. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 31, 2013 at 4:12 pm

    You wrote:

    “This oil business has destroyed Iran. The sooner, Iran stops exporting oil and gas completely, the better.”

    I must disagree with this.

    The Near East climate mitigates against capital accumulation.

    The selling of oil – in spite of its plunder by the Axis Powers – enabled the Iranian state – under the Monarchy as well as under the Islamic Republic – to carryout a program of adaptation of Western civilizational techniques in Iran that would have been impossible otherwise.

    One need only look at Afghanistan, Pakistan, Jordan, Tunisia, Egypt, and Morocco to see the difference that oil has made to Iran over the last 100 years.

    But I agree with you that perhaps the time has come to rely not on the Oil Lift but on the Intellect Lift.

    [If you look at Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Armenia, and Georgia you can see how the removal of oil-based subsidies from the USSR state plunged them into rapid poverty.]

  365. Karl.. says:

    So Israel attack again, again Israel doesnt bluff when they threat which some here seems to believe. West accept these attacks too, an attack on Iran will be treated the same.

  366. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    October 31, 2013 at 4:50 pm

    “So Israel attack again, again Israel doesnt bluff when they threat which some here seems to believe. West accept these attacks too, an attack on Iran will be treated the same.”

    Karl, a list of attack threat for you up until Monday, November 21, 2011. There have been quite a few more threats since then, but this should keep you busy for a while.


  367. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    October 31, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    Rubbish! All evidence points in the opposite direction regarding Obama and Syria.

  368. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    October 31, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    I agree with the essence of what you wrote, but still we have other examples like Japan, South Korea, China, Brazil (they developed an ethanol economy) and Argentine (they developed their own indigenous nuclear reactor designs) who despite them never reaching western civilization did achieve tremendously without oil. Though oil makes certain adaptations easy (eg. Dubai/Qatar are quite “modern” cities) but at the end of the day it will again come back to human resources.

    Maybe Amir Kabir knew this (I am not sure even he had grasped these ideas) but majority of people even today are clueless. They still think of wealth in terms of oil/gold/money/rent/their smuggler cousin connection/stealing etc etc, even at quite high level of state. While actually they must think of wealth in terms of human thinking capability and its resultant products. No matter how much Iran Khodro gets foreign investment and imported technology and preferential custom duties, it will never be able to become a proper car manufacturing company. Until and unless they do not entrust and support the capable people to run well funded R&D setups. It should be the market demand and R&D output that runs a company not the oil money, rent, etc etc.

    I am sure, if the oil money starts flowing again, Iran will sink back to a rent economy subsidizing importation of consumer goods and discouraging any investment in capital goods and indigenous production. Oil has become a poison for Iran’s economy. The sooner its export comes to a halt, the better, preferentially permanently. The first step to treat a poisoned patient, is to stop giving him poison. This was the point I was; making.

  369. Smith says:

    Nuri Maliki writes an Op-Ed in NYT just before meeting Obama, begging US for help: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/opinion/international/have-patience-with-us.html?_r=0

  370. Smith says:

    Baluchestan: Iran’s Tragic Frontier: http://www.majalla.com/eng/2013/11/article55246455

  371. Karl.. says:

    November 1, 2013 at 1:24 am

    Wow the comments are very negative. Who can deny that Iraq face real terrorism?

  372. Rehmat says:

    The leaders of America’s four main pro-Israel Jewish organizations, AIPAC, AJC, ADL and the Conference of Jewish Presidents, slammed US secretary of state, John Kerry for criticizing the opponents of US-Iran direct nuclear talks during his speech at the Ploughshares Fund Gala on October 28, 2013.


  373. Rd. says:

    one hope the Turkish government is finally getting off their donkey..

    “Turkey, Iran signal thaw in ties amid mutual concern on Syria”



    “Ankara plans to shut Saudi intelligence offices in Turkey following a series of diplomatic disputes over the conflicts in Syria and Egypt, a well-placed Turkish source told Al-Akhbar.”


  374. fyi says:


    Axis Powers wish to keep Iran (and everyone else) backwards:

    See here US innovations on fission-powered space vehicles


  375. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    October 31, 2013 at 7:50 pm

    Yes, I agree.

    As Mr. Richard Steven Hack had repeatedly stated: Syria, followed by Iran – that is still their game plan.

    At a minimum, if one to believe otherwise, one would expect explicit and implicit statements from US leaders that enemies of Israel are no longer considered to be also enemies of the United States.

    That policy change – as far as I can tell – is yet to be made.

  376. fyi says:


    On fission-powered space vehicles


    I am certain that the P5 would also ban these types of developments in Iran if they could.

  377. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    October 31, 2013 at 9:52 pm

    The case of Iran Khodro is a frustrating one.

    It is a charity in that it is over-staffed, it is held back because the government treats its products as another form of socialistic entitlement for the Iranian people, and it is inefficient since its leadership is a form of state sinecure.


    Yes, you are right, the days that Muslims could live off being middle-men ended when Portuguese circumnavigated the globe.

    Yet very many people in these polities still think that they can emulate the late Adul Rahman be Ouf and become rich in the Bazar.

  378. Smith says:

    Karl.. says:
    November 1, 2013 at 7:49 am

    Yes, they are angry.

    It is because US is allied with taliban/alqaida and anyone who is ideologically and nationalistically against them is not a friend of US.

    US created them.

    They were living in infamy in Afghanistan, US made a global force out of them.

    They were not present in Iraq, US transplanted them there by force.

    They were not present in Libya and North Africa, US transplanted them there by force.

    They were not present in Levant. US transplanted them there.

    Without US help these wahabis could not take over all these places from Pakistan to Yemen.

    Without British help Wahabis would be today confined to a few villages in middle of Hijaz desert.

    This is all part of the plan. They now want to inject this disease into Iran.

    An ideal oil producing Muslim country for Americans/Westerners is Saudi Arabia. If Iran tomorrow became wahabi, banned women from driving, killed all the industries and started to lick the bottom of Americans then every thing would be fine.

  379. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    November 1, 2013 at 10:19 am

    Let’s hope as you say, the sanctions kick Iran into discipline. Because without it, Iranians will never have the incentive to move on to modern economics.

  380. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    November 1, 2013 at 10:14 am

    It is interesting to note in the research paper you linked, they are proposing to use highly enriched uranium at 99% for space travel and proudly mention that a cupful amount of this uranium has more energy stored in it than 50 space shuttle fuel tanks. But then as Americans love to say, they are exceptional. They can do whatever they like. Including making nuclear weapons and using them on civilians, twice.

    As I had noted earlier, the possibilities with this technology is endless: http://goingtotehran.com/after-rohanis-visit-to-new-york-flynt-leverett-on-prospects-for-u-s-iranian-nuclear-diplomacy#comment-20256

  381. fyi says:

    Smith says:

    November 1, 2013 at 11:47 am


    US: Let us improve the donkey breed in Iran and import donkeys from Cyprus.

    EU: We will teach them how to take their excrement in an environmentally friendly way.

  382. James Canning says:

    “The [Iranian] government is drawing up what it says will be attractive new contractual terms to lure top flight US and European oil compnaies, to invest a desperately needed $100 b[illio]n over the next three years.”
    — David Gardner, in today’s Financial Times

  383. James Canning says:


    Iran’s government will be seeking the highest quality, for western investments in Iran’s oil industry. Donkey poop, in your view?

  384. James Canning says:


    It is actually in the best interests of the US and Iran, for the gas pipeline to Pakistan to get built sooner rather than later.

  385. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    November 1, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    These are all pipedreams.

    US leaders have determined that their best interest is to wage an incoherent war among Muslims; on behalf of the fantasies of Jews in Palestine.

    That is where we stand now and will be for a few more years.

    In my view, investments in Iran by Axis Powers, by Russia, China, Japan, South Korea, South Africa, Brazil or anyone else is not likely for next decade or two.

    Iranians are on their own for any and all of their development needs.

    It is clear to me that you do not understand the gap and the distance that the recent war of Axis Powers against Iran and Syria has created.

  386. James Canning says:


    To be blunt, the economic and political power of Jews in the US in effect forces American politicians to make noises about any enemy of Israel being an enemy of the US. Many of these politicians also in effect encourage Israel to grow its illegal colonies in the West Bank even if this programme obviously is contrary to the best intersts of the American people. I think Rouhani comprehends this basic political reality that obtains in the US.

  387. James Canning says:


    You simply are mistaken, about Obama and his attitude toward western intervention in the Syria civil war. A Russian analyst said Obama appeared to have a gun aimed at his head, when he made his statements about the US attitude toward involvement in that civil war. A numbeer of Obama’s advsiers have pushed for American interention in that civil war.

  388. James Canning says:


    Are you arguing that the Soviet Unuin invaded Adghanistan in 1979 as part of a joint scheme with the US to damage Iran?

  389. Karl.. says:


    Obama threatened Syria for 2 weeks with war, hes stance was obvious. Then he backed off.

  390. Rd. says:

    fyi says:

    “It is clear to me that you do not understand the gap and the distance that the recent war of Axis Powers against Iran and Syria has created.”

    When it comes to their interest, that gap may be dynamic!!!

    “Senator Levin Backs Delay
    On Iran Sanctions Bill”

    Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/11/levin-iran-sanctions-halt-congress.html#ixzz2jQIHLQs5

  391. James Canning says:


    The August 21 gas attack forced Obama to make hostile noises. Clearly Obama was relieved that the programme to get rid of CW in Syria came along, and made it unnecessary for him to attack Syria. Even of the Saudis and Israelis are unhappy with this turn of events.

  392. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    November 1, 2013 at 2:33 pm

    To be blunt, it matters not why and how the internal dynamics of US is causing her policies.

    A man could be deranged for any number of reasons.

    For others, the only thing to note is that he is Mad as a Hatter.

  393. James Canning says:


    David Gardner in the FT comments: “The dithering response by the US and its allies to an Arab world in upheaval transformed the August 21 nerve gas attack. . . into an opportunity for rapprochement with Iran.”

  394. James Canning says:


    But Obama is NOT “mad as a hatter”. Obama to some extent must pretend to be, as you put it, “mad as a hatter”. Big difference, and one I think Rouhani sees clearly even if you do not.

  395. James Canning says:


    You should remember that Obama personally doubted the wisdom of huge enlargement of US war effort in Afghanistan. He was pressured into making a decision he appears to regret.

  396. fyi says:

    Rd. says:

    November 1, 2013 at 3:16 pm

    Just an adjustment – the Geneva talks yesterday and the day before failed to bridge the gap between the 2 sides.

    As I said before, a small agreement was difficult to make even before August 21 of 2013, now, Iranians knowing with certainty, that the destruction of their government remains US goal, there is even less room for flexibility.

    We would know before this year is out.

  397. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    November 1, 2013 at 3:26 pm

    No, Americans are….

    Else why go for another quagmire in Syria….

  398. James Canning says:


    In the late-19th century, Grover Cleveland felt politically obliged to make periodic denunciations of Great Britain. Clevelamd took care to tell the British minister in Washington, Lord Sackville, that the hostile noises were for show, and necessary due to large and powerful Irish vote in American big cities.

  399. Karl.. says:


    It doesnt matter what caused Obama to threat with war, he did it.

  400. James Canning says:


    Considerable population growth in Syria, coupled with a lack of economic opportunities, helped bring about civil war.

    Pakistan’s unchecked population growth poses serious potential problems for Iran, down the road.

  401. James Canning says:


    Wrong. Obama was concerned that if he did not punish Syria for the poison gas attack, Iran might take him as “bluffing” regarding not allowing Iran to build nukes.
    You should be glad that the FT could report today that production facilities for CW in Syria have been destroyed. And that Obama was not obliged to attack Syria.

  402. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    November 1, 2013 at 3:35 pm

    Do not kid yourself Mr. Canning; Mr. Obama is no Grover Cleveland; he meant to go to war against Syria – only the peasants revolt in the United Kingdom stopped him.

  403. James Canning says:

    Jack Straw, former British Foreign Secretary, said this week that Aipac is an obstacle to peace in the Middle East, due to its huge campaign contributions.

  404. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    November 1, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    Your Arab friends caused an incident – after it became clear in April that Mr. Assad and his government were staying in place.

    You still do not seem to have grasped the situation as it has evolved over the last 2 months: the Shia Crescent knows and internalized that its problems with the Mad King and Venal Barons are not resolvable and that war is very distinct possibility at any time during the coming years.

    Do you seriously think that Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon can go back to status quo ante of last August?

    Decades of hostility and Cold War is in the works in between the Axis Powers and your Arab friends on the one side and the Shia/Irani Alliance on the other.

    War cannot be threatened so wantonly and cavalierly without massive consequences.

  405. James Canning says:


    It does appear highly likely Obama would have hit Syria with missiles, if the deal to get rid of Syrian CW had not come along. And there would indeed have been efforts to enlarge the engagement.

    I assume you agree Rouhani would expect state-of-the-art oil facilities to be built in Iran, by western oil companies.

  406. Karl.. says:


    November 1, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    Again, regardless of obama’s motivation he threatened with war, dont you understand?

  407. James Canning says:


    I am glad Rouhani does not share your vision for what the future holds in the ME.

    Saudi Arabia and Israel would prefer the US not make a deal with Iran. Interesting that you take the same position.

  408. James Canning says:


    Russia told Syria to get rid of its CW in order to avoid a US attack. Good advice. You apparently think Syria should have kept its CW?

  409. James Canning says:


    Your timeline is way off. Iran needs to make a deal in the near-term. Not decades from now.

  410. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    November 1, 2013 at 4:31 pm

    Are you daft man?

    There is no deal that can heal the rupture between the Axis Powers and Iran in the near term.

  411. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    November 1, 2013 at 4:29 pm

    Mr. Rouhani then is a delusional man if he cannot grasp the fact that absent strategic accommodation of Iran by US, the Middle East faces more years of war, violence and bloodshed.

    And since US and EU leaders are not interested in such a strategic dialogue – the contours of which I have attempted to sketch – it follows that the leaders of the Shia Crescent must plan for years of violence and war – within and without their borders.

    Everything else is just a pipedream.

  412. Karl.. says:


    Surely you dont deny that Obama threatened Syria with war?

  413. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    November 1, 2013 at 2:42 pm

    Mr. Obama has made numerous promises on the domestic front that he has elected not to deliver on. When he has been far short of being honest with his words in the domestic front, why should his words be trusted on the international front?

    In his speech to the National Defense university, he promised an administration intent on giving back many of the powers that had been given to it under the Bush presidency. He has not lifted a finger.

    In his many campaigns, both in his first run and his second run, he promised a less intrusive government that will be brought to “check” – to make sure all surveillance is done constitutionally. He has done nothing of the sort.

    Time after time, when he has been confronted with another revelation of domestic spying and he has reassured the public, the next Snowden story has proven that he is “bending” the truth to the breaking point! His reassurances have been hollow.

    As Mr. Bush put it, “fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”

    Don’t get fooled again!!

  414. James Canning says:


    I think Obama genuinely did not want the US to intervene in Syrian civil war. No trickery about it. And I think he does not want war with Iran. Provided Iran does not try to build nukes.

  415. James Canning says:


    Obama clearly threatened a missile strike against Syria. Which easily could have been enlarged into something more.

    Surely we are both glad Syria is getting rid of its CW.

  416. James Canning says:


    I think Rouhani rightly sees an opening for strategic dialoge or understanding with the US. This is one reason some Saudi leaders are not happy about developments of late. And Israel opposes any deal or understanding between Iran and the US.

  417. James Canning says:


    Rouhani would not have called for better contract terms for western oil companies, if he did not see an opening for Iran in this arena. Arising from a deal of some sort with US (and P5+1).

  418. James Canning says:


    Rouhani wants the improved contract terms ready for adoption within six months. This in effect is his timeline.

  419. Karl.. says:


    Finally you admit.
    No it was bad for Syria to end its CW program. Why do you think that was good?

  420. James Canning says:


    I tend to think William Hague would welcome strategic dialogue between Britain and Iran. Provided Iran makes clear it will make deal with P5+1.

  421. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    You’re delusional if you think that vali-e faqih is not the leader of Hezbollah- both in his capacity of as vali-e amr and as a marja. And “delusional” is putting it mildly.

    Just ask any Hezbollah member- oh yeah sorry I forgot you are only an expert as long as you don’t have get your old ass up from behind the computer and actually go talk to the people you ignorantly pontificate about.

    Cause you see it’s because Imam and Rahbar were/are NOT Hezbollah leaders that their pictures are always and everywhere related to Hezbollah, right? Gee I see, thanks for explaining that one to us.

    The Iranian constitution or act of majlis are irrelevant on this particular matter.

    FYI (no pun intended), in fact it’s the vali that gives legality to the constitution and acts of majlis, exp council, any military forces etc.. See how that works. As usual you got it ass-backwards.

    We are all the “wali’s party”- Hashemi, Khatami, Ahmadinejad, Rohani, whoever comes after them.

    In fact the beauty of velayat-e faqih is that it is not limited to countries.

    The jurisdiction of vali-e faqih extends to wherever an individual chooses to follow him.

    I’ve told you many times before, don’t tell us what is “legal” and “illegal” under Islam given that you are grossly uninformed and a kafer. Thanks.

    Of course the vali can issue a death sentence. Even a lowly marja in comparison can do that. Oh I see, a marja or the vali can issue order of offensive jihad in ghaybat (per Ayat. Khoi and Rahbar) involving the lives of millions of people, but they can’t issue a death sentence. I see, thanks for clarifying…absolutely nothing!

    I know. You can’t help being an expert on everything, given your advanced mental disease. Like I said, you have my pity.

  422. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    November 1, 2013 at 5:19 pm

    I think Mr. Rouhani began his campaign for Iranian presidency believing that some sort of a deal with P5+1 were possible.

    He assumed office with that programme but the events of late August 2013 indicated that his beliefs in this respect were a miscalculation.

    Lacking any other alternative, he is now carrying out with charade; he has no other alternative.

    Evidently, Iranians did not find any “give” in the position of P5+1 this past Wednesday and Thursday.

    Furthermore, regardless of any small concessions by Iran, there will be new US sanctions against Iran by the end of this year or by early next year.

    There is no deal to be found – it seems to me – in the Halls of the Mad King.

  423. fyi says:


    On US Exceptional0ism in the light of Mr. Snowden’s disclosures:


  424. Karl.. says:

    According to news Turkey seeks better relations with Iran now. Can Turkey be trusted? They have that said many times only to change course on Iran later.

  425. Karl.. says:

    These people, where did they go wrong?


    Maybe Iran should start threaten US too would you like that panetta?

  426. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:
    November 2, 2013 at 5:45 am

    All of these international actors are trying to gauge the depth and extent of Iranian concessions since Mr. Rouhani’s programmer and his election are perceived as signs of Iranian weakness.

    When they are disabused of those notions, we will soon be back to business-as-usual; i.e. hostility all around to Iran.

  427. Bibijon says:

    test 4

  428. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    November 1, 2013 at 5:11 pm

    You continue to assert statements contrary to evidence.

    Mr. Obama is deceiving his constituency on a daily basis, and you seem to think that he will be sincere with an international audience.

    Mr. Rouhani and the Iranian political apparatus remain engaged for the sake of remaining “engaged” – the absence of any will for strategic realignment on the part of the US means real progress will not be made.

  429. James Canning says:


    What do you mean by “strategic realignment”? Obviously the wealth and power of Jews in the US ensures that the US will continue to protect Israel. Nothing is likely to change this situation.

    Saudi fears of Iranian subversion cause Saudi Arabia to cooperate with Israel even if the Saudis would prefer not to do so.

    I think Obama clearly is willing to accept Iranian enrichment to low levels, to enable a deal to be made with P5+1 in the face of strong opposition from Israel and much of the Israel lobby. This could clear the way to major oil deals with Iran, which in turn would be a good thing for Iran and the world in general.

  430. James Canning says:


    You probably realise that Russia and China are trying to get past strong opposition from the Israel lobby and Israel, to enable a P5+1 deal to be made that affords more sanctions relief to Iran.

  431. James Canning says:


    Rouhani’s willingness to make a sensible deal with the Six Powers indicates to my mind, strength rather than weakness.

    Bashar al-Assad should have disposed of Syria’s CW years ago. Did he lack the strength to do this?

  432. James Canning says:


    Leon Panetta is actually a reasonable man and he thinks fairly clearly in my view. I am sure you are aware that anyone addressing the fanatical “pro-Israel” ADL must make threats of use of military force against Iran (if no deal is made with six powers, and Iran continues to stockpile enriched U etc etc).

    Abe Foxman of ADL is a leading exponent of suppressing free speech in America, to “benefit” Israel (and enable continued growth of illegal colonies of Jews in the West Bank).

  433. James Canning says:


    Sean Mirski should be seen as a propagandist for fantastically high levels of “defence” spending by the US. Notion of war with China is rather far-fetched, at least as things stand today.

  434. James Canning says:


    What is your precise view of why Obama did not attack Syria? Do you actually believe Obama wanted to attack, and that he was displeased things did not go that way?

  435. James Canning says:


    Surely the “events of late August” worked in Iran’s favour. And obviousy Rouhani comprehends this.

  436. James Canning says:


    I have said many times that Iran needs to make a deal, and that if there is no deal, Iran’s ability to export oil will be compromised significantly from current levels. Your belief this would be better for Iran than making a deal that would prevent Iran from being able to build nukes quickly is simply mistaken, in my view.

  437. James Canning says:


    Syria’s CW posed a threat to the Syrian government. I have thought that for years. The events of August 21 showed I was quite right.

    Syria should have destroyed its CW years ago.

  438. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Great source as usual genius. CIA-backed station “analyzing” Islam- kinda like in 1978 and 35 years since.

    That’s why you are in the US spending your retirement pontificating to a closet-case but without any influence whatsoever on events in the old homeland and we are here building Iran.

    Whatever good and bad there is in Iran, it’s not your problem and it hasn’t been your problem since the early 1980s.

    I doubt you have the courage to reflect on these “realities”.

    What you are engaging in on this blog is self-therapy. I wish you success.

  439. Karl.. says:

    November 2, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    How does the threat to attack Iran make Panetta reasonable?

    How was the CW in Syria a threat?

  440. James Canning says:

    Marsha B. Cohen has some interesting comments about efforts by some elements of Israel lobby to block any deal with Iran:


  441. James Canning says:


    Element of political theatre. Panetta does not want US war with Iran, but he obviously is aware there likely would be a war if no deal is achieved with P5+1 and Iran continues to stockpile etc etc. Panetta was addressing the ADL. Which wants no deal with Iran.

    Syria’s CW almost brought about US intervention in the civil war. Ergo, the threat posed by Syrian CW was to the Syrian government itself.

  442. Karl... says:


    So you think its reasonable to threat with war? I must say you really coming out now James as the warmonger you are. Maybe you can tell us 1. How this is legal 2. How a a strike on Iran would benefit the US?

    Tell us what threat syrian CW posed. Second time I ask now.

  443. James Canning says:


    You seem to forget I opposed a US attack on Syria, in wake of Aug. 21 CW event. You also overlook the fact I oppose a US attack on Iran.

    But I will say again that Syria should have dumped its CW programme years ago.

  444. fyi says:

    Karl… says:

    November 2, 2013 at 3:36 pm

    The fact is that the Syrian CW were unusable against any tangible threat that Syria faced – or is facing.

    Syrian Government should have gotten rid of them years ago.

    But it was a convenient excuse for the Mad King to start her war in Syria – later to be extended to Iran.

    It was fortunate for Syrian people to avoid this war as Americans, French, and the English were going to wreck Syria just like they wrecked Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan.

    It was fortunate for Iranian leaders as they realized that War with Iran is on US agenda and their confrontation will US cannot be ended and in fact, there is high chance of war with US since her leaders have determined to destroy Iran one way or another.

  445. Karl.. says:

    In James mind hes against war but if UK, US go to war, he supports it and it will always blame Iran for it.
    Thats the result of extreme nationalism I guess.

  446. Karl.. says:


    I dont agree, if Syria could be threatened to end X so can Iran seems to be the view of the warmongers of today, and thats a very dangerous path that could lead to war.

  447. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    November 2, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    You do not understand – Americans decided on War with Iran several years ago – under Mr. Bush who declared enemies of Israel to be enemies of US.

    That has not changed.

    Americans are only looking for the most opportune time to attack Iran with a good excuse to support that.

    They were going after Syria, then Hezbollah, and then Iran when the revolts of the peasants in UK derailed their plans.

    This delay is only temporary – nothing has changed in the Halls of the Mad King.

    You saw the article about waging war against China….

    That is not the discourse of sane people…

  448. fyi says:


    Mr. Khamenei on hejab (in Persian)


    رجانیوز: رهبر معظم انقلاب در جریان سفر خود به استان خراسان شمالی در باره حجاب برخی استقبال کنندگان اظهارنظر کردند.

    ایشان خطاب به مسئولان فرمودند: «خودتان را مجهز کنید، مسلح به سلاح معرفت و استدلال کنید، بعد به این کانونهاى فرهنگى – هنرى بروید و پذیراى جوانها باشید. با روى خوش هم پذیرا باشید؛ با سماحت، با مدارا. فرمود: «و سنّة من نبیّه»، که ظاهراً عبارت است از «مداراة النّاس»؛ مدارا کنید. ممکن است ظاهر زننده‌اى داشته باشد؛ داشته باشد. بعضى از همینهائى که در استقبالِ امروز بودند و شما – هم جناب آقاى مهمان‌نواز(استاندار )، هم بقیه‌ى آقایان – الان در این تریبون از آنها تعریف کردید، خانمهائى بودند که در عرف معمولى به آنها میگویند «خانم بدحجاب»؛ اشک هم از چشمش دارد میریزد. حالا چه کار کنیم؟ ردش کنید؟ مصلحت است؟ حق است؟ نه، دل، متعلق به این جبهه است؛ جان، دلباخته‌ى به این اهداف و آرمانهاست. او یک نقصى دارد. مگر من نقص ندارم؟ نقص او ظاهر است، نقصهاى این حقیر باطن است؛ نمى‌بینند. «گفتا شیخا هر آنچه گوئى هستم / آیا تو چنان که مینمائى هستى؟». ما هم یک نقص داریم، او هم یک نقص دارد. با این نگاه و با این روحیه برخورد کنید. البته انسان نهى از منکر هم میکند؛ نهى از منکر با زبان خوش، نه با ایجاد نفرت. بنابراین با قشر دانشجو ارتباط پیدا کنید.»

  449. Karl.. says:


    Yes but the more of these “defeats” (ending CW by Syria etc) the closer we will get to such a war. Syria unfortunately showed weakness and that affected the resistance group in the region.

  450. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    November 2, 2013 at 4:24 pm

    I do not think so – Syria is absorbing many blows and is still a functioning government.

    It is more difficult for Americans to initiate a war with Syria now – a war which they need to successfully conclude before attacking Iran.

    You have to look at the way it is seen in Tehran and Damascus – that they are winning decisively and that their enemies are in disarray.

    The Sunni Jihadists are a threat to the friends of US and EU – Turkey and Jordan primarily.

    Mr. Obama’s policy of unrolling the Shia/Irani power failed.

    So he had to escalate to destroy Syria himself – which was thwarted by UK revolt which gave a backbone to some in US Congress to resist another quagmire.

    So it is like this now:

    Mr. Obama is willing to make a deal with Iranians since his war options are rather limited at this time.

    His Peace options with Iranians are non-existent.

    Which means that he is passing the initiation of the war against Syria and Iran to the next US President – whomever that person would be.

    This is fine as it buys time for all sides but it does not resolve the fundamental religious confrontation between Champions of Israel and the Shia Crescent.

    In the light of the situation in Pakistan – Iran could be attacked from those quarters.

    You never know….

  451. Karl.. says:

    I wonder how many billions Israel get these days? Officially its around 4 billion but its way more covered up.


  452. James Canning says:


    I think Obama may have been willing all along, to accept Iranian enrichment to low levels, to enable a deal between P5+1 and Iran.

  453. James Canning says:


    If Syria had spurned Russia’s advice, and refused to get rid of its CW, an American missile attack very likely would have taken place. That attack might well have grown into something larger.

    Again, Syria should have dumped its CW years ago.

  454. James Canning says:


    I think you are dead wrong to believe, as you profess to believe, that Obama is simply looking for an opportune time to attack Iran. In fact, you are effectively trying to help the Israel lobby to block any deal with Iran, to make war far more likely.

  455. James Canning says:


    A propaganda piece placed by arms manufacturers, to play up the notion the US may face war with China, needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The US and China have vital common interests. One of which is working together to get rid of NK’s nukes.

  456. James Canning says:


    I support a rich, powerful and secure Iran. An Iran with no nukes, and no ability to build nukes quickly.

  457. James Canning says:


    I see you agree Syria should have dumped its CW years ago. Lots of money wasted, needlessly. But Russian intervention diplomatically on that issue has opened a way for a deal on Iran. Potential deal, perhaps I should say.

  458. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    November 2, 2013 at 1:03 pm

    I do not believe in grand conspiracy theories, or the all-powerful forces.

    The so-called Israel lobby does not exist standalone. These are interrelated network of political forces that serve each other when they have convergence on a cause.

    Blaming it all on Israel lobby is simply an excuse.

  459. fyi says:

    Jay says:
    November 2, 2013 at 6:22 pm

    In general I would have agreed with you had not US policy, since Mr. Bush, had not become one of “Enemies of Israel are Enemies of America”.

    This position has persisted under Mr. Obama and now has metastasized to an unprecedented degree.

    He will be remembered as the man who cemented the United States to the cause of a religious war against Islam on behalf of Israel and her champions.

    In my opinion…

  460. Rehmat says:

    American Jewish editor, author and blogger, Sheldon Richman, said on October 23, 2013: “Even if the Iranian government were to agree to stop enriching uranium beyond the low level needed to produce electricity, limit the number of centrifuges operated for enrichment, and accept broadly intrusive surprise inspections by the International Atomic Energy Commission – all of which the Iranians may be willing to accept – the war party could refuse to lift the sanctions on the grounds that Iran had not fulfilled these other extraneous and unreasonable demands, which would amount to regime change and humiliating subordination to the United States and Israel.”


  461. M.Ali says:

    “Syrian conflict: Persian Gulf officials, tired of waiting for U.S., move to boost aid to rebels”


    Whats amusing are statements like this,

    ““We agreed to everything that we were asked . . . as part of what was going to take place,” said a senior Saudi official reached by telephone in the kingdom. Instead of the 10-to-12-hour warning before launch that the Americans had promised, the official said that Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan “did not know about [the cancellation]. . . . We found out about it from CNN.””

    Without US support, Middle Eastern US allies, are not able to make any real change in the region. Their desperate attempts in Syria has been an excellent example.

  462. Karl.. says:


    So would you also have supported UK giving up its nukes and if they didnt they would have been attacked (by whoever threatening the UK)?
    Dont you understand your hypocrisy and warmongering?

  463. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    November 2, 2013 at 7:10 pm

    I do not disagree with the observation that since Mr. Bush, and continuing with Mr. Obama, the American policy of “Enemies of Israel are Enemies of America” persists.

    I disagree with what I would consider a simplistic notion that this is all due to “Israel lobby”.

    There exists a complex network of actors, one of which is the “Israel lobby”, that have self-organized to reap financial, political, and geopolitical benefits by advancing a policy. Cameron’s party, Saudi Arabia, Harper’s party, several senators and congresspeople in the US, Russia, China, MEK, …

    “Israel lobby” is not all powerful, rather it excels at aligning its objectives with larger goals of a group of actors.

    One can advance an argument that whatever the method, the effect is the same – strong influence. Effect being the same as it may, I suggest that there is value in understanding how this symbiotic mechanism of action advances a policy in line with desires of a few. For example, understanding this symbiosis is helpful towards: a) offering a path to countering its geopolitical impact, and b) recognizing Trojan Horse arguments of the nature proposed by some (so and so wanted to have such and such relations before Israel lobby ruined it!).

  464. Rehmat says:

    Iranian will be celebrating the 34th anniversary of the US embassy take-over on November 4. The Hollywood’s Oscar-winning movie Argo is based on Zionist distortion of the history. The six American who “managed to escape the US embassy compound” were not work of CIA – but Kenneth Taylor, Canadian ambassador in Tehran, who also acted as head of CIA operation in Iran during the 1979 Islamic Revolution.


  465. fyi says:

    Jay says:
    November 3, 2013 at 8:01 am

    Yes, I agree.

    That is why I tried to convey the same sense by coining the phrase “Champions of Israel”, which included those misguided Protestant Christians that are enamored of Israel – Ancient & Modern.

    So, both for religious and geopolitical reasons Axis Powers wish to destroy the Shia Crescent – how much is owed to which reason, I think, could be subject to very intense and long debate.

  466. fyi says:


    Mr. Pillar on the coming nuclear negotiations


    At the end, he states: “…building a nuclear deterrent as a way of dealing with what they would perceive as unending Western hostility.”

    Axis Powers cannot end their endless hostility – it is now a matter of religion as well as sunk-costs as well as the madness of the king.

    But I could be wrong…

  467. fyi says:


    Mr. Zarif’s comments:


    We read:

    “..whether they want to agree to something that is doable now, or wish for it two years after…”

    My sense of it is that the discussions next week will fail largely due to Axis Powers’ maximalist position.

  468. Karl.. says:


    November 3, 2013 at 11:03 am

    As we all know it has to do with this:


    As soon as US/Iran tried renew the talks, Israel stepped in.

    You are correct on your last sentence too and after that more sanctions will be put in.

  469. James Canning says:


    Yes, Aipac is one of the “pro-Israel” groups in the US that are undermining the national security interests of the American people by trying to block any deal with Iran. Rouhani has a much better chance of working around these groups, than obtained under Ahmadinejad.

  470. James Canning says:


    Is it fair to say you want Iran to insist on a deal that would enable Iran to get closer to an ability to build nukes quickly? Even if this means no deal?

  471. James Canning says:


    Sound analysis by Paul Pillar. One might add that some elements of the Israel lobby that are trying to continue the nuclear dispute with Iran, do so in order to help Bibi Netanyahu continue to grow the illegal colonies of Jews in the West Bank (and other measures oppressive to the Palestinians).

  472. James Canning says:


    Curious thing, is it not: Iraq is seeking greater military support from the US at the same time you argue that Iraq is a central component of a “Shia crescent” that defies the US and its programme of assisting Israel to oppress the Palestinians.

  473. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    November 3, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    I think it best for all concerned that Axis Powers leader take Mr. Pillar’s advise the link to which I supplied.

    However, I suspect – strongly – that advise has not, is not, and will not be taken.

    As for my own position: it was a strategic mistake for Iran staying in NPT after 1998.

    In pursuit of the continued existence of Iranian state, there is no other alternative.

    There is a change of government in Pakistan, with a PM bought & paid for by Saudi Arabia – the foremost enemy of the Shia everywhere – and almost immediately a terrorist attack against Iran takes place.

    It is fortunate that most Iranian population centers are in the North part of Iran.

    As I stated before, there is not appeasing of the Mad King, there is no end to Axis Powers hostility to Islamic Iran, and there is no end to anti-Shia campaigns of Saudi Arabia until Saudi state is replaced by a more inclusive (of all Muslim Mazhabs).

    Naval blockade etc. and limited war with US will not destroy Iranian state; after that Iran could leave NPT and build nuclear weapons – the world will understand that as it does even now.

  474. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    November 3, 2013 at 12:10 pm

    Mr. Maliki went to US to get help – he has a duty to try to do so; seeking any help from any quarters.

    Like any other political leader in the world, he wished to expand and maintain his own freedom of action.

    Well, he got nothing in Washington because Iraq is understood to be the part and parcel of the Shia Crescent.

    At any rate, UK recognized PRC decades before US – the King – did. That did not mean UK had ceased to be a member of the Axis Powers.

  475. James Canning says:


    Saudi Arabia and Qatar tried to facilitate an improvement of UK and US relations with Syria, and I am sure you are aware David Cameron and William Hague supported this effort. Getting Bashar al-Assad to put more distance between Syria and Iran was a key element of the plan, and one that helped it to fail, in my view.

    Iran’s announcement of intent to treble production of 20% U pretty much wrecked the effort.

  476. Karl.. says:


    You are blaming the victim James again I guess this is due your extreme nationalism, now you say its Iran fault that palestinians live under apartheid and getting ethnically cleansed from their homes. Are you a troll or whats your purpose?

  477. Karl.. says:


    November 3, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    Iran have even reduced their 20% uranium, stop lying. Besides 20% enrichment came IN RESPONSE to UK, US sanctions and refusal to grant Iran 20% enrichment. You think these lies will become true just because you type them over?

  478. James Canning says:


    Purpose of NPT is to stop nuclear proliferation. And work toward getting rid of nukes.

    What is “hypocritical” about supporting a primary purpose of the NPT?

    I think it interesting that you ore sorry Syria is getting rid of its CW.

  479. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    November 3, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    That is patent nonsense; Syria did not need the Saudi or Qatari intermediaries to the United States.

    Syrians repeatedly tried to improve their relations with America but once Americans decided to make enemies of Israel that of themselves those efforts were ignored.

    Syria, like Iran, was targeted for destruction by the United States since she was an enemy of Israel.

  480. James Canning says:


    Iran can enlist powerful proponents of an easing of sanctions, by pursuing its current programme of intended contract offers to western oil and gas companies. (Assuming a deal with EU3+3.)

  481. James Canning says:


    Saudi and other Gulf Arab fears of Iranian subversion is also a factor in the current debate about what kind of deal with Iran should be made.

    Huge importance of Israel lobby lies partly in its proven ability to distort the picture painted for the American public by news media. Surely you accept this.

    And we must bear in mind that Democrats depend upon Jewish finance to win national elections. This has been true for decades now, in the US.

  482. Karl.. says:


    Thought so, you couldnt respond and instead divert the discussion from your lies.

  483. James Canning says:


    “Lies”? I have noted a number of times that no country is seeking sanctions against the UK for its possession of nukes. No country. But you seem to argue sanctions against Britain should be sought. By whom?

  484. James Canning says:


    The current need is to foster a deal between Iran and the EU3+3. Rather pointless to argue Britain has nukes. If your position is that Iran should refuse to make a deal, and endure more sanctions even to the point of losing nearly all oil exports, simply say so.

  485. Karl.. says:


    Yes lies and obviously you will not admit those lies you are using systematically.
    I have not said there are any sanctions on the UK for its nukes, another lie by yourself.

  486. Fiorangela says:

    Edward Snowden would have been irrelevant if more had paid attention to this report


    An appraisal of technologies for political control
    published by European Parliament
    Directorate General for Research
    Directorate B
    The STOA Programme
    Mr. Steve Wright – Omega Foundation – Manchester
    Mr. Dick Holdsworth
    Head of STOA Unit
    6 January 1998


    “Some idea of the range and variety of riot control weapons under consideration at that time
    can be gleaned from the 1972 US National Science Foundation’s Report on Non-lethal
    Weapons.(NSF, 1972). Altogether it listed 34 different weapons, including chemical and kinetic
    weapons; electrified water jets; combined stroboscopic light and pulsed sound weapons;
    infrasound weapons; dartguns which fire drug-filled flight stabilized syringes; stench parts
    which give off an obnoxious odour; the taser which fires two small electrical contacts
    discharging 50,000 volts into the target; and instant banana peel which makes roads so
    slippery, they are impassable.
    Many of these weapons were then only partly developed or had problems of public
    acceptability:others have since achieved operational status. They include: incapacitation
    weapons such as the electronic riot shields and electro-shock batons (discussed in Sections
    6,7, & 8 below); Bulk chemical irritant distributor systems, (delivered by watercannon such as
    the UK made Tactica or the many back pack sprays like those made by the Israeli company
    lspra (Fig.27 or the German Heckler & Koch (Fig.28); New forms of irritant such as OC (or
    peppergas);kinetic impact weapons like the German & UK plastic bullet guns (shown in Fig32)
    or the South African hydraulically fired, TFM Slingshot rubber bullet machine; biomedical
    weapons, such as the compressed air fired drug syringe now commercially available both in
    the US & China(shown in Fig.33).
    The range of weapons currently deployed for crowd control is vast indeed and defies any
    attempts to be comprehensive. In Britain, since the first use of CS gas, rubber bullets and
    water cannon at the beginning of the Northern Irish Conflict in 1969, there has been a
    globalisation of such public order technologies. To our knowledge some 856 companies
    across 47 countries have been or are currently active in the manufacture and supply of such
    weapons. This proliferation has been fuelled by private companies wishing to tap lucrative
    security markets, a process which has led to both vertical and horizontal proliferation of this
    technology.(See Appendix 1) For example, one company, Civil Defence Supply, who provide
    nearly all UK police forces with sidehandled batons, boast of an international riot training
    programme, having trained the entire Mexican Police Granaderos with armadillo linked riot
    shields, CS and baton firing guns like the Arwen and what they call the complete ‘Early
    Resolution System’, for its elite forces.
    To understand why this arsenal of crowd control weapons has been developed, it is vital to understand the thinking which underlies their construction. An important task in assessing
    new crowd control technologies is to examine the criteria used to evaluate just what is an
    ‘acceptable’ police weapon, and to whom. In the discussion below, an attempt is made to
    clarify why the theory of ‘non-lethal’ weapons used for ‘minimum force’ policing, does not
    match the reality of para-militarised riot squad approaches to ‘peacekeeping’.


    “8.3 Export Of Implements of Torture From The U.S.A.
    Sadly, it no longer comes as a surprise to discover that other leading Western Liberal
    Democracies have been colluding with the torture Trade. Yet during the 1980’s some clues
    were afforded by reports that US companies such as Technipol were freely advertising
    thumb cuffs, leg irons and shackles (Klare & Arnson, 1981 ). The Danish Medical Group of
    Amnesty found that electronic prods manufactured by the US Shok-Baton Company had been
    used in the violation of human rights, 163 and a repentant Uruguayan Torturer confessed that
    he had used US-made electroshock batons.(Cooper, 1984).164 In fact scores of US companies
    either manufacture or supply electroshock devices, thumbcuffs and leg irons. 165Back in 1984, it emerged that US export regulations even had special customs codes form
    such items as ‘specially designed instruments of torture’ (US Department of Commerce, 1984)
    There was even some suggestion (in para 376.14) that the US government could distance
    itself from human rights violations through ‘judiciou~ use of export controls’.(US Department
    of Commerce, 1983). Concerned by the possible scale of the trade in such technologies and
    the possibility they could be exported on via Europe which has much laxer arms export
    controls and transparency than the US, the UK human rights organisation, the Omega
    Foundation, sought comprehensive US export trade statistics. A Freedom of Information
    request was put down on Omega’s behalf by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS).
    What emerged was that the new category codes in the export administration regulations
    have if anything been extended to include, inter alia:
    * ‘saps,thumbcuffs,thumbscrews, leg irons, shackles and handcuffs, specially designed
    implements of torture, straight jackets etc. (OA82C)’ and
    * ‘stun guns, shock batons, electric cattle prods and other immobilization guns (OA84C)’
    (United States Department of Commerce 1994).
    The statistics of the export licences of such repressive equipment show that from
    September 1991 to December 1993, the US Commerce Department approved over 350
    export licences under commodity category A82C. The further category OA84C aggregates
    together data on electric shock batons with shotguns and shells. Over 2000 licences were
    granted from September 1991 to December 1993. (See Chart 13) As feared, the list names
    many EU Member States including Austria, Belgium, France, Germany; Iceland, Ireland,[Israel], Italy,
    The Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom. While the licenses represent a snapshot of
    permissions for the sale to go forward, they do not indicate actual delivery, nor are they
    comprehensive since countries in NATO, such as Turkey, do not require a licence (Arms
    Sales Monitor, 1995). FAS has pointed out that aggregating data in this way, by lumping noncontroversial
    data on equipment such as those on helmets with controversial data on
    equipment often used for torture such as shock batons, effectively frustrates public oversight.
    Given the nature of some of the recipients – Saudi Arabia for example, where Amnesty has
    already recorded instances of Iraqis being tortured with electric shock batons (Amnesty
    International, 1994), many observers feared the worst. 1
    ” Pressure to desegregate such
    categories in the US eventually proved successful but there remains a :ack of effective
    checking and some items which should be in the amended category, are still slipping
    through 167. ”

    h/t Marco Roscini on ArmsControlLaw dot com

  487. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    November 3, 2013 at 2:18 pm

    I once met a dissident priest from the Philippines who had been imprisoned by the late Ferdinand Marco’s government for years.

    He and others were being tortured via electric shocks delivered through old hand-cranked telephone set.

    [I recall them since my grand-parents owned such a set – and I sometimes have seen them in US war movies from World War II.]

    The torturer could only torture so many prisoners so many times; they would physically get tired and had to rest in between the torture sessions.

    The priest stated later those machines were replaced by new ones from US which no longer required to be hand-cranked – the electric shock was initiated by pushing a button.

    I never doubted the veracity of his statements.

  488. James Canning says:


    Obviously I have difficulty ascertaining why you think Britain’s pssession of nukes is an issue pertinent to the effort to achieve a deal between Iran and the P5+1.

  489. James Canning says:


    It would help if you would clarify your position. You appear to argue Iran should decline to make a deal. You apparently believe Iran’s oil exports would not be cut off almost entirely, for one reason or another, as result of failure to make a deal.

  490. James Canning says:

    Support among American Jews for a US attack on Iran appears to be declining:


  491. Jay says:

    Karl.. says:
    November 3, 2013 at 12:39 pm


    Perhaps James has forgotten that Britain pledged to get rid of its nuclear weapons in 1970 by signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). And that, she reaffirmed this pledge in 2000. In exchange, non-nuclear weapons states agreed that they would not pursue their own nuclear weapons.

    Not only Britain has not honored this pledge, she has gone the opposite way by reinvigorating work on on, for example, submarine based ballistic missiles.

    It is disingenuous to ask members to give up their rights while other members openly violate their commitments. Wouldn’t you say!

  492. Jay says:


    While I respect every person’s right to have an opinion – and, you have several – consistency of the basis of opinions, in relation to known facts, gives each opinion a different measure of validity.

  493. Karl.. says:


    Correct, its hypocritical by UK/James. And everyone have the right to an opinion, only problem here seems to be that UK nor James admit they are dishonest about nuclear/rights, its just another sign of the extreme nationalism and the negative views of arab/iranians/muslims that made brittish colonialism once possible. Its still alive today apparently.

  494. James Canning says:


    China insists Iran not build nukes. “Extreme nationalism” on the part of the Chinese? Or just common sense?

  495. James Canning says:


    An example of where I have been “inconsistent”, in your view?

  496. James Canning says:


    I favour abolition of all nukes, globally. I fail to see how the issue of Britain’s possession of nukes is relevant to matter at hand: resolution of Iranian nuclear dispute.

  497. Karl.. says:


    Diverting again..
    Compared to you and UK China arent driven by colonialist views but by economic interests and reason. Apparently you are too deep in this colonialist-view that you are unable to understand what people are saying. A better comparsion with you and the UK would be Israel, they also have a colonialist view of the region. Thats why UK also have supported Israel to this day.

  498. Rehmat says:

    On October 29, 2013, several pro-Israel Senate Amigos sent a letter to president Barack Obama with the following “red-line”.

    “We urge you to make clear to Prime Minister Maliki that the extent of Iran’s malign influence in the Iraqi government is a serious problem in our bilateral relationship, especially for the Congress. Published reports demonstrate that the Iranian regime uses Iraqi airspace to transit military assistance into Syria to support Assad and his forces. Furthermore, attacks against the residents of Camp Ashraf in Iraq are reprehensible, especially because the Iraqi government pledged to protect these people. Prime Minister Maliki must understand that actions such as these need to stop. Not only do they make it difficult for Iraq’s friends in the United States to build public support, especially in the Congress, to enhance our strategic partnership, but they also undermine Iraq’s standing as a responsible member of the international community.”


  499. James Canning says:


    Britain tried hard to get Israel out of all territories occupied during the June 1967 Arab-Israel war. Lyndon Johnson refused to give the UK the necessary backing.

    You seem to argue it is “colonialist” for Britain to insist Iran not build nukes, but not for France to insist? What about Russia, and its insistence Iran not build nukes or try to get too close to ability to build nukes? “Colonialist”?