Unrest in Iran

[Fragony]

Of course there are foreign agitators, but that doesn't mean that the uprising was a black op. Foreign involvement in such cases is limited to adding fuel to the flames.
https://twitter.com/Zolfegar12/statu...36369990070278

The democratically elected government and its foreign policy enjoys approval by the majority, while the protests are mostly civil in nature.
http://cissm.umd.edu/sites/default/f...L%20-%20sm.pdf
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b06d1621b9a019

Iran is divided, but if the American war hawks hope for a pro-American revolution, then they are going to be disappointed.
http://www.dw.com/en/iran-protests-r...rce/a-41974090

I am not a hawk and not American, but if something is going to change it will be in Iran and nowhere else. Iranians are different from other people in the middle-east they are much more free-thinking. Maybe I am overly optimistic and I am most certainly biased but still, go team Persia salafist those mullahs, hard deep and unsafe

[Crandar]

I know you mean well, but calling Iran as Persia is a bit insulting towards Iranians. By the way, the name changed by the Pahlavis not the revolutionaries.

Anyway, as the research proves, the foreign policy and the government enjoy immense popularity. Iranians may be relatively progressive, but keep in mind that their regime is also progressive and liberal for the region's standards.

[Fragony]

I know it's insulting and I don't care, but thanks for understanding that I don't mean any harm. Maybe it's a bit too close to me I don't know, at least I know that am biased that's something. But I really think that Iranians can be our best friends there, they are no clueless goatherders or Bedouin who lost their camel and don't know where it is and somehow wash up here

[Montmorency]

they are no clueless goatherders or Bedouin who lost their camel and don't know where it is and somehow wash up here

Can you explain this?

[Fragony]

Can you explain this?

What you already know about me, why explain. You know I have zero respect for the islamic world so why ask. Any humanist should but they are too busy with gender-types and that sort of things.

[Agent Miles]

http://www.aeinstein.org/wp-content/...13/09/FDTD.pdf
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12522848

Gene Sharp is the American dictators fear more than any CIA operative or member of SEAL Team 6. In the 21st century, all the dark alleys where revolutionaries meet are on the internet. Rebels don't need a harbor full of British tea or a catch phrase like "Land and Freedom" any more. Sharp's book is the one-stop-shop to kick start the party. Free speech is the thorn in every autocrat's side, even the liberal, progressive ones. The first Green revolution in Iran followed over 100 of the lessons from the book. Cell phones and social media aren't just for organizing mob dances. When mass demonstrations happen all over a country, you can bet somebody bookmarked a page in "From Dictatorship to Democracy". Shut down the dictatorship machinery for a few days and then we'll see how popular the regime really is.

[Fragony]

Much simpler I think, loose the midd,e-class and it's seeeeya

I wish Dariush was here he's from Iran, I could be totally wrong about everything and can't know what I say is true

[Gilrandir]

Anyway, as the research proves, the foreign policy and the government enjoy immense popularity.

You mean this research?
http://cissm.umd.edu/sites/default/f...L%20-%20sm.pdf

It was published in January 2016, so it was conducted as late as December 2015 and perhaps earlier. During the two years that have elapsed since then the attitudes might have changed.

[Agent Miles]

Here's what Freedom House has on Iran:

https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2017/iran

I suppose a regime only needs a score of 17 to be liberal, progressive and popular.

[Crandar]

Here's what Freedom House has on Iran:

Freedom House is a joke paid by the U.S. government to paint a black image of any regime that said government dislikes. We are talking about some "experts" that they consider Russia as democratic as a confederation of tribal monarchies.

It has a particularly bad record in Iran, blamed by genuinely humanitarian organisations for actually undermining the issue of civic liberties inside the country.

The good thing is that Freedom House is as subtle as a Khmer Rouge poster. Their linked article about Iran prompted me to spam a bunch of butthurt pro-Shah emigré slogans in tweeter. That's partisanship, not professionalism.

[rory_20_uk]

Given Iran is the major power of 30% of Muslims they are surely our natural ally (not having to deal with the entire Middle East would definitely be better of course). The USA needs to get over that it utterly botched its relationship with propping up the Shah and frankly engage as suits its own interests.

Even for Israel, Iran is a smaller threat than everyone else that surrounds them; blustery rhetoric aside, Saudi Arabia has exported a lot more extremist religion than Iran has and apparently we are bestest mates. Hezbollah in Jordan / Syria is definitely supported by Iran but what with the whole embargoes for a few decades they take allies where they can.

[Crandar]

Given Iran is the major power of 30% of Muslims they are surely our natural ally (not having to deal with the entire Middle East would definitely be better of course). The USA needs to get over that it utterly botched its relationship with propping up the Shah and frankly engage as suits its own interests.

Even for Israel, Iran is a smaller threat than everyone else that surrounds them; blustery rhetoric aside, Saudi Arabia has exported a lot more extremist religion than Iran has and apparently we are bestest mates. Hezbollah in Jordan / Syria is definitely supported by Iran but what with the whole embargoes for a few decades they take allies where they can.

I think you meant to say Lebanon, not Jordan. The interests of Iran and the US are contradictory and they cannot be conciliated.
The discord stems from the nationalisation of Western companies which exploited the human and natural resources of Iran without paying almost anything and also concerns the geopolitics of the Middle East.

Iran and her allies are definitely the biggest threats Israel faces, a fact that explains why Israel has gladly supported terrorists, including al-Qaeda to undermine Iran.
The only neighboring governments with hostile relations with Israel are Syria and perhaps Lebanon, both of which are extremely weak compared to Israel or even Iran.

I know it's insulting and I don't care, but thanks for understanding that I don't mean any harm. Maybe it's a bit too close to me I don't know, at least I know that am biased that's something. But I really think that Iranians can be our best friends there, they are no clueless goatherders or Bedouin who lost their camel and don't know where it is and somehow wash up here

They are already our friends. Disagreement with the current aggressive policy and bitterness over the past misdeeds of western governments doesn't mean they dislike Westerners, like you only dislike the government and not them.

Iran is not solely responsible for the hostile diplomatic relations and, given the immense support the Shah and Saddam received from the west, I would argue that Iran isn't even the primary responsible.

[rory_20_uk]

I think you meant to say Lebanon, not Jordan. The interests of Iran and the US are contradictory and they cannot be conciliated.
The discord stems from the nationalisation of Western companies which exploited the human and natural resources of Iran without paying almost anything and also concerns the geopolitics of the Middle East.

Sorry - Lebanon, not Jordan.

The first boils down to money and often can therefore be sorted out with money. We have no current innate hostility - as long as we leave each other alone then that's fine and if we can trade that will enable us to spend money on our long term enemies. We managed to reconcile with China after a shared history of humiliation and a side order of slaughter. They don't like us but tolerate us - especially if we don't interfere.

The latter is definitely a large issue. But again, geopolitics - especially in the Middle East - is fluid, much more so than North Korea for example and we continue to hope that this will sort itself out. Whether they'd believe that all of a sudden we've stopped trying to throttle their economy and it is not a prelude to invasion. But since they are viewed as Infidels by Sunnis (as mostly are we).

So the rhetoric on both sides is contradictory - rather like the UK and the USSR. But the two joined as allies after a far longer period of conflict as it suited both parties.

[Husar]

The USA needs to get over that it utterly botched its relationship with propping up the Shah and frankly engage as suits its own interests.

Didn't they install the Shah to protect British financial interests in the first place?

[rory_20_uk]

Didn't they install the Shah to protect British financial interests in the first place?

Along with other Oil companies. All who lost their assets. And I imagine the USA was looking forward to their own interests as the British Empire crumbled and they'd rather the USSR didn't stroll in.

But this is some time in the past and many other intractable foes have come to peace - France and Germany for one simple example. We don't keep hearing about Verdun where more lives and money was blown to pieces.

[Fragony]

May cynism serve you well, you are going to need it

[Agent Miles]

Yes, the West should only do business with the nice people in the world. (sigh)

The despicables the USA "tolerated" had a shelf life that we recognized, having been revolutionaries ourselves, once. Taiwan, South Korea, Panama etc. may not have democracy because we are the puppet-masters, but they also didn't have some kind of Pol Pot butcher a third of their citizens. Some choices didn't have Utopia on the list.

Crandar, Freedom House gave the US an 89, 10 points less than Canada. My government better not have paid for that. It listed the Russian Collusion crap as a reason.

If everything is rosy in Iran, then let's see what happens when the Revolutionary Guard back down.

[Crandar]

How is this relevant to my criticism of Freedom House? I questioned the objectivity of your source, not the morality of the American foreign policy.

[rory_20_uk]

Yes, the West should only do business with the nice people in the world. (sigh)

The despicables the USA "tolerated" had a shelf life that we recognized, having been revolutionaries ourselves, once. Taiwan, South Korea, Panama etc. may not have democracy because we are the puppet-masters, but they also didn't have some kind of Pol Pot butcher a third of their citizens. Some choices didn't have Utopia on the list.

Most Empires have only the justification that they are big and powerful and that's the end of it. The USA often goes on about the whole "land of the free" line and some people think that they should follow this.

Of course, they never have in their entire history and enjoyed the same methods of disenfranchising and when required killing those who don't want to join Team USA. Setting the bar as low as "hey - we didn't support killing 1/3 of the population" makes most of the things the British Empire did practically benign.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Yes, the West should only do business with the nice people in the world. (sigh)

The despicables the USA "tolerated" had a shelf life that we recognized, having been revolutionaries ourselves, once. Taiwan, South Korea, Panama etc. may not have democracy because we are the puppet-masters, but they also didn't have some kind of Pol Pot butcher a third of their citizens. Some choices didn't have Utopia on the list....

Admittedly, our coterie of kleptocratic thugs murdered too many innocents, but decidedly LESS than the Stalinist thugs. Sadly, that means they were "better" for some values of better.


The USA gets derided for being too jingoistic and naive in foreign affairs AND for being too cynical and calculating. I think the world would truly be happiest if we voted "abstain" hereafter in the UN and just funded what they asked us to fund without upsetting everyone.


Europe was happiest with us under Carter, since he had the only truly consistent and principle-driven foreign policy we've displayed over the last half century, with his human rights centered approach. Of course, we see how well that worked out in the long run

[Agent Miles]

Actually, the USA was founded by Masons who are nothing more than an evil tool of the Illuminati and that's why we control the world. ;)

Meanwhile, a failed script for the X Files isn't going to win brownie points for a dictatorship in decline. A sob story of how this despotic regime is just a product of western meddling isn't going to keep them on life support. The "unrest" is actual, political resistance. The chains are breaking.

[Fragony]

That would be cool because it would mean that the Dutch control everything. But we don't

[Montmorency]

I had heard one of the usual government pronouncements that police violence in Iran was the result of some kind of outside agitators stirring things up.

I rolled my eyes, as I usually do at such things.

However, I got to thinking....

We have Saudi proxies (at least by some definitions) clashing with Iranian regulars in Syria and Saudi regulars clashing with Iranian proxies in Yemen. We know from previous episodes over that last three years that not all in Iran are content.

Might it ACTUALLY be outside agitators for once? Trying the RomeTW 'send 4 spies to force the town to rebel' ploy? I am not sure.

I'm sure it includes outside agitators.

Russia has opened the Pandora Box here with its cyberwar investments (and this is exactly what cyberwar looks like, not the sci-fi stock of explodifying aircraft or the power grid from afar). Everyone from China down is moving to partake of the Meddling Pie. We don't have a chance.

Unless the USA has massively upped its game the odds of them having a decent number of people that could infiltrate Iran is close to nil. Imagining that Saudi Arabia has such people - such as some of the 2% of Arabs in Iran - is much easier to believe. And they must be itching to bring the hurt home whilst Yemen is ongoing.

The Arabs in the southwest of Iran sure did disappoint Saddam Hussein in his expectation of Arab solidarity. Any Saudi interference probably isn't restricted along ethnic lines.

I am not a hawk and not American, but if something is going to change it will be in Iran and nowhere else. Iranians are different from other people in the middle-east they are much more free-thinking. Maybe I am overly optimistic and I am most certainly biased but still, go team Persia salafist those mullahs, hard deep and unsafe

You didn't mean it that way, but a Salafist takeover in Iran would certainly be a turn for the worse.

As for my other question, why do you hate Arabs so much compared to Persians?

Given Iran is the major power of 30% of Muslims they are surely our natural ally (not having to deal with the entire Middle East would definitely be better of course). The USA needs to get over that it utterly botched its relationship with propping up the Shah and frankly engage as suits its own interests.

Even for Israel, Iran is a smaller threat than everyone else that surrounds them; blustery rhetoric aside, Saudi Arabia has exported a lot more extremist religion than Iran has and apparently we are bestest mates. Hezbollah in Jordan / Syria is definitely supported by Iran but what with the whole embargoes for a few decades they take allies where they can.

A telling comment from a ___ over New Year's upon hearing of Russian material support for the Kim Jong Un regime: 'North Korea just wants nuclear weapons because America is trying to conquer it [sort of], and they have the right to manage to their own affairs and self-defense [arguably], so we shouldn't try to stop them from having nuclear weapons [there are other reasons to dislike a nuclear North Korea, and those who are helping them along...]. North Korea is defending itself, just like Israel defends itself from Iran.'

The obvious question to pose here is, does Iran similarly have a right to "defend itself" from Israel and the United States? Hezbollah is an Iranian creation, and the worst thing you can say about Iran's foreign policy is that it wants to control Syria and Lebanon, thereby access to the East Med coast, and are willing to fund international crime and terrorism to do it. This is a sticking point on the same level as nuclear proliferation, and a much better argument for a US counter to Iran than "they say mean things about Israel". And as far as I am aware, Iran has never directly attacked the territory of Israel, but Israel has directly attacked the territory of Iran. But the United States has been unfair and hypocritical in its disposition toward Iran, more so than is justifiable through Iran's fundamental governance or policies.

An ideal show of force in the Middle East, if such a thing exists, might have been to demand mutual deconfliction and normalization of relations between Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Iran as a prerequisite to full participation in the American order. We meet some of our objectives for the region, and we don't have all of the aforementioned playing us against Russia for profit. If the US guarantees the peace (between states), then the various parties have no business cultivating clients and proxies anyway. Probably not feasible today - maybe in 2002.

That has been the rap against CIA and 'No Such' for some time. It certainly has a good measure of truth behind it, as our brilliant HUMINT work prior to the invasion of Iraq under Bush43 suggests.

I would caution everyone, however, that groups like the CIA seldom publish their successes [wholly understandably I believe you will all agree], only their failures are noted.

CIA operations in the Vietnam War were "technically" very successful. So were CIA coups and assassinations. Unfortunately, CIA successes have tended to be much worse for the world than CIA failures.

[Agent Miles]

The political resistance has nothing to do with Iranian foreign policy toward the US or Israel or support for Hezbollah. The people want to be free. Students are jailed for having a party. Only opposition candidates approved by the government can run. It's an autocracy.

Seamus, "all evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing."