Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:57 pm

Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun
The shrinking number of loyalists around the Ayatollah Khamenei are shaken by their failure to break the will of the opposition.

By MICHAEL LEDEEN

Today is the first anniversary of the fraudulent election that kept President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power, igniting huge demonstrations all over Iran. At the time, very few outside observers believed that most Iranians hated the regime of "Supreme Leader" Ali Khamenei and Mr. Ahmadinejad and were willing to risk their lives to bring it down.

Having failed to recognize the intensity and dimensions of the opposition, many Iran observers performed a neat about-face, concluding that the regime was doomed and would be brought down in the near future. Yet while there have been many demonstrations this past year, the regime has brutally fought back, killing or arresting hundreds if not thousands of real or suspected critics. Although not a day goes by without protests (typically at universities), large, organized demonstrations are too risky.

So is the new Iranian revolution fizzling? Has the regime taken firm control? The reality is that the regime's leaders are frightened, and everyone from the Ayatollah Khamenei down the dark labyrinths of this remarkably cheerless state knows that the only hope for the regime's survival is to intimidate the opposition.

Thus, the mass arrests of workers, intellectuals, filmmakers and any woman who shows a bit of hair under her veil. (Much of this brutality has been carried out by foreign forces, notably Hezbollah thugs brought in from Lebanon and Syria, adding to Iranians' rage.) Thus, the unprecedented ban on laughing or telling jokes recently promulgated at the Shiraz Medical School. Thus, the epidemic of executions, five and six a day of late. Many go unreported; the bodies simply disappear. The regime fears the dead almost as much as the living.

To say that the regime is unpopular is a gross understatement. A week ago Friday marked the anniversary of the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the 1979 Islamic revolution that overthrew the shah and established the theocratic tyranny that's ruled the country ever since. Leaders called for a massive turnout to celebrate the Islamic Republic, and they bragged that millions of supporters would come to the Tehran cemetery where Khomeini's remains are interned. More than 50,000 buses were deployed for the effort, and supporters were offered free food and drink as well as free subway transportation to the shrine.

The event was a fiasco. There were more buses than demonstrators. And when Khomeini's grandson, Hassan, rose to ask why there was such a pitiful turnout in honor of his grandfather, he was shouted down by the thugs of the Basij, a paramilitary security force recently elevated to full standing in the Revolutionary Guard Corps, lest he publicly expose their failure to mobilize any meaningful support.

The failure to mobilize even 100,000 of the faithful was duly noted by the leaders of the opposition Green movement, who issued a challenge to the interior minister: Let's have two days of celebration of your so-called electoral victory. You get this Friday, a holiday, and we'll take Saturday, the beginning of the work week. Let's see what the turnouts tell us about the wishes of our people. The regime's response was automatic: Stay off the streets or we'll crush you.

Meanwhile, Iranian human-rights organizations tirelessly report on the dreadful treatment of political prisoners, and Green movement leaders Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi ceaselessly demand their release. In the past year, the Greens have rapidly expanded their movement, reaching out to workers' organizations, women's groups, ethnic and religious minorities, veterans of the Iran-Iraq War, and a plethora of brave clerics including the Ayatollah Sayed Hossein Kazemeyni Boroujerdi, who continues to denounce the Islamic Republic from a cell in Evin prison where he's been confined since October 2006.

The clearest indicator of the strength of the opposition is that the regime has not moved directly against its leaders. There are endless warnings, most recently from the Ayatollah Khamenei at the Khomeini tomb, where he pointedly observed that even some of those who had accompanied Khomeini in 1979 on his triumphant return from exile were later executed for treason.

Despite the threats, Messrs. Mousavi and Karroubi remain politically active. And while they are careful to insist that all they want is respect for the Iranian constitution, it's clear to anyone who reads their words or hears their underground broadcasts that the Islamic Republic would not survive their victory.

But such limited actions are not likely to bring down a regime prepared to kill any number of its own people. The Green movement may well be larger than before, and regime leaders may well fear for their survival, but sooner or later there will be a showdown, most likely sooner. The regime is riven by internal conflict, and some of the past heroes of the Islamic Republic are openly siding with the Greens. This was seen in a dramatic television interview last week with the former defense minister, Admiral Ali Shamkhani, who enraged his interviewer by supporting many Green demands for greater freedom.

The shrinking number of loyalists around the Ayatollah Khamenei are clearly shaken by their failure to either mobilize significant support or break the will of the opposition. What will they do if, as seems inevitable, there are significant challenges from the Greens today and in the weeks hereafter? Protests could intensify leading up to the July 9 anniversary of the savage 1999 massacre of thousands of students and critics.

The regime is hollow, but it kills a lot of Iranians. Eventually the Greens, who have preached and usually practiced nonviolence, may fight back. There have been reports of antiregime violence already: A petroleum refinery in the south was recently torched, and the head of the Iranian Automobile Industries in Syria—in reality one of Hezbollah's top logistics officers—was gunned down in Damascus a few weeks back.

The West has a lot at stake in the outcome of the Iranian crisis. Were the regime to fall, a Green successor government—most likely to be headed by Messrs. Mousavi and Karroubi for at least a while—would end support for terrorism in such hot spots as Iraq and Afghanistan and, at a minimum, cut back on the deals that the Ayatollah Khamenei and Mr. Ahmadinejad have made with Venezuela, Syria and Turkey. The Russians were active players in that game for several years but have recently chastised the mullahs, perhaps foreseeing a change in regime.

Western support for the Greens would do wonders for opposition morale, catalyze the undecided, and perhaps contain the looming violence. Yet no Western government is even talking to the Green leaders, let alone embracing their cause. This fecklessness advances neither our interests nor those of the brave Iranians who are fighting to join the civilized world. Even the watered-down sanctions enacted this month by the U.N. Security Council represent a challenge to the regime, although they do not touch its Achilles' heel: crude oil and petroleum products. We should do much more.

One can imagine the Green movement's leaders quoting Martin Luther King Jr., speaking a half-century ago of another struggle for freedom and respect: "In the end," he said, "we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends."

Mr. Ledeen, a scholar at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, is the author of "Accomplice to Evil: Iran and the War Against the West" (St. Martin's Press, 2009).
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby 82_28 » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:20 pm

This whole thing is such a many, many, many headed hydra that has been going on decades. Every which way. Just what is going on? Personally, I don't know where to even begin. Very prismatic with constantly shifting lights.

I know neo-con Ledeen and his obviously want war and always have. Obviously there are US forces as such, fomenting the "revolution" -- be it through tech means, black ops on the ground, spies, propaganda, agitprop, sanctions etc. Obviously many in Iran "want to be free". What's that Iranian graphic novel that came out awhile back? Can't think of the name. Gutwrenching though. It's just Ledeen and Co I don't think, think of Iranians, Persians, Arabs et al as humans. This "revolution" is for trans-nat corporations and defense contracts and oil and racism and pet projects, hegemony, and and and.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby Gouda » Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:20 am

Michael Leeden, Neocon, Fascist. Civil and Economic Rights credentials pending, wrote:
One can imagine the Green movement's leaders quoting Martin Luther King Jr., speaking a half-century ago of another struggle for freedom and respect. "In the end," he said, "we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends."

Iranian Green movement, beware your "friends".

Anyway, CNN chips in along these lines with some helpful analysis and guidance provided by the American Enterprise Institute, The Council on Foreign Relations, and The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

***

One year later, Iran's opposition remains quiet force

(CNN) -- Nima has felt the force of a club come crashing down on his body in three separate beatings by Islamic security forces over the past year.

Azadeh repeatedly has tossed herself in the throes of mass protests through the streets of Tehran, engaging in the now well-known, cat-and-mouse game of people versus brute force.

Ehsan and Kianoosh refused to keep silent, speaking out until the only choice left was to leave their country. "It was like losing a piece of my body," said Ehsan.

As Iran marks its first anniversary of the June 12 presidential elections, the four -- who asked to be identified by aliases for fear of their safety -- will find themselves in a position distinctly different from where they were a year ago.
Video: Iran elections: One year later

While Azadeh and Nima planned to return to the streets as veteran protesters, Ehsan and Kianoosh will watch from afar.

"There is fear," said Azadeh, a 30-year-old bank teller in Tehran. "I can't say I'm not scared, but you still have to go out -- because that's what the government wants, for you to be afraid and not continue. But we have to."

The disputed presidential election sparked widespread outrage within the Islamic republic, thrusting the depths of Iranian society into the global spotlight and inciting violence that hadn't been seen decades.

A diverse opposition movement -- headed by presidential reform candidates Mir Hossein Moussavi and Mehdi Karrubi -- grew into today's Green Movement, protesting for social justice, freedom and democracy in demonstrations throughout the country since the June polls. The two opposition leaders, both from the ranks of supporters of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led Iran's 1979 Iranian Revolution, accuse the current hardline regime of stealing the election and staging a brutal crackdown.

"Before the elections, I think part of the society believed in the system," said Nima, a 30-year-old university researcher. "But after the elections, most people saw how brutal the system was with violence against its own people."

Weeks ago, Moussavi and Karrubi called for demonstrations on June 12, asking opposition groups and reformist parties to apply for rally permits. But just 48 hours before the election anniversary, the pair called off plans for protests, citing reports that the Islamic government was once again preparing security against demonstrators and warning against gathering in the streets.

"Hardliners and repressors are being organized to attack the defenseless and innocent people," Moussavi and Karrubi said Thursday. "We ask the people and the protesters to demand and follow up on their rightful demands and requests through less costly and more effective methods."

Some, including Azadeh, said the opposition's cancellation wouldn't change their plans to protest, though others are focusing their attention and energy beyond the public protests.

While the opposition movement initially had strong showings with seas of green banners, arm bands and signs coursing through Tehran and other cities, the protests have largely fizzled out in recent months. Perhaps the most evident sign of this was on February 11, when Iran's security forces clashed with demonstrators -- coming through on a promise to crack down on protesters on the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution and the fall of the Shah.

Few demonstrations have been organized since then, leaving observers to wonder what's happened to the opposition and the protesters. The fruits of the opposition's labor, however, are still fresh to many.

"Their struggle wasn't in vain, there was an outcome," said Kianoosh, a 30-year-old blogger who fled Iran after plainclothes security personnel arrived at his home looking for him. He hid in a friend's basement for the next 27 days, before paying someone $500 to help him flee the country.

"The important thing was to get rid of that fear," he added. "When that taboo was broken, that fear disappeared. People are no longer afraid of the regime."

Some within the movement say it's still growing, though its future is uncertain.

"In the beginning, the movement was like a child. As it's growing, it is taking a different shape," said Azadeh. "It doesn't need violence to continue."

Ehsan, a 31-year-old engineer and poet, fled Iran after repeated questioning by authorities, accusing him of composing "un-Islamic" and "anti-government" poems. He said that over the past year, the people of Iran have an "increased awareness" about their world since the elections.

Indeed, the protesters are no stranger to the violence that became virtually inevitable after the election. Ahmadinejad's administration, under the watch of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has vowed to respond with force against any protests. Thousands were arrested during last summer's demonstrations -- including former lawmakers, political activists, local and international journalists, filmmakers and foreign nationals -- and hundreds were accused of engaging in a "soft revolution" and tried in court. At least 11 protesters have been sentenced to death after the election, and a few have already been executed.

Nima blames the government's emphasis on security for the opposition shifting out of the public eye.

"The biggest reason is the violence by the government," he said. "The violence didn't allow people to protest."

"It could also be that some people don't want to get themselves in trouble for no reason," Nima continued. "I see this lull as kind of a breather with people waiting for the right time to come out the again."

The lull has left Iranian experts at odds over whether the opposition movement has lost steam against the oppressive regime, or is simply broadening its ranks and reach in a methodical fashion.

"The opposition can't expect reform in the current structure. The system has to be completely changed," said Ali Alfoneh, a resident fellow at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute who has researched the relationship between Iranian civilians and the Revolutionary Guard.

Alfoneh noted that an increasing part of the government's strength is its well-organized security forces -- posing brute strength to counter the protesters -- that answer straight to Iran's current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was established after the Islamic Revolution to defend the regime against all threats, "but has since expanded far beyond its original mandate," according to the Council on Foreign Relations, a U.S. foreign policy research center.

"Today the guard has evolved into a socio-military-political-economic force with influence reaching deep into Iran's power structure," the CFR says, noting that several current and former IRGC members have been appointed to positions as ambassadors, mayors, undersecretaries, provincial governors and cabinet ministers.

During the demonstrations that followed the election, the IRGC's paramilitary volunteer force -- the Basij -- was seen chasing protesters on motorcycles and attacking them. Amateur videos showed members of the Basij, wearing plain shirts and pants and wielding clubs and hoses, dispersing protesters and beating a handful of Iranians at a time.

The Islamic regime has also been successful in hurting the opposition's rank-and-file -- not by arresting its leaders, but by nabbing mid-level managers, political party activists, those who manage communications between the leaders and members of the movement.

"It's made it impossible for the Green Movement to mobilize," Alfoneh said.

Others keeping an ear to the movement aren't so easily convinced. What's more interesting than the opposition not demonstrating lately, they say, is the fact that the government has scaled-down its own trademark state-sanctioned rallies.

Consider this past week when Iran would have celebrated Khomeini's life by commemorating his June 3, 1989, death. Though state-run media promised "millions" of followers to turn up for an event around the shrine where Khomeini is laid to rest, video and independent media put the crowd in the thousands. And the three-days of annual mourning ceremonies for the Islamic icon was reduced to a single day of government observance.

Another example is the May 31 Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla, in which commandos intercepted the convoy at seas and stormed the largest vessel, killing nine people aboard. The ships were carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza, the Palestinian territory that has been blockaded by Israel since its takeover by the Islamic movement Hamas in 2007, and the deadly raid sparked international condemnation.

Such an incident would have typically prompted the Iranian government to encourage its people to protest in favor of Palestinians. But that didn't happen this time, noted Mehdi Khalaji, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

They "did not encourage people to come to streets for demonstrations, obviously, because they cannot control people easily any more," Khalaji said.

Khalaji indicated that the opposition movement is seeking to expand and strengthen by looking beyond Tehran and speaking with different ethnic and religious groups and organizations involving women, human rights and labor unions, in order "to form a bigger social power."

"The Green Movement is mostly trying to inform people about their rights and raise their awareness," said Ehsan.

Moussavi and Karrubi are looking to decentralize their role and put leaders in the ranks, Khalaji said. The movement is also moving away with its old strategy of mobilizing on national and religious holidays, when the government expects demonstrations and beefs up forces accordingly.

"We're dealing with a very difficult society and a very difficult government. We can't expect them to take to the streets every week ... They are looking to minimizing the damage and maximizing the benefit of their actions," Khalaji said. "That's why they don't want to rush."

Nima, for his part, started an underground awareness campaign in January through which he distributes homemade DVDs about the Green Movement into smaller cities in rural Iran. The videos include footage of speeches from human rights activists and opposition leaders and news clips. He pays for the project out of his own pocket and with the help of a few friends.

"There may not be as many demonstrations, but people know the movement still exists and it's more dangerous because you can't see it," Nima said.

"Every movement takes time. We shouldn't expect to see any results after only one year," he continued. "You have to be patient. If you really want to get somewhere you have to continue working and struggling."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast ... tml?hpt=C1
User avatar
Gouda
 
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:53 am
Location: a circular mould
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby lupercal » Sat Jun 12, 2010 10:27 am

"The Green Movement is mostly trying to inform people about their rights and raise their awareness," said Ehsan.


Image

Viva the Greens.
User avatar
lupercal
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:11 pm

WPost, NYT Show Tough-Guy Swagger

By Robert Parry
June 14, 2010
When Americans wonder how their country has ended up in so many pointless and seemingly endless conflicts around the world, like the meandering Afghan War and the bloody mess in Iraq, a good place to start would be the “prestige” newspapers, the Washington Post and the New York Times.

And, they are now engaged in a replay regarding Iran.

On Saturday, the Post’s editorial writers joined their counterparts at the Times in a new Establishment chorus demanding “regime change” in Iran through the ouster of the country’s Islamic-directed government by supporting the opposition Green Movement, which lost last year’s presidential election and then mounted public protests.

Since that election one year ago, it has become an accepted truth in the major U.S. news media that the Green Movement’s candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi won the election which was then stolen by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

So, the thinking goes, President Barack Obama must abandon his naïve efforts to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear program and instead ratchet up bilateral tensions by throwing more U.S. support behind the Iranian opposition – and winking at Israeli plans to launch airstrikes against military targets inside Iran. Those attacks would supposedly spark an uprising in Iran.

This wishful thinking is reminiscent of the run-up to war in Iraq. Then, too, the Post and Times – plus much of Washington’s foreign policy elite – bought into a mythology of their own making, wanting to believe that the internal opposition in Iraq was much stronger than it was and that negotiating with the official leadership was a sign of weakness and betrayal.

The fantasies about Iraq led to neoconservative dreams of a "cake walk" for U.S. troops as Iraqis threw rose petals. Now, similar uncritical thinking is being applied to Iran.

“A year ago,” the Washington Post’s editorialists wrote on Saturday, “a movement was born that offers the best chance of ending the threat posed by Iran’s support for terrorism and pursuit of nuclear weapons,” adding that:

“Mr. Obama’s strategy hasn’t slowed Iran’s nuclear program or its aggressions toward Iraq, Lebanon or Israel. The popular discontent reflected in the Green Movement offers another avenue for action, one that is more in keeping with America’s ideals. It’s time for the president to fully embrace it.”

Last Thursday, a New York Times editorial took a similar line, praising the new round of anti-Iran sanctions that the Obama administration pushed through the U.N. Security Council, though the Times said they “do not go far enough.”

The Times also took a mocking swipe at Brazil and Turkey, which voted against the new sanctions after having convinced Iran to swap about half its low-enriched uranium for more processed uranium that could only be used for peaceful purposes.

“The day’s most disturbing development was the two no votes in the Security Council from Turkey and Brazil,” the Times wrote. “Both are disappointed that their efforts to broker a nuclear deal with Iran didn’t go far. Like pretty much everyone else, they were played by Tehran.”

But the truth was that the Iran-Turkey-Brazil deal was torpedoed by the United States, although President Obama had privately encouraged it. Turkey and Brazil weren't "played by Tehran"; they were double-crossed by Washington.

Other Belligerent Voices

In recent weeks, Times star columnist Thomas L. Friedman also has weighed in with an influential column advocating U.S. backing for the Green Movement rather than further negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.

The Green Movement’s “success — not any nuclear deal with the Iranian clerics — is the only sustainable source of security and stability. We have spent far too little time and energy nurturing that democratic trend and far too much chasing a nuclear deal,” Friedman wrote.

These moralistic “tough-guy” tones might sit well with armchair warriors like the Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt and the New York Times executive editor Bill Keller, but they appear likely to continue America’s stumbling progression toward another Middle East war.

And, as during the prelude to the Iraq War, the attitudes of the Post and Times editorialists are in sync with the warmongering of the neoconservatives. Regarding Iran, it is hard to distinguish between the opinions of the Post, the Times and, say, neocon propagandist Michael Ledeen writing recently in the Wall Street Journal.

So, over the past several weeks, it has become the collective judgment of key honchos from American journalism that the Obama administration should refuse to seek compromises regarding Iran’s nuclear program and instead push for “regime change.”

However, beyond the human consequences of such war-like policies, there’s the journalistic concern about these prestigious opinion leaders making up their own “reality.”

For instance, there’s the troublesome fact that virtually all the available evidence indicates that – contrary to Western hopes and desires – President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won the June 12, 2009, election in Iran and that his chief challenger Mousavi didn’t even come close.

As an analysis by the University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes discovered, not a single Iranian poll – whether before or after the election, whether conducted inside or outside Iran – showed Ahmadinejad with less than majority support. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Ahmadinejad Won, Get Over It!”]

However, the Post and Times seem determined to place their cherished myth of Mousavi’s victory at the center of U.S. foreign policy. Over the past year, whenever they mention the Iranian elections, the Post and Times characterize the vote as “disputed” or cite the opposition’s accusations that the results were “rigged” or “fraudulent.”

The Bush Exception

Though one might argue that such wording is fair given the controversy, it is worth noting that the two newspapers took the opposite approach toward the U.S. presidential election in 2000 when the evidence was overwhelming that George W. Bush stole the victory from Al Gore, who got more votes nationally and apparently got most of the legal votes in the key state of Florida.

Rather than forthrightly present the findings of a news media study which discovered Gore’s rightful Florida victory a year after the election, the editors of the Post and Times buried the startling result and instead highlighted hypothetical partial recounts that still left Bush ahead.

The editorial thinking – after the 9/11 attacks – apparently was that the truth would undermine Bush’s “legitimacy” amid the crisis and open the newspapers to accusations that they had undercut the patriotic unity that was then sweeping the country.

To enforce the "Bush-won" judgment, prominent commentators, such as the Post’s media writer Howard Kurtz, mocked anyone who bothered to read the recount study’s actual results and who dared notice the unacceptable outcome (Gore’s victory). Those who did became “conspiracy theorists.” [For details, see the book, Neck Deep.]

So, the major U.S. news media harps on what is essentially an unsupported conspiracy theory – that Ahmadinejad “stole” the Iranian election – while treating as a “conspiracy theory” the accurate recognition that Bush did steal the U.S. election. You can look far and wide for the Post and Times referring to Election 2000 as "disputed" or "rigged" without much success.

To make matters worse, the Times and Post editorialists now have elevated their mythology about Iran’s “fraudulent” election into the chief rationale for relying upon the Green Movement to facilitate “regime change” in Iran, despite recent evidence that the opposition is fizzling.

“As a formal political organization, the reform movement is dead,” reported Will Yong and Michael Slackman in a news story for Saturday’s Times that nevertheless carried the hopeful headline, “Across Iran, Anger Lies Behind Face of Calm.” (Given today’s economic dislocations, a similar headline could be applied to nearly every country on the planet, including the United States.)

Spiking Afghan Peace

Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, as the U.S. and NATO casualty lists grow, the New York Times also is taking a hard line, publishing an editorial on Monday, condemning Afghan President Hamid Karzai for even exploring a possible peace deal with the Taliban.

As happened with Obama regarding his initial interest in engaging the Iranian government, Karzai is portrayed as foolish for thinking that a negotiated peace is possible for Afghanistan, at least not before U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal gets more time to pummel the Taliban.

Though acknowledging that McChrystal’s war escalation so far has met little success, the editorialists said his “counterinsurgency strategy still seems like the best chance to stabilize Afghanistan and get American troops home.”

As for Karzai’s peace overtures, the Times concluded: “We don’t know if the Taliban leaders will ever compromise. But we are sure that they will consider it only under duress. General McChrystal is going to have to do a much better job [in an upcoming offensive] in Kandahar. Mr. Karzai is going to have to drop his illusions and commit to the fight.”

It apparently is beyond the ken of the smart editorialists at the Post and Times that they may be the ones suffering from “illusions.”
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby Gouda » Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:14 am

The NYT just found one more credible voice:

Op-Ed Contributor, REUEL MARC GERECHT, (full neocon and CIA credentials)...

Iran’s Revolution: Year 2

IN 1985 — when no case officer could even dream of widespread pro-democracy demonstrations in Tehran like those that occurred a year ago this week — I first arrived on the Iran desk in the C.I.A.’s Directorate of Operations. One of my colleagues was an older man who had entered the agency in its early days, when liberal internationalists and hawkish socialists ran most of America’s covert-action programs.

(...and more where that came from...)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/15/opini ... lobal-home
User avatar
Gouda
 
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:53 am
Location: a circular mould
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby Simulist » Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:45 am

Ledeen Speaks!

Ledeen is well-trained, and will always speak on command — especially if there's a treat in it for him.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Iran's Revolution Has Only Just Begun - Ledeen Speaks!

Postby MinM » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:41 pm

Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3288
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 164 guests