Comments on: In the Middle East, a bonfire of alibis http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/ Navigating the global archipelago Fri, 26 Sep 2014 22:50:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: yummy8755 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-201 Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:40:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-201 Iraq as a beacon of democracy, as in: all are equally free to murder each other?

]]>
By: txgadfly http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-198 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 02:53:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-198 Well most of you who have never met an Iranian xenophobe have, obviously, not lived there. They generally are xenophobic, although perhaps 10%, mostly young, are not.

]]>
By: SocialCapital http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-197 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 01:22:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-197 Dear Dr. Mousavizadeh,

Very interesting analysis, simultaneously in depth and wide spectrum; tho, i wander why all the above comments are focused around Iran and Iranians, is it because you are a proud Iranian descendant? or is it rather ” There is no smoke without fire”?
The law of the Sword and the law of the (Holly) Book are about to meet on the battle ground and they will certainly annihilate each other and make room for Global Incorporation.
As you say: When it comes to the Middle East today, a bonfire of alibis is overdue. There is no time like the present to strike the match, the present is actually subject to the 3 upcoming elections, a new deck will be introduced and the card will be dealt again, would they be still playing the same game? with the same rules? have the stakes changed? is the outcome as vague as it has always been?
On a total different note : how close are we to Nostradamus prophecies on the same topic ? now that we know that the speed of light is no longer the fastest measure around …

Be safe my brother and keep writing, hopefully the right people will soon take better notice of what you are unraveling .

]]>
By: xcanada2 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-196 Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:14:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-196 Mr. Mousavizadeh: You state,
“a regime in Tehran that is an enemy to its own people”.

I can’t say exactly where you get your information, or what your agenda is.

But, as Professor Juan Cole, a Farsi speaker, has well described, recognized polls prior to the last election of Ahmadinejad indicated that he would win the election with about the percentage of votes that were recorded as the final outcome.

Also, you need to consider the probable effects of the billions of dollars spent on the CIA and US special ops groups, as far as promoting provocateurs in Iran. How real was the Green movement, is difficult for us civilians to know, always kept in the dark by “our” government.

If you are referring to Ayatollah Khamenei as an enemy of his people, I’d remember that it was the Islamic revolution which drove the US/British installed, and much hated Shah out of Iran. (And the Shah was installed in Iran by US/UK after a CIA sponsored overthrow of the democratically elected Mossadegh, as you know.) Moreover, it is abundantly clear that the Islamist group was the only organized group left in the country to take on the Shah, so the people made a choice to support the Islamic revolution over the US-backed Shah. You can’t expect it to be any different now, especially as they are again under great pressure from the West.

Moreover, Ahmadinejad, being duly elected, is in conflict with the clerics over attempting to gather greater power to himself, that is, a further move in the democratic direction.

Let Iranians work it out themselves! It is their sovereign right!

Furthermore, it is not the right of the West to know all details of their military defense.

]]>
By: BioBehavioral http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-194 Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:30:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-194 WHAT WOULD THE AMERICAN FOUNDING FATHERS SAY?

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible.”
– President George Washington (1796)

For the USA, did the military intervention in Libya conform to President Washington’s admonition? Would an American intervention in Syria?

For the USA, whence comes the authority to intervene in civil wars in other nations? What are the specific and objective criteria for such interventions?

As currently practiced, doesn’t “humanitarian aid” merely represent a euphemism for providing aid and comfort to one side but not the other? Doesn’t “leading from behind” merely represent Mr. Obama’s euphemism for allowing other nations to initiate a military intervention in which the USA subsequently will participate . . . decisively?

An implicit policy of selective, military intervention . . . think Libya versus Bahrain, occasions a risk of unintended but inescapable consequences. An explicit policy of non-interventionism, direct threats to American national interest excepted, avoids such consequences but, admittedly, raises the obverse . . . the consequences of inaction. The American Founding Fathers, nevertheless, favored the latter.

Why? Were George Washington and John Adams smarter and wiser than George W. Bush and Barack Hussein Obama?

For the USA, viewed in the light of recent history . . . think Viet Nam and even Afghanistan, it seems that, in the long run, a scientific analysis of one policy versus the other would confirm the position of her Founding Fathers; namely, that a policy of non-interventionism offers the lesser risk (www.inescapableconsequences.com).

Conversely, Iran falls into a different category. The issue is not internal to Iran but external to its neighbors and even to far-flung nations, including the USA. For issues in this category, direct, military intervention may be in the national interest of the USA. If so, it should be undertaken with a goal being to have achieved total and complete victory; anything less would be self-defeating.

]]>
By: Biscayne http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-193 Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:50:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-193 I have as yet to meet a single Iranian xenophobe and the evidence is that the Iranian government does not have the support of the vast majority of Iranians.
Repression at home and foreign policy adventurism are the hallmark of a narrow-minded government that is clutching at justifying its existence. Like their avowed enemy the U.S., the Iranian regime has wasted billions pursuing imaginary enemies in what they have come to see as their backyard. They will get a rude awakening and the process has already begun with Hamas’s declaration of support for the Syrian rebels.

]]>
By: Biscayne http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-192 Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:50:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-192 I have as yet to meet a single Iranian xenophobe and the evidence is that the Iranian government does not have the support of the vast majority of Iranians.
Repression at home and foreign policy adventurism are the hallmark of a narrow-minded government that is clutching at justifying its existence. Like their avowed enemy the U.S., the Iranian regime has wasted billions pursuing imaginary enemies in what they have come to see as their backyard. They will get a rude awakening and the process has already begun with Hamas’s declaration of support for the Syrian rebels.

]]>
By: txgadfly http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/2012/02/27/in-the-middle-east-a-bonfire-of-alibis/#comment-191 Tue, 28 Feb 2012 03:12:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/nader-mousavizadeh/?p=76#comment-191 Thinking that the Iranian government does not have the support of the vast majority of Iranians is wishful thinking. Iranians are deeply xenophobic and have been for centuries, if not thousands of years. One thing that is certain is that they do not want another puppet regime for a government.

Iran will have to be dealt with as it is. Like Iraq, any thinking that an invasion or other war would be over quickly is an illusion sold by people who want to personally profit from a war there.

Any involvement of Israelis or of their American advocates must be distrusted. Who knows what the truth is? Not the involved parties.

]]>