The Iranians betrayed

JonB

Your readership understands, but how can Obama and others have their eyes opened? Who can influence them?

phil

I wrote some months ago about being fortunate enough to have met with young Iranians presently living in the west .They told me a vastly different story of their fellow citizens ,one where so many crave for a life like ours but are subjugated by the iron grip of the mullahs.Corruption is rife even to the extent of those that cannot go back can exchange their Iranian funds for European currency at exorbitant rates on our own streets .Those that are caught drinking by the religious police can pay them off ! I said that we need to help those moderate people and to encourage them to change the regime ,but not one person even made a comment -how sad

chrys

On the nose as ever Melanie. Obama is simply a confection-the liberal elites wet dream as all of them are unpricipled,incompetent and venal as he is. Palin had it right-two books and no laws or experience in running anything yet! No faith and no sense of history or humility. Obama is simply the Wests Gorbachev-although he DID have principles and courage unlike Obama. That he is "of colour" will only skewer the liberals more-yet WE don`t have to go along with it!

Truthtriumphs

How about our craven, unprincipled so-called government which branded the PMOI as an outlawed terrorist organisation.
It just so happens that it is the dissident, resistance movement in Iran, and remains our best hope for regime change there.

London Calling

Words can be easily misinterpreted.... How exactly do you get rid of a regime? If you have answers that do not include dropping a very large bomb, then start with Mugabe and work your way down so we can all have some peace on Earth.

The way I see it you have 12th century Islamic ideology at war with moderate Islam and outside of that bubble we are at war with corrupt capitalism that is no less hungry for power than the desire for Islamic world domination.

If the Iranian people want democracy, then they had better vote with their feet, march until they drop and make their voices heard from the mountain tops, you cannot force democracy, it has to come from within, unfortunately it is the few who control the whole, and at present it is the few that Obama has to deal with.

My eyes are wide open, I just shut them now and then and image a better world other than the one we now live in, if only, we could resolve our differences, work together to resolve global poverty, our energy crisis and reach for the stars together...

The Iranian people are not only ones who have been betrayed ...to date we all have.

Neil Mosafi

Brzezinski was behind Carter's foreign policy and is now behind Obama's so it's not surprising they're doing the same thing.

London Calling

Words can be easily misinterpreted.... How exactly do you get rid of a regime? If you have answers that do not include dropping a very large bomb, then start with Mugabe and work your way down so we can all have some peace on Earth.

The way I see it you have 12th century Islamic ideology at war with moderate Islam and outside of that bubble we are at war with corrupt capitalism that is no less hungry for power than the desire for Islamic world domination.

If the Iranian people want democracy, then they had better vote with their feet, march until they drop and make their voices heard from the mountain tops, you cannot force democracy, it has to come from within, unfortunately it is the few who control the whole, and at present it is the few that Obama has to deal with.

My eyes are wide open, I just shut them now and then and image a better world other than the one we now live in, if only, we could resolve our differences, work together to resolve global poverty, our energy crisis and reach for the stars together...

The Iranian people are not only ones who have been betrayed ...to date we all have.

An American

Phil,

I agree with you. I wrote something similar some time ago.

The only salvation for the Iranian people is for them to find their own way out.

Unfortunately, once a evil regime has a foothold, it's hard for its unarmed citizens to retaliate or rebel.

If the west is worried about Iran's Mullah's plans...imagine what clear thinking Iranians must be feeling about now...

Linda Smith

London Calling: problem is that if the Iranian people march with their feet, under Sharia law, the mullahs may cut them off!

karen USA

Obama is a betrayer, a liar. He is not a good man. Asking him to understand is a waste of time. He only believes in the destruction of western civilization.

Michael B

We can expect more of the same. Much more. The R/TOTUS (the Rhetorician/Teleprompter of the United States) has recently vowed to "persist" in this illusion, this appeasement process directed at Iran's Shi'a based theocracy. Carteresque delusional thinking, on steroids, in a yet more volatile era.

postergirl

" Ofooli " is about right, especially under our present leadership.

Jim D

Your writing is baseless and immature, and your knowledge is tainted with falls information.

Question: How many innocent people have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and which countries terrorized those people and destroyed million’s of lives in the past 6 years? Which countries own the largest stock pills of WMD’s (weapons of mass destruction). Your lies and falls propaganda does not have much buys anymore.

An American

Jim D

Your are the one that's not logical...what's with this 'falls information" and "falls propaganda"...

You have to be coherent to be understood.

Renata

American: You would do well to follow your own counsel "... you have to be coherent to be understood'.

An American

Renata,

You give no examples of my being incoherent.

I suspect you disagree with my politics but lack the bravery to write it.

I did type 'your' instead of 'you'...but I'm a lousy typist. I excuse type and spelling mistakes in others as I hope they will mine. It's when I have to read comments two, three time to make sense of them that I find them incoherent.

Jim D

An American you did not answer the questions that I raised, who terrorized 35 million people in Iraq? Who owns more WMD than anyone else in the world?

You and your like can demonizes Iran as much as you want, which country did Iran invaded in past 200 years, which war was it that Iranian nation waged on the humanity anywhere in the world?

The answer is NONE.

I believe between you and I you are the one who is not clear.

The writer of this article is banging on a hallow drum, it sounds very familiar, been hearing it for past 8 years, all lies and deceptions.

Ignorance Is Bliss

Most of you Brits wanted a change in America and now you've got it. Be careful what you wish for becasue you just might get it. I hope you enjoy the DVDs. Cheerio!!

phil

Jim D the answer to your first question is of course sadaam and the rest does not need dignifying by an answer

Graeme Thompson

"[..] they consider America and the West as ‘Ofooli,". How astoundingly apt .. And Melanie ... " .... into the nuclear checkmate position" WOW! What writing!

An American

Jim D,

I wasn't aware that you were addressing your comments to me specifically.

After the al Qaeda attack of 9-11, that killed 3,000 innocent Americans citizens, Bush decided to take the war first to Afghanistan, al Qaeda's stronghold, where in a very short time, our troops either killed or drove al Qaeda and the Taliban out of that country to our and the Afghan citizen's great benefit.

Bush with the support of all of the Congress with the exception of a few, then took the war to Sadamm who was making and storing WMDs..Yes, I believe he was and someday, we will find proof that they are stored in Syria or Russia. Sadamm had six months to hide them before we invaded.

After we easily destroyed Sadamm's army, thousands of al Qaeda terrorists from all over the world went to Iraq to fight the Americans.

Bush won that war and in the process, he killed two birds with one stone. He destroyed Sadamm and his evil, sadistic empire and killed most of the top lieutenants of Osama bin Laden, in the process crippling al Qaeda badly. Osama is now hiding out in some northern Pakistan cave and will someday end up like Sadamm.

The benefit to Americans, is that we haven't had an attack on our country in seven years. And Afghanistan and Iraq have benefitted by having more reasonable govenments installed in power instead of Taliban's Muslim extremists who treated their women worse than stray dogs and kept that country in the 12th Century. Our brave soldiers destroyed the Iraqi dictator Sadamm who killed thousands of his own people with chemical gas among other heinous crimes against Iraqi citizens.

That's my take on what happened in Iraq. But I doubt you will agree.

I don't demonize the Iranian people, I feel great pity for them. They must take power away from the Mullah's if they are to survive. If you can believe what you hear, see and read... The Mullahs are devising a great holocaust that will destroy Israel and much of the Middle East all in the name of bringing their savior out of his well to conquer the world....crazy, crazy, crazy.

An American

Jim D,

I wasn't aware that you were addressing your comments to me specifically.

After the al Qaeda attack of 9-11, that killed 3,000 innocent Americans citizens, Bush decided to take the war first to Afghanistan, al Qaeda's stronghold, where in a very short time, our troops either killed or drove al Qaeda and the Taliban out of that country to our and the Afghan citizen's great benefit.

Bush with the support of all of the Congress with the exception of a few, then took the war to Sadamm who was making and storing WMDs..Yes, I believe he was and someday, we will find proof that they are stored in Syria or Russia. Sadamm had six months to hide them before we invaded.

After we easily destroyed Sadamm's army, thousands of al Qaeda terrorists from all over the world went to Iraq to fight the Americans.

Bush won that war and in the process, he killed two birds with one stone. He destroyed Sadamm and his evil, sadistic empire and killed most of the top lieutenants of Osama bin Laden, in the process crippling al Qaeda badly. Osama is now hiding out in some northern Pakistan cave and will someday end up like Sadamm.

The benefit to Americans, is that we haven't had an attack on our country in seven years. And Afghanistan and Iraq have benefitted by having more reasonable govenments installed in power instead of Taliban's Muslim extremists who treated their women worse than stray dogs and kept that country in the 12th Century. Our brave soldiers destroyed the Iraqi dictator Sadamm who killed thousands of his own people with chemical gas among other heinous crimes against Iraqi citizens.

That's my take on what happened in Iraq. But I doubt you will agree.

I don't demonize the Iranian people, I feel great pity for them. They must take power away from the Mullah's if they are to survive. If you can believe what you hear, see and read... The Mullahs are devising a great holocaust that will destroy Israel and much of the Middle East all in the name of bringing their savior out of his well to conquer the world....crazy, crazy, crazy.

War is Peace

So what did Bush's policy do to help topple the mullah's regime? Precisely bugger all? True too though, that cosying up to China has done zilch for human rights there and in Tibet.
Interesting that the Iranian journalist quoted wishes that the Shah had been allowed to 'crush' the Ayatollah and his followers. What does he mean by crush?

Stew

An American, well said. The Iranians will use Obama's out stretched hand as a delaying tactic to buy themselves time to progress with their development of a nuclear weapon and to purchase defence equipment from Russia. It looks more and more likely that Israel is going to act unilaterally if not with tacit US support in blunting the Iranian threat especially given the Israeli election results and the liklihood that Iran will 're-elect' Ahmadinejad in June.

Stew

An American, well said. The Iranians will use Obama's out stretched hand as a delaying tactic to buy themselves time to progress with their development of a nuclear weapon and to purchase defence equipment from Russia. It looks more and more likely that Israel is going to act unilaterally if not with tacit US support in blunting the Iranian threat especially given the Israeli election results and the liklihood that Iran will 're-elect' Ahmadinejad in June.

An American

Stew,

Thank you for the kind words.

I'm sure I will get some flak for my positions...can't wait.

I also think that Bush went into Iraq to try to create a more moderate middle eastern government... to plant some hopeful seeds of Democracy in the region.

So, they can demonize Bush all they want, but I believe his intentions were good. If the liberal Congress and media had supported him and not fought him the entire time...we would have had fewer soldiers killed and maimed and finished the job sooner. We have no interest in staying in Iraq any longer than necessary. How many other countries in history defeat their enemy and then hand the country back? Not many, most stay for eternity.

I agree with you that Iran will have the bomb shortly if Israel doesn't act. Israel will have to go it alone...I don't believe that Obama's will come through for them. I hope I am wrong. Apparently, Bush also didn't want Israel to bomb Iran's bomb making facilities. I have yet to hear the reasoning...perhaps he didn't want to be pulled into another war while still in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Israel will have to do whatever is necessary to protect itself.

If Iran had differnt leadership, I don't think the world would be so worried...after all Pakistan, whose government has always been unstable, has nuclear bombs. With them giving away the northern part of the country to the Islamic extremists...maybe we should be more worried about those extremists getting the bomb.

But, back to Iran. We only have their words and threats to go on. What a delimma Israel faces.

An American

War is Peace,

Crush is just a nice politically correct word for kill. And too bad they didn't do it when they had the chance.

It always amazes me that in history, hundreds of millions of innocent humans die in wars, revolutions, ethnic cleansing, etc...but the offending leadership is protected to the end by other world leaders. Just looking after their own skins, I imagine. So many millions of lives would be saved and chaos stopped worldwide, if evil leaders were eliminated early on...you cut off the head of the snake first.

Iranians can thank President Carter for the lives they now have to tolerate and the future they fear.

If the mullahs succeed in their threats...I wonder if Carter will apologize..probably not. The arrogance of this incredibly stupid little man is overwhelming.

Bush didn't create the Iranian mess but he couldn't find a way out either. How do you negotiate with a neanderthal like Ahmadinejad? Obama thinks he can charm him with his wit (needs his teleprompter there) and dazzling smile...yeah sure.

War is Peace

An American-So assassinating the Ayatollah would have nipped the whole problem in the bud and Iranians would now be happily living under the shah? Get real. Carter should not be blamed for everything- the Shah's corrupt, oppressive, western-backed regime was the driver that caused such a reaction.
Many governments are now keeping a lid on their own Islamic fundamentalist problem by 'crushing' them, and democracy in the process. Lets hope that these movements don't gain popular support and leave us facing a dozen irans.
The moral democratic example which the west could have offered progressive forces in those countries is undermined by their self-serving foreign policy, disguised under ridiculous names as 'operation enduring freedom'.

War is Peace

BTW An American, going to war on a hunch is, as you americans say 'whack'. The 'evidence' for WMD's had to be faked. You think we should start wars on peoples' beliefs rather than evidence carefully accumulated byweapons inspectors, the intelligence communtiy etc.

Augustus

Jim D, you sound like your's shooting the rapids. Or is it just your big mouth your shooting off?

An American

War is Peace,

By the way, we know one of those 'weapons inspectors'...and he still believes they had WMDs.

On an interesting note...He showed us a Christmas card he received from the Iraqi woman scientist that was over their WMD programs. The card had a 'Death Head' on it wishing him a Happy New Year...sick.

Do you believe we should just stand by and wait until we have another major attack on the US..this time with a WMD? Do you believe in responding only after we've suffered another attack with perhaps hundreds of thousands of Americans killed? What would you call that...a revenge attack?

You must remember that Iraq happened after we were attacked on own soil. We were not going to stand by and wait for another even worse attack to occur.

Yes, I believe in nipping evil in the bud, instead of waiting for it to bloom and destroy us.

I agree with you that the arrogant, desk jockies that run US foreign policy have made a mess of things for decades. Their bad decisions have brought on many of these problems...

Linda Smith

Has it occurred to any of you posting here that Iraq borders Iran. The reason the US and its allies went into Iraq was for strategic purposes vis-a-vis Iran, sponsor of terrorism. Or maybe you don't believe that Iran poses any danger to the "free" world.

benjamin

Most of the commentators here have a completely erroneous view of Iran. I have several Iranian friends who are mostly anti-Mullah regime. All are glad that Shah was kicked out. All point to the vast improvement of educational and health system under the present regime - which is more democratic than most in the region i.e. they do have elections in Iran, believe it or not. Local elections are reasonably free. Presidential election candidates are screened before by the Supremme Guide.
All point to the fact that 60% of university students are female. Iranians are highly sophisticated technologically. In the domain of medical science, Iranian scientists have been working with stem cells for years - compare with US! Number of children per woman is around 2; just like any Western country (stage whisper to the born again christians: that means they use birth control!!!). All say that the situation is not perfect but is improving - that Iranians have a longer history than Islam - that Iranian culture is older and stronger than Islam - - that the Mullahs are not crazy, in spite of what Western propaganda says - that change will come inevitably, but if US tries to force the situation the people, being naturally patriotic and proud, will back their govt.
I would have more hope for the Iranians than the Saudis any day.

Suffolkbor

Where do you come from Benjamin?

Kafir

War is Peace: Do you have a link showing the evidence was faked? It may have been mistaken, but it was not faked.

Kafir

Linda Smith: if that is true, why didn't they just invade Iran? Your assertion makes no sense.

Linda Smith

Kafir: Iraq provided a justifiable opportunity for the US to get a base in the Middle East in case it needs to act against Iran. Iran and its nuclear programme has been a growing problem for years. Saudi Arabia has recently called on the Arab countries to join together to counter Iran's bid to dominate the region.

benjamin

Suffolkbor:
I'm from Ireland. Lived most of my working life between Britain, Germany, US and France. Meeting lots of people from different countries made me realise that most people have pre-conceived ideas about other countries and people that are aften wrong.More things about Iran in case you think I am overly optimistic:
Newspapers closed down and journalists locked up.
Homosexuals persecuted and even risk death sentence. People of Bahai faith strongly persecuted.

An American

Linda Smith,

You are right on.

Bush could never use this as one of the reasons for invading Iraq...but anyone with half a brain knew that this was part of the plan. We talked about it often in among family and friends.
It was a good political move when it came to creating middle eastern stability but at home, it opened the door for the Obama and his socialist cronies...somehow, I don't believe the trade off was worth it for Americans.

Suffolkbor

Benjamin :
Thank you for your reply .
When people are left to self determine they usually choose to get on with the business of life .

The problem with humanity is that certain groups and individuals have other ideas as to how society should be ordered .

Whenever you see a politician or religious leader with that unmistakeable gleam in their eyes as they start talking about their "Vision" for the future and nonsense about building shining citadels , beware .
What is needed are more pragmatists and far fewer ideologues .

Crawford

An American, while I agree with the general sentiments in your posts, it isn't true to say that Bush drove the Taliban out of Afghanistan.

Sadly, we hear on a regular basis, of British troops being killed there by the Taliban.

Both the USA and the UK need to keep going until the Taliban ARE extinguished.

Original Tony

Wow! Not a songle word on this subject from Carl, Hazlitt or Laird, which proves beyond a shadow of doubt that they only contribute to blogs that debate Israel. By definition therefore, they must be anti- Israel.

Henry Sidgwick

I may have misread, but I think Melanie Phillips expressed regret for the fall of the Shah.

I suppose we can all play the game of, Wouldn't it have been better if...

Wouldn't it have been better if the US and UK had not sponsored a coup against the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran (unfortunately he was a nationalist and thought the natural resources of Iran should benefit the Iranian people - Exxon and BP disagreed). Wouldn't it have been better if they had not installed the Shah - fewer people might then have found the ayatollahs an attractive alternative.

Something similar happened in Iraq didn't it? Wouldn't it have been better if the US and UK had not sponsored a coup against the democratically elected Prime Minister (unfortunately he was a nationalist...) Wouldn't it have been better if they had not then decided a thug called Saddam Hussein would be a useful asset, and given him also sorts of weaponry, including chemical and biological...

I do not know what Obama's policy is going to be towards Iran and Iraq. Perhaps he is attempting to clear up the mess made by his predecessors without causing a war.

War is Peace

What about the 2004 story about Iranian involvement in fomenting the war through Ahmad Chalabi.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122301,00.html

As an aside, I'm sure most of the more hawkish respondents on this site welcome the escalation of the afghan conflict by Obama-yes Obama- in giving the green light to the bombing of Pakistan. That action seems just as crazy and reckless as any of Bush's actions. Pakistan is struggling to contain the fundamentalist threat, and the state being undermined by foreign incursion just means the 'crazies' are getting closer and closer to those nukes, as well as imposing an alien brand of islam on the majority of pakistanis. Sorry to any Afghans reading, but a democratic pakistan seems to be a higher priority than routing the taliban.

An American

H. Sidgwick,

So...it's all the US and UK's fault that the Ayatollah and Saddam were in power. The Iraqi and Iranian politicians, mullahs and people had nothing to with any of it. Gosh, you make things look so incredibly simple.

It must feel good to know ALL and wrap it up with a 'Hate America' bow.

Obama's predecessor Bush had nothing to do with putting Sadamm or the Shah of Iran in power.

You never mention or give credit to Bush for the democratic country that is now Iraq. I'm sure in several years time, you'll give the credit to Obama...he's already beginning to take credit, even though he did everything to the contrary.

Obama will not clear anything up, he is an socialist ideologe, as are you.

Henry Sidgwick

I thought someone would have picked up on my blunder. In Iraq, the King was ousted by an army general in a coup. The general could hardly be called a democratically elected prime minister! What he was however was a nationalist. His other error of judgement was to allow the Communist Party to flourish.

An American

I don't believe I said it was all the fault of the US and UK.

I don't believe I said anything about hating America.

I did not say anything about George W. Bush (although there is a lot to say, none of it complimentary).

Obama is no socialist. Nor am I.

An American

Henry Sidgwick,

Obama is a far-left socialist and if you can't see that by his early-on grab to nationalize our private industries...then you are naive or worse...a socialist too.

Henry Sidgwick

An American

His "early-on grab to nationalize our private industries" - its other name is the welfare state for Wall Street, which is as ill-advised as the partial deregulation and bonus structure that went before - all of them give traders, and bankers generally, an incentive to take inappropriate risks that pay them handsomely in the short run and blow up in the face of the taxpayers in the long run. Obama's nationalization, which he inherited from that arch socialist his predecessor, is in fact the worst of crony capitalism. And no I'm not some socialistical ******, I'm a former City worker. IF you want the same message from a reliably "right-wing" economist, read Alan Meltzer.

An American

Henry Sidgwick,

I knew it..."I'm a former City worker". You've worked for city government all you life. You don't know what it's like to work in the real world. Now I understand where your distorted views come from. Captialism is evil, wall street is evil, business is evil, successful people are evil, the only good is by government.

I by no means believe that the Capitalistic system is perfect but it is a heck of a lot better than socialism.

Obama and his ilk have done a good job perpetuating hate for anything that isn't government and their power base. Obama and his Congressional cronies have manipulated class envy to serve themselves and people like you have fallen for it.

Too bad, if its bad at the top of the ladder, it will be even worse at the middle and bottom. There really is such a thing as a trickle down economy. Obama says his economy will start at the bottom, yeah with all those people on welfare...I've never seen anything trickle up except sap...that's what he counting on..saps.

I'm sorry to come down so hard on you but I am so very angry to see my great country be destroyed by this false 'Messiah' and his gullible worshippers who lap up his socialist rhetoric.

I know I can't reach someone like you...you will have to see it happen with your own eyes. It will take a decade of so to realize the fraud that's been perpetrated...then it will be too late for all of us.

Henry Sidgwick

An American

The difficulties you labour under should not be minimized. But one problem is easily sorted: "Wall Street" is the collective term for the financial sector in the US, and "the City" is the collective term for the financial sector in the UK.

On one thing we do happen to agree: great splurges of government spending are definitely not the solution.

One thing we may not agree on: government has been at fault in its partial deregulation - partial both in the sense of "incomplete" and in the sense of "to benefit their cronies". The central banks have been at fault in maintaining too lax a monetary policy, assuring the banks that they will be helped out of any trouble they get themselves into. And the regulators have been at fault in allowing the arms race of ever more complex derivatives, allowing everyone to convince themselves they had laid off their risk although no-one understood how these instruments were meant to work (both Warren Buffet and the BIS had warned years ago that this would endanger the whole system when it imploded). But the sins of government are as nothing compared to the arrogant and ignorant greed of blundering investment bankers. This has nothing to do with free markets. This is crony capitalism. Free markets, like socialism, has never been tried.
Welfare for the well-off has nothing to recommend it. The only things that trickle down are the bills.

An American

Henry Sidgwick,

I spent my time writing a lenghthy response to you which was swallowed...it is so frustrating.

Sorry, I'm not up to repeating if for fear that it too will dissapear.

Suffice it to say, I agree that both the government and banks are at blame. But, I believe our crooked politicians are most at fault for forcing this problem on the banks who responded with greed, knowing the taxpayers would bail them out if necessary.

Everything that Obama is doing will make things much worse for Americans, with more taxes and fewer liberties. He's an unmitigated, arrogant fool. Absolutely everything that is occurring in our now socialist government goes completely against what I believe in and love about America. I go between rage and mourning.

Henry Sidgwick

An American

I like the picture of the politicians forcing the bankers to accept obscene amounts of money.

The Masters of the Universe required no invitation. They thought they were worth it! They probably still do!

I think you probably have the causation the wrong way round: the bankers have been adept at lobbying the politicians to pervert both regulation and deregulation. Tt has to be said however that the revolving door has revolved so bewilderingly between government and Wall Street that it can be difficult to tell.

Barak Obama would not have got the campaign finance from the people he got it from if he was at all likely to frighten the horses. He just represents a different set of corporate sponsors than the Republican administration. He may help a few poor people. He may put a bit more grit in the workings of the economy (although his predecessor did a good job there). He may be a bit less crass in offending all his allies and getting into fights. But broadly the same interests will continue to be served both at home and abroad.