|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
Member |
RE: http://www.military.com/opinio...15202,193368,00.html
It will be interesting to see how this turns out, because a regime change "MIGHT" cause major world changes and US foreign policy as far as the DPRK, Iraq, Israel, Palestine, Russia, and China. As far as rigged elections, Stratfor.com has a dissenting opinion too detailed to post here, but they did the mathwork and it is possible Achmadinejad could have won. It is still highly possible it was rigged. The Ayatollah has lost power with urban elites (protesters), or shall we say they lost their power with Ayahtollah. The Ayatollah is still staying close to the Revolutionary Guard (active duty) in order to secure his power (they are not part of the urban elite), but if ethnic groups in the RG revolt, then Iran will not be a Islamic Republic, but a dictatorship. The Ayatollah made a mistake of calling the election "divine" from Allah and then retracting his comment by later stating it is possible there might have been "some" voter fraud. If Allah is "perfect" in everything he does, then the election would also HAVE TO BE perfect too. Religiously, it would be impossible for voter fraud to possible. The liberal Iranians noticed this too and immediately demanded that Mousavi restore their flag. The pre-revolution flag did not have Islamic connotations on it like it does now. The caveat of a free Iran is their strong nationalistic views (similiar to Americans) might influence them to still pursue nuclear weapons. This would leave the world in the same place as it does with the theocracy; albeit without fanatism guiding their strategic decision making. I hope this turns out the best for the freedom of the Iranian people and the security of the world at the same time. |
||
|
|
Member |
One primary fact to keep in mind w/r/t Iran, is that quite unlike our staunch allies in the area (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc) they at least hold elections. In this particular case, the suspicions of the Iranian population are such that the mullahs that are running the show now have clear reason to be concerned (the number of people taking to the streets was enormous and impossible to ignore). The use of force to put down the protests (as opposed to even a superficial investigation) does nothing to help the mullahs retain legitimacy. They are in effect only sowing the seeds of their own destruction. However, there is no evidence to support the contention that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. There is lots of paranoia - but there was plently of that prior to the invasion of Iraq, especially with respect to WMD (the primary reason for invading), in addition to the Bush Administration implying that Iraq presented an imminent danger to the security of the United States (despite the October 2002 NIE clearly concluding that: Iraq presented no immediate threat to the security of the United States; the UN had done a thorough job of removing any remaining WMD, and that any remaining ones would be tactially/strategically of no consequence). There were no WMD of consequence, there was no imminent threat to the United States of America, nor was there any connection whatsoever to 9/11 or Al Queda: in effect - Iraq was not our enemy (the US had far bigger fish to fry). The case w/r/t Iran having nuclear weapons ambitions is appallingly (and just as) weak: according to the consensus of all 16 of our national intelligence agencies in the 2008 NIE Iran gave up its nuclear weapons program. Paranoia is different from having facts to back up the accusation, yet despite the complete lack of any evidence whatsoever people on this site (including a lot of folks that should know better) talk about Iran having a quest for nuclear weapons as if it is certainty. It is NOT a CERTAINTY. The Iranians are signatories to the NPT, and are therefore entitled to process urnanium and use nuclear power to generate electricity. The Iranian people are incredibly proud of their progress w/r/t nuclear energy and are entirely supportive of the program. Regardless of whoever ends up in office or what form of government they have (even if today they turned into a liberal democracy commensurate with the wildest wet dreams of the neoconservative syndacate that until recently ran the United States of America) they will continue with their nuclear power program. Could there be something else going on? Maybe - but there aren't any facts that support the pursuit of nuclear weapons. There is only the paranoia of the previous administration, who was unable to provide any facts/evidence to back of their obviously baseless claims/accusations. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Please provide me a copy of the NIE that you must have read to get some of your information, because either I've looked in the wrong location for it, or I've been denied access to it for not having the "need to know" and/or the proper clearance.
I was discussing Iran, not Iraq, but it is true we have not found the WMDs or we refuse to acknowledge we found them for a variety of reasons like maybe we supplied them. What would you say to the Kurds about the non-existence of MWDs? As far as the intelligence, the US was not the only country that had intell on WMDs in Iraq. Have we checked Iran or Syria yet? Only time will tell where they might be. So are you saying that ALL countries that have signed the NPT have given up their quest for nuclear weapons and we should trust them at face value? Are you saying ONLY the PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION is/was concerned with a nuclear armed Iraq? Why would the UN send inspectors there? This Iran and/or nuclear armed countries "phobia" transcends partisan politics/administrations; it has been a US national security "concern" for awhile, and will be as long as history exists. |
|||
|
|
Member |
|
|||
|
|
Member |
To provide a copy of the still classified 2008 NIE is something that I cannot do - I also have to rely on those that have access to such documents, and the reports that are culled by other organization. However,the opinions of multiple sources that all concur with what I have stated above match with other published information. Regardless, here is some useful reading: http://www.cfr.org/publication...gence_estimates.html Please note that I'm not suggesting that Iraq never had WMD (chemical weapons in this case, as WMD has come to include those in addition to nuclear and biologicals). And it is clear that Iraq used them against both Kurds and Iran (the US actually provided intelligence in how to use these weapons to best effect against Iran). But what I am saying, is that Saddam had no ambitions to use them against the US (unless in self-defense, which he didn't do even when we invaded), and that whatever weapons of this type he had left over after the UN inspectors got done with them were no longer of tactically/strategically significant. Furthermore, after Gulf War I Saddam was acutely aware that any terrorist act that was committed was carefully scrutinized for Iraqi participation. If anything, Saddam wanted to survive, and he therefore had little to gain by picking a fight with the United States (or giving us cause). Considering that Iran was a mortal enemy of Iraq, Saddam would have no incentive whatsoever to give them to the Iranians. Syria also had a tenuous relationship with Saddam, as Iran had been involved with them as well. Nor would I be so dilusional as to suggest that all signers of the NPT have given up nuclear weapon ambitions: what I said is that there is no proof that the Iranians are pursuing such a program, other than what the previous administration was saying during the period they were attempting to drum up support for potential conflict with Iran (that the NIE at the time largely torpedoed). They were big on telling you their theories, but incomprehensively light on providing evidence. Here is a link that provides some interesting reading on this topic: http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.fi...rism/nie20805dni.pdf The concern remains - but it isn't as alarming as the Bush Administration was attempting to imply. Cheers. |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
