Deja Vu all over again?

Timber

My brother just returned to continue working and living in Iraq today as you know he was home for a bit of a rest!

We spoke of Iran at length and he seems to feel that a conflict with Iran is next!

Nancyann

No one should read Robert Fisk. Especially on purpose.

Steve, that point that the Iraqi war with the Persians "completed" the revolution is well taken. When the Austrians invaded France in 1792, the Comité de salut publique declared la patrie en danger (the fatherland in danger), raised huge levies of troops, and combining an excellent artillery with a revolutionary new military doctrine, overwhelmed the Austrians and the "Prusso-Brunswickers" sent against them. The fervor of the raw levies in large measure overcame their lack of experience--and it gave the Committee for Public Safety the excuse for extraordinary measures to protect the homeland.

Exactly the same authority accrued to the Mullahs in Iran, and the Persians showed exactly the same patriotric fervor, easily mutated into religio-revolutionary fervor by the Mullahs with very little necessary tinkering--when the Iraqis attempted to invade. Even the ability on the part of Persian authorities to mount a sufficiently convincing propaganda campaign suggesting an eminent American invasion would work to the disadvantage of those who oppose the rule of the Mullahs.

Stupid, stupid, stupid . . . these jokers are so damned clueless, and the stakes are extremely high . . .

It was a christmas present so I am accidentally reading all 1300 pages, not to appear rude.

In his chapter entitled The Carpet Weavers, Fisk (seriously McG why do you object to F?) makes the point that the Iranians possess qualities of extraordinary patience and endurance. (10 years to make one carpet! Thats ridiculous it took me a lot less than that to put some plastic floor tiles down...)

If the Iranians want nuclear technology (which they can dual-use) they will get it. We can destroy their nuclear industry and they will re build, and if they do have to rebuild under such circumstances, it will certainly be focussed on weapons.

On an idea parallel to that, Steve: The Parsee and the Medes invaded the central Iranian plateau about 4000 years ago--but their attempt to cross the Zagros mountains failed. They were patient, they learned from the "superior" civilizations across the mountains, and when they re-crossed the mountains almost 1500 years later, they not only succeeded in forcing a passage, they conquered all before them--the Akkadians and the Assyrians, the former being the most culturally advanced people of the region and the latter being the most militarily formidable. They brought monotheism to the middle east (that's how the Palestinian hillbillies known as the Hebrews caught that particular disease), and they went on to overcome the homeland of the Hittites and conquer all of Anatolia, including the Ionian Greek littoral. They attempted and briefly succeeded in conquering the Egyptians, and failed in a spectacular invasion attempt of Greece.

They were conquered by the Greco-Macedonians following Alexander III's psychotic star, and rose again to assert their independence. They were conquered again by the son-in-law of the Prophet, Ali, in the "mother of all battles" and, having embraced Shi'ism, rose again to assert their independence. They were laid low by the Mongol-Tatar invasion, and rose again to assert their independence. They were subsequently bullied and temporarily invaded by the Turks, the Russians and the English. They always asserted their independence, and in the end always were independent. In the second world war, the Anglo-Americans forced the Shah on them and opened a supply line to the Soviet Union. The Persians endured and then constitutionally elected a government in 1953, lead by Mohammed Mossadegh, which threatened to turn out the Shah and nationalize the oil industry. The Anglo-Americans acted quickly, the English cutting off the export of oil and the CIA engineering the overthrow of Mossadegh by right-wing military officers, who re-installed the Pahlavi dynasty. The Persians endured, and they overthrew the Shah twenty-five years later to assert their independence. We have helped to create the monstrous aspects of the modern Persian state.

If we invade, you can bet your bottom dollar they will rise again . . .

What McG means is, "no right wingnut should read Robert Fisk because they absolutely will not be able to handle the truth".

See, that's why. Becuase people read Fisk and believe his spewage as truth. You should be ashamed.

I hope, McG after my perfectly civil question as to why you disapprove of Fisk, this reponse was not directed at me.

I dunno, I enjoy reading Fisk, and the likes of Chomsky, Krugman, Dowd, Corn, even Huffington, et al. Following along as those sorts lay out their thinking builds confidence; what they and their followers believe and espouse precisely is why The Democratic Party enjoys the elctoral success it has been gaining itself.locak "Det

I'll ignore the self-serving smugness which preceeded this . . .


locak "Det ? ! ? ! ?

Thread title should be "stop me if you've heard this one before...."

[cynicism]
GWB's poll numbers are declining, and he is, after all, a "war" president.[/cynicism]

- Sorry 'out that - screwed up. Actually, that's part of a command line code string - I'm working on somebody's 'puter, and I musta not been paying attention while browsing around with other 'puters and typed that on this 'puter's keyboard ... pretty clumsy, but it ain't the first time I've done something like that

Explains why the other machine didn't do what I expected it to do, too

Setanta~
I notice you use the term "Persians" rather than "Iranians". Why so?
Are you focussing on one particular ethnic group in Iran?

Just curious.
(I believe it was Alexander the Great who said "One man's Mede is
another man's Persian. Or not.)

I don't understand why anyone would think this situation with Iran is "Deja Vu all over again."



source

Why couldn't he have resolved the Iraq thing through "peaceful means?"

The terms Persia and Iran both derive from the early language of the Aryan tribes who called themselves Parsee and Meda. These are the Persians and Medes to whom the Greeks referred. These people still speak Farsi (or Pharsee), so i refer to them as Persians.

Also, i like the fact that it confuses those who are less well-informed about history and geography. Just good, old-fashioned snobbery . . .

I figure the chances of the US attacking Iran to be about as close to zero as you can get with or without a condom.

Who is going to pay? China? And Set is right on soldiers, unless of course China will spring for that hundred grand signing bonus. And the cost of oil will get how high??? That will be just peachy with corporate. And what countries, now, will join in to help in this new "Coalition of the Bullied and Bribed"?

Recall DiIulio..."everything, and I mean everything in this administration is run by the political wing".

The chances of such a war are zero. The chances that this administration will attempt to look all puffed up like a elephant's boner, to the end of hoped for electoral consequence in 10 months is one hundred per cent.

War with Iran is hard to believe.

Even harder to believe is a nuclear-armed Iran.

I've been lurking on this forum for awhile. I think you guys might find discussions that are of interest re the Iran problem.

Diplomacy and Force

Newsweek Interview
Jan. 23, 2006 issue - The man in the middle of the escalating tensions between Iran, Europe and the United States is Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency.[...]

DICKEY: You've said you're running out of patience with Iran. What does that mean?

ELBARADEI: For the last three years we have been doing intensive verification in Iran, and even after three years I am not yet in a position to make a judgment on the peaceful nature of the [nuclear] program. We still need to assure ourselves through access to documents, individuals [and] locations that we have seen all that we ought to see and that there is nothing fishy, if you like, about the program.

At one site called Lavizan, facilities were bulldozed by Iran before you could look at them, and you weren't allowed to run tests in the area.

We clearly need to take environmental samplings from some of the equipment that used to be in Lavizan. We need to interview some of the people who have been engaged in Lavizan. We have [also] gotten some information about some modification of their missiles that could have some relationship to the nuclear program. So, we need to clarify all these things. It is very specific. They know what we want to do, and they just have to go and do it. I'm making it very clear right now that I cannot extend the deadline, which is ... March 6.

With all due respect, the Iranians don't seem to care what you think.

Well, they might not seem to care. But if I say that I am not able to confirm the peaceful nature of that program after three years of intensive work, well, that's a conclusion that's going to reverberate, I think, around the world. [...]