Nuconvert, I probably shouldn’t butt in on this conversation between you and kabar. Though, I’m interested!
“They enjoy taking Americans hostage, because they can. And they think it shows strength.”
Let’s be more specific: What IRI has taken so far (Roxana Saberi and Esha Momeni), and has been taking (remember, previously, Kian Tajbakhsh, Haleh Esfandiari, Ramin Jahanbeglou, etc..., as examples) are/were Americans of “Iranian Origins”, becasue IRI can, and it shows strength, in the eyes of the world, and particularly Iranians in Iran. Levinson (mentioned in Ledeen’s article), is more of an exception - Levinson is not of Iranian Origins. Ledeen mentioned Levinson, but, Levinson does not figure in Iran for most Iranians.
On the other hand, I also, somewhat, agree with kabar. I do not think IRI is totally unpredictable. I think IRI has been predictable, if you see the pattern. That pattern is that they keep repeating their core stance of hostage taking (as mentioned), as well as hype and propaganda, with same or similar accusations/charges/labels of those taken hostage. IRI’s hostage taking is not new, as you know; it has been ongoing. For Iranian-Americans it seems to be cyclical, when deemed necessary from IRI’s perspective - So far, IRI’s actions thereafter have been consistent too.
BUT, with Obama in office (I agree a little with poster # 25), I would be very interested to see the outcome of June elections in Iran. IRI’s shenanigans, possibly moving a few pegs up & in different directions than during Bush Administration (all 8 years of it), to determine reaction.
BTW, there won’t be an Israeli attack before June elections in Iran, that’s my guess. Anyway, the whole thing is my view of the subject.
lol. Yes, IRI predictably takes hostages and will continue to do so.
I think the Israeli attack is scheduled for Aug, Sept, Oct.
Just my guess
I would be very interested to see the outcome of June elections in Iran. IRI’s shenanigans, possibly moving a few pegs up & in different directions than during Bush Administration (all 8 years of it), to determine reaction.
Whoever is elected will still be mostly a figurehead. The Supreme Leader and the Assembly of Experts still run the country, i.e., the mullahs. A more moderate face might be desireable so they can continue their nuclear program under the cover of being more moderate and it may help the regime in dealing with the domestic opposition and the sad state of their economy. Iran has a negative population growth rate and a huge brain drain that the IMF deemed the highest in the world among the 90 countries it measured.
BTW, there won’t be an Israeli attack before June elections in Iran, that’s my guess. Anyway, the whole thing is my view of the subject.
It could go either way. In terms of any substantive change in the Iranian nuclear program, the election will have little to no effect. The optics are a different story. If Ahmadinejad is reelected, the Israelis could use it as a pretext to attack. However, a more "moderate" President, might actually make such an attack more difficult. And the Israelis must consider the factor of the sale of Russian missile defense systems to Iran. The longer they wait, the more difficult the attack will be.
If there is an attack by Israel, the US will be blamed regardless, which will have ramifications for our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and our relations with Pakistan. Perhaps, this will force Obama to publicly condemn Israel, the possible action that Biden alluded to prior to the election, i.e., their supporters might not agree with their decision initially but would see that it was the right one in the long run.