Posted on 06/16/2009 6:27:24 PM PDT by rdl6989
I said that we should state unequivocally that we support them in overthrowing the entire regime, not just replacing nutjob with Musavi.
There will still be a religious requirement to engage in jihad against the infidels.
You are mistaking Sunni Wahhabbi jihadism with Iranian Shia ideology. The regime is led by an Bolshevist style revolutionary zeal which is also reflected in it's rethoric. Religious minorities like Jews and Christian, while discriminated by the state are much better treated than in countries that are our "allies" like Saudi Arabia.
Iran is much more into power politics and expansionism than the stone-age Muslims from Saudi-A or the Taliban. Not less a threat, but quite different.
TEHRAN (Reuters) - An Iranian provincial prosecutor has warned that the "few elements" behind post-election unrest could face the death penalty under Islamic law, an Iranian news agency reported Wednesday.Mohammadreza Habibi, prosecutor-general in the central province of Isfahan, said these elements were controlled from outside Iran and urged them to stop "criminal activities," Fars News Agency said.
"We warn the few elements controlled by foreigners who try to disrupt domestic security by inciting individuals to destroy and to commit arson that the Islamic penal code for such individuals waging war against God is execution," Habibi said.
"So before they are stricken with the law's anger they should return to the nation's embrace and avoid criminal measures and activities," he said.
If by "overthrowing the entire regime", you mean removing the clerics from having secular power, this is a big deal in an Islamic country. I'm all in favor of it happening, but it would involve a VERY big change in people's attitudes.
A secular government is the case in most islamic countries today. And for Iran the current system of mullahs holding worldly power is new, non-traditional and unprecedented.
Iran has a 2500 year tradition of monarchy and since 100 years a Constitution and parliament. They were modernized and secularized long before most other ME countries, except for Turkey.
It is also unusual and non-traditional for the clerics to hold worldly power. Until the 1960's and 70's, the dominating Shia tradition was that of withdrawing from the secular world. They had influence, but they respected the secular institutions like Crown and State.
Khomeini's conception of an islamic state were met with widespread skepticism and scrutiny among other more respected Shia scholars. It was not founded in real Shia tradition, but a Soviet-like "republican" system with a new religion-inspired ideology. It is very much like Trotskyism... exporting Revolution to other countries and create "republics" there.
Real jihadi islamist, like Wahhabism, is aristocratic/tribal. They create "Emirates" and "Caliphates", not "Islamic Republics".
I'm all in favor of it happening, but it would involve a VERY big change in people's attitudes.
As mentioned above changing a political system which is both un-traditional and unusual for Iran, is not the big challenge. Indeed those protesting now are from a strata of society that would very much like secularism and modernity. Iran is much more ready for secular democracy than Afghanistan, Iraq or the Arab states. Iran has the tradition and institutions for this. They had a Constiution, western secular laws and government institutions long before most other Muslim states.
The real challenge is to convince the religious, fanatical, slum and rural population (those who supported Khomeini and now Ahmadinejad) that islam itself (unrelated to the republic) should take a backseat and most importantly of all to convince those who benefit from the current system, the Revolutionary Guards and their families, who control economy and hold the power, not to resort to violence to defend their current priviliges.
(1) Iranian military showing support for protesters:
I've just been witnessing a confrontation, in dusk and into the night, between about 15,000 supporters of Ahmadinejad - supposedly the president of Iran - who are desperate to down the supporters of Mr Mousavi, who thinks he should be the president of Iran.(2) 2:01 AM ET -- Aslan: Rafsanjani calls "emergency" meeting of Assembly of Experts. If true, this is a bombshell.There were about 10,000 Mousavi men and women on the streets, with approximately 500 Iranian special forces, trying to keep them apart.
It was interesting that the special forces - who normally take the side of Ahmadinejad's Basij militia - were there with clubs and sticks in their camouflage trousers and their purity white shirts and on this occasion the Iranian military kept them away from Mousavi's men and women.
In fact at one point, Mousavi's supporters were shouting 'thank you, thank you' to the soldiers.
One woman went up to the special forces men, who normally are very brutal with Mr Mousavi's supporters, and said 'can you protect us from the Basij?' He said 'with God's help'.
Appearing on CNN last night (video below), Iran expert Reza Aslan reported this:There are very interesting things that are taking place right now. Some of my sources in Iran have told me that Ayatollah Rafsanjani, who is the head of the Assembly of Experts -- the eighty-six member clerical body that decides who will be the next Supreme Leader, and is, by the way, the only group that is empowered to remove the Supreme Leader from power -- that they have issued an emergency meeting in Qom.Now, Anderson, I have to tell you, there's only one reason for the Assembly of Experts to meet at this point, and that is to actually talk about what to do about Khamenei. So, this is what I'm saying, is that we're talking about the very legitimacy, the very foundation of the Islamic Republic is up in the air right now. It's hard to say what this is going to go.
Oil prices are in agreement with him.
Place a censorship gag on NYT for violation of censorship.
Oh, wait, you have to ask for an arrest warrant on Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and get him to shut down NYT.
The demise of the mullahs will mark this.
I agree
Mossad chief Meir Dagan on Tuesday told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that the riots in Iran over the election results will die out in a few days rather than escalate into a revolution. "...If the reformist candidate [Mir Hossein] Mousavi had won... It is important to remember that he is the one who began Iran's nuclear program when he was prime minister." ...Dagan also told the committee the Mossad believed that Iran would have its first nuclear bomb ready for action in 2014, "If the project continues at the present rate and is not interrupted."
I know. Dagan is either imbecile or he feels the need to play down the events in Iran at any cost.
There were unconfirmed reports that Mohammad Asgari, who was responsible for the security of the IT network in Iran’s interior ministry, was killed yesterday in a suspicious car accident in Tehran. Asgari had reportedly leaked evidence that the elections were rigged to alter the votes from the provinces. Asgari was said to have leaked information that showed Mousavi had won almost 19m votes, and should therefore be president.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/17/iran-protests-day-five
Working at the Iranian Ministry for Information is bad for your health. This isn’t the first time someone who was suspected of leaking was “found dead” or had an “accident”.
“found dead” or had an “accident”
There may be a lot of that going around .......
The Iranians have such as propensity for violence, but on a more “patriotic” level, don’t they?
Iran means Iranians collectively wanting democracy, not Ahmandinenutshell and his mullah paymasters.
That’s right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.