BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Iran as part of an axis of evil?

 
 
sleazenation
08:59 / 11.07.02
News from Iran

A country in the throes of popular Islamic reform, huge election victories for the reformers against a hardcore of Ayatollah's, A country making real progress against the extremist religious orthidoxies of the past -

How does this square with Iran as described by George W Bush?

Is it really helpful to brand a country that is undergoing such powerful and (to western eyes) favourable reform as being part of an axis of evil?

And what do people think of Iran these days anyway?
 
 
Ganesh
10:29 / 11.07.02
I guess that would make it Neutral Evil or even Chaotic Evil, then, rather than Lawful Evil?
 
 
grant
14:07 / 11.07.02
I imagine the reformists might take heart, in that the "evil" Bush is condemning is the terrorist support/succour network supposedly entrenched in those areas controlled by the fundamentalists.
So America is on their side, politically, at least in part.

One hopes.
 
 
sleazenation
14:52 / 11.07.02
But the reformists are actually in power - The reformists currently occupy the position of government for the nation state of Iran. Bush's words would appear to be condemning the very people that are doing the most to moderate islamic funamentalism within their own country.

I guess The question that is really behind my fist post is:

Why is Iran viewed as part of an access of evil specifically by America?
 
 
Harold Washington died for you
16:09 / 11.07.02
Some of it has to do with a lot of support for terrorist factions, like Hamas and Hezbollah, coming from Iran.
 
 
grant
17:01 / 11.07.02
My understanding (informed by nothing more than a couple reports on NPR) is that there's a reformist government which makes the laws and all, but which doesn't have the power to actually *do* all that much. The people in many areas will still follow/are cowed into submission by (depending on your perspective) the ayatollahs. So, for instance, if the gov't tried banning prayer in school, there'd likely be a bloody revolution and then no one would be in power.
 
 
w1rebaby
17:42 / 11.07.02
Some of it has to do with a lot of support for terrorist factions, like Hamas and Hezbollah, coming from Iran.

yes, but (a) that's hardly unusual, there are plenty of other states that support terrorism and (b) there are plenty of states that do worse than that. Why Iran specifically?
 
 
invisible_al
21:54 / 11.07.02
Yeah the reformists are in, but unfortunately the clergy and the hardliners within it are in control of the judiciary and the religious police. Those are the fellas who are the guardians of morality, aka a bunch of thugs with sticks who have permission to beat you if you're being immorral.

But the fact that there is a growing movement within the clergy who are sick of the corruption and failure of the ayatolla's to respond to the will of the people. Like this man who just resigned, put there by Khomeni himself, thats going to cause people to sit up and take notice.
I'm hoping that we might get a velvet revolution in the future here, of course Bush isn't helping by trying to 'contain' the evil menace which just plays into the hands of the extremists.

The EU is actually playing it smart for once and keeping a dialog open with promises of trade and prosperity for all if the walls come down.
Its getting very interesting, imagine what would happen to the political landscape of the middle east if Iran's mullah's changed to liberal Islam.
 
 
Naked Flame
07:41 / 12.07.02
Fingers, toes, knees and eyes crossed for this one.

It's still worrying that the West (and I'm not specifically referring to the US) is focusing on the fundamentalist Iran as the 'fact'. I've been noticing more and more grassroots level action about this, too, all focusing on putting pressure on Iran to change- and diplomatically, that means Iran's government- but from this thread it should maybe be a case of working with rather than against those in power...

could be a situation where protest in Western countries actually starts to undermine the process of change by skewing the popular perspective.
 
 
Baz Auckland
14:06 / 24.11.02
This article was in the disinfo newsletter last week. First I've heard of this, and it sounded interesting:

after iraq, bush will attack his real target
by Eric Margolis, Toronto Sun - November 13, 2002

One poignant photo said it all: Georgia's defeated Democratic senator, Max Cleland, sitting in a wheelchair, missing both legs and an arm lost in combat in Vietnam. This highly decorated hero was defeated by a Vietnam war draft-dodger who had the audacity to accuse Cleland of being "unpatriotic" after the senator courageously voted against giving Bush unlimited war-related powers. I do not recall a more shameful moment in American politics.

Bush's victory is clearly a mandate to proceed with his crusade against Iraq. Preparations for war are in an advanced stage. The U.S. has been quietly moving heavy armour and mechanized units from Europe to the Mideast. Three division equivalents and a Marine heavy brigade are now in theatre. An armada of U.S. warplanes is assembling around Iraq, which is bombed almost daily. U.S. special forces are operating in northern Iraq, and, along with Israeli scout units, in Iraq's western desert near the important H2 airbase. The war could begin as early as mid-December if there is no coup against Saddam Hussein.

The real target of the coming war is Iran, which Israel views as its principal and most dangerous enemy. Iraq merely serves as a pretext to whip America into a war frenzy and to justify insertion of large numbers of U.S. troops into Mesopotamia.

Israeli defence officials have long dismissed demolished Iraq as a minor threat, even though it likely has between six and 18 old Scud missiles hidden away. Saddam did not use chemical weapons in 1991 for fear of Israeli nuclear retaliation. The prevailing view in the Israeli military is that Iraq will be quickly defeated by U.S. forces, and then likely split into two or three cantons.

Iran is a different story. Iran is expected to produce a few nuclear weapons within five years to counter Israel's large nuclear arsenal, and is developing medium-range missiles, Shahab-3s and -4s, that can easily reach Tel Aviv.

With 68 million people and a growing industrial base, Iran is seen by Israel as a serious threat and major Mideast geopolitical rival. Both nations have their eye on Iraq's vast oil reserves. This week, Israel's grand strategy was clearly revealed for the first time, though barely noticed by North American media, as Prime Minister Ariel Sharon called for an invasion of Iran "the day after" Iraq is crushed.

Full article here
 
  
Add Your Reply