Get a different analysis of the USA's plans to Wage War on Iran

Rambuchan

The Funky President
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
13,560
Location
London, England
From The Real News. (The Real News is a not-for-profit initiative, from journalists with integrity, that seeks to provide news and analysis that is free of pressures resulting from government and corporate funding and / or ownership of the media.)

This 5.44 min clip gives insight and analysis that is often missing from the Mainstream Media's (MSM) coverage of this issue. In this clip we are informed of:

~ The likely consequences of a military attack on Iran's growing reform movement.

~ The White House's attempts to intimidate the Iranian people.

~ The shifting mentality of the Iranian people toward this possible conflict.

~ The internal workings of, and conflicts within, Iran's Democracy and Theocracy, with comment on key figures.

~ How the Theocratic elements of Iran's government will benefit from an attack.

~ More that the MSM far too often fails to provide.

-----

Feel free to comment and discuss as you wish.
 
So, are you discounting everything you've heard on the basis of that?
No, but it certainly hurts his credibility.

Imagine if he said, "The Christian religion teaches peace, so Christians would never try to develop a nuclear bomb." That's obviously false, since Christians were the inventors of the nuclear bomb. It's the same as saying Muslims don't want a nuclear bomb. :shake:
 
Fair enough. I agree with your point there, which is of course quite obvious. On balance, I thought the guy had some valuable and oft ignored insights to offer, such as those I pointed to in the OP, and especially the info about Rafsanjani. Out of curiosity, what do you make of the Real News initiative? And why do you think we do not hear such comments as aired here, including the one upon Islam's relationship to the nuke, through other, more mainstream news media?
 
Fair enough. I agree with your point there, which is of course quite obvious. On balance, I thought the guy had some valuable and oft ignored insights to offer, such as those I pointed to in the OP, and especially the info about Rafsanjani. Out of curiosity, what do you make of the Real News initiative? And why do you think we do not hear such comments as aired here, including the one upon Islam's relationship to the nuke, through other, more mainstream news media?
Overall, I liked everything Pepe said except for my complaint above.

From these two clips the only things I can say about this Internet news "The Real News" is that it's roughly the same as other Internet news, in particular blogs.

I don't think Islam's relationship to the nuke is something you want to focus on, if you're going to take Pepe's stance. It's simply wrong. It would be more accurate to say, "Islam has no relationship to the nuke, one way or the other. Muslims, regardless of Islam, will pursue the nuke, as they already have in Pakistan."

Pepe's information about the command structure in Iran was the most interesting part, I thought. That command structure is definitely worthwhile to show on mainstream news. By the way, what mainstream news are you referring to? BBC? CNN?

And I think he's wrong about Persians being "fighters" or "hard to intimidate" because of their history of having to defend themselves. Iranians had that history thousands of years ago which is meaningless today. Unless he's talking about something which I'm not, like the Mongol invasions or something. Persians lost to the Arabs didn't they? Otherwise, Iran wouldn't be Muslim today.

I'm probably making some mistakes in what I typed above regarding what Pepe did and didn't say. I don't want to watch the videos again right now.


Regarding these:
~ The likely consequences of a military attack on Iran's growing reform movement.

~ The White House's attempts to intimidate the Iranian people.

~ The shifting mentality of the Iranian people toward this possible conflict.

~ The internal workings of, and conflicts within, Iran's Democracy and Theocracy, with comment on key figures.

~ How the Theocratic elements of Iran's government will benefit from an attack.

~ More that the MSM far too often fails to provide.

An attack on Iran would be a disaster in every way.

What specifically do you think the mainstream media is not reporting?
 
I found the "Persians don't scare easily, because they have a long history of fighting wars" and "A bomb is anti Islamic" statements absurd.
Otherwise i think he makes some good points, mainly that the current situation doesn't work towards making a regime change more likely.

Maybe it is because i stopped watching news half a decade ago, but i found the video presentation very annoying. The opening music of the video almost made me close the site right away. While the interview itself was interesting, i would have preferred a transcript, partly because of his accent, partly because it would make it easier to go back and re-read his earlier points. It would also allow him to cite references, which would help his credibility a lot.

The video stream was pretty much devoid of any useful information, imho. I don't need to see a guy staring into a webcam, interrupted by snippets from the IRINN. The fact that Pepe was referred to as "author of <some book title>" struck me as more of an advertisement than a credential. I really hope the network puts more thought into how they present their content in the future.

All in all, i found his comments on the key figures in the Iranian regime as the most interesting bit of the interview.
 
In the end, I don't think that now is the time to start a conflict with Iran and I am absolutely terrified about how our government will exploit the situation for its own gain and create another mess for this nation to mire through.
 
Wow, he was good! I like... totally... missed when he invented the A-bomb.:crazyeye:

Well, it could have hardly been created without his work now could it. Perhaps you would rather me tab Robert Oppenheimer as the creator since he was the head of the program that created the bomb. He was of jewish decent but not religious. Perhaps he was an atheist, hmmm?

Bottom line, to say the bomb was created by christians is just a stupid statement to make.
 
Well, it could have hardly been created without his work now could it. Perhaps you would rather me tab Robert Oppenheimer as the creator since he was the head of the program that created the bomb. He was of jewish decent but not religious. Perhaps he was an atheist, hmmm?

Bottom line, to say the bomb was created by christians is just a stupid statement to make.

Einstein did not have that much control over his work, as far as I know, he never directly helped with the nuclear program. He was just following the logical conclusions of Maxwell's experiment.

And Oppenheimer did, if I remember correctly, specifically site Nazi Germany as the reason for working on the atomic bomb, trying to preempt a German bomb.
 
Please, what does this have to do with the OP? Kindly stick to the topic or start another thread.

Good comments there Till and Phlegmak. I'll come back to them.
 
Bottom line, to say the bomb was created by christians is just a stupid statement to make.

True, it would be hard to peg down a certain religion to the atomic bomb. We all had a hand! Invented with the help of jews, perfected by christians, described with hinduism, and tested on Shintoist.....
 
True, it would be hard to peg down a certain religion to the atomic bomb. We all had a hand! Invented with the help of jews, perfected by christians, described with hinduism, and tested on Shintoist.....

you forgot stolen by atheists
 
you forgot stolen by atheists

How could I forget?!

But on topic....I can't see the clip because I'm at work, but it does touch on some familiar themes, especially around the command structure. I get the sense that the impression that many people have of the islamic republic is that it is a monolithic dictatorship under the thumb of the Supreme leader, when its governing structure is actually quite complex, with power shared between a few key offices. An understanding of this structure is key if we want to know which way the wind is blowing in the Iran.
 
I know we would mop the floor with Iran without ever sending in a ground force. Do we need to when they are busy doing this to there own students?

September 17, 2007 -- AS millions of Iranians prepare for the new school year, the scene is being set for what could be a long hot autumn on university campuses across the nation. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has promised to "cleanse" the Iranian educational system of what he calls "the corrupt influence of the infidel" and has mobilized a special militia to crush the expected student revolts.

The radical president refers to his "academic cleansing" plan as "The Second Great Islamic Cultural Revolution." The late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini closed the universities and launched the first "Great Islamic Cultural Revolution" in 1980. A committee created to "cleanse" academia purged more than 6,000 professors and lecturers, virtually destroying Iranian academia. Dozens of academics were executed as hundreds fled into exile. The committee also expelled thousands of students on charges of monarchist or leftist tendencies. It also censored or totally rewrote dozens of textbooks to conform to the Khomeinist ideology.

When the universities were reopened two years later, the committee tried to fill them with students and teachers sympathetic to Khomeinism. The trick was to allocate special places for members of The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and children of families believed to be loyal to the regime.

Further, it established a blacklist of banned authors and writings - an index that has grown every year since, reminding one of the worst days of the Inquisition in medieval Europe. The madness of censorship, supervised by the so-called Ministry of Islamic Orientation and Culture, reached a new peak last week with the banning of a new volume of memoirs of former President Hashemi Rafsanjai - who was a member of the original "cleansing" committee!

More than two decades of purges and "cultural cleansing" didn't prevent Iranian universities from becoming bastions of opposition to the Khomeinist ideology. In the 1990s, Iran experienced the largest and longest student revolt in its history. Then-President Muhammad Khatami crushed the revolt through the Revolutionary Guard with mass arrests and the expulsion of thousands of students.

Ahmadinejad launched his second "Islamic Cultural Revolution" last year by appointing a semiliterate mullah as chancellor of Tehran University - the first time that a cleric took charge of the nation's oldest and largest center of higher education.

Ahmadinejad's purge started last July with the replacement of 20-plus college deans. In almost every case, a bona fide academic was pushed out in favor of a Revolutionary Guard member.

Scores of professors and lecturers have reportedly been told that their services are no longer required. The purged teachers include individuals who had served as members of the Islamic Majlis (Iran's ersatz parliament) or, in two cases, as ministers in pre-Ahmadinejad Cabinets. Dozens of academics have been arrested, including some returning from conferences abroad.

An unknown number of students have been arrested. In Tabriz, all seven members of the students union were picked up and taken to an unknown destination last month. The families of two of them claim that they may have died under torture. In Tehran, more than 150 student activists have been "disappeared" in recent weeks.

As part of the purge, 30 privately owned colleges have been shut and their assets seized. Thirteen others are under investigation. The moves could interrupt the studies of some 100,000.

Serving notice that any protest on the campus will be crushed, a special force (known as the Ashura Brigade) commanded by Guard veteran Gen. Qassem Kargar has been assigned the task of "ensuring a peaceful atmosphere" at centers of higher education.

Ostensibly mandated to enforce the Islamic Dress Code (enacted in May 2006), armed guards are posted at all centers of higher education to prevent anti-regime demonstrations.

"Cleansing" the universities through expulsions and arrests may be easy for a government prepared to use force against unarmed civilians. But when it comes to the education's content, things are not as easy as the Tehran radicals might wish. A report prepared for Ahmadinejad claims that at least 40 percent of the textbooks in use in Iranian universities do not conform to Khomeinist dogma.

The problem for the regime is that it has alienated the intellectual elite. No author, academic or scientist of note would be prepared to participate in the "Islamic Cultural Revolution." Efforts to find somebody to prepare a course on Khomeini's "philosophy" have provoked only derision among intellectuals approached to assume the task.

After months of efforts to prepare a special course on Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust, the committee charged with the task has produced nothing but a pamphlet that consists almost entirely of translations from Western writers.

Iran today is a society whose "muscle" power is at war against its "brain" power.

Ghulam-Hussein Hadad-Adel, the speaker of the Islamic Majlis (Iran's ersatz parliament) says the Islamic Republic must prevent "dangerous thoughts and ideas." But who decides what is dangerous?

In fact, the central role of the university is to allow dangerous thoughts and ideas to be expressed and measured against other thoughts and ideas. The imposition of a uniform mode of thought and prefabricated ideas is better suited to a concentration camp than a university campus.

The first "Islamic Cultural Revolution" failed to subject generations of Iranians to mass brainwashing in the name of education. The second one will also fail: Iranians love dangerous thoughts and ideas.
 
Who the hell is Pepe Escobar and why should I give a damn as to what he thinks?
 
I don't think Islam's relationship to the nuke is something you want to focus on, if you're going to take Pepe's stance. It's simply wrong. It would be more accurate to say, "Islam has no relationship to the nuke, one way or the other. Muslims, regardless of Islam, will pursue the nuke, as they already have in Pakistan."

Well, the Sunni/Shia divide should be given a token examination, then.
The Shia's modern prophet has stated that nukes are wrong. If we're to believe that Iran is under the influence of Shia teachings, then we should factor that in.

If Iran is too secular to listen to their prophet, then we don't have to "OMG MUSLIMS!" with Iran, then.
 
Is it automatically better because it's not mainstream?
 
Top Bottom