Author Topic: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]  (Read 5967 times)

MicroBalrog

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,505
Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« on: June 03, 2008, 12:06:50 AM »
Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes
Most of the Middle East hates America, but Iranians see a more appealing image. It's their own president they can't stand.

By Azadeh Moaveni
Sunday, June 1, 2008; B01

TEHRAN On a recent afternoon, while riding a rickety bus down Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran's main thoroughfare, I overheard two women discussing the grim state of Iranian politics. One of them had reached a rather desperate conclusion. "Let the Americans come," she said loudly. "Let them sort things out for us once and for all." Everyone in the women's section of the bus absorbed this casually, and her friend nodded in assent.

Although their leaders still call America the "Great Satan," ordinary Iranians' affection for the United States seems to be thriving these days, at least in the bustling capital. This rekindled regard is evident in people's conversations, their insatiable demand for U.S. products and culture, and their fascination with the U.S. presidential campaign. One can't do reliable polling about Iranians' views under their theocratic government, of course, but these shifts were still striking to me as a longtime visitor -- not least because liking the United States is also a way for Iranians to register their frustration with their own firebrand president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

It might startle some Americans to realize that Iran has one of the most pro-American populations in the Middle East. Iranians have adored America for nearly three decades, a sentiment rooted in nostalgia for Iran's golden days, before the worst of the shah's repression and the 1979 Islamic revolution. But today's affection is new, in a sense, or at least different.

Starting in about 2005, Iranians' historic esteem for the United States gave way to a deep ambivalence that is only now ending. President Bush's post-9/11 wars of liberation on both of Iran's borders -- in Iraq to the west and Afghanistan to the east -- rattled ordinary Iranians, and Washington's opposition to Iran's nuclear program -- a major source of national pride -- added to their resentment. In early 2006, when I lived in Iran as a journalist, I had only to step outdoors to hear the complaints. Standing in line for pastry, I heard indignant matrons suggesting a boycott of U.S. products. The pious bazaar merchant who lived across the street grumbled that America was trying to "boss Iran around." On the ski slopes outside Tehran, I heard liberal college kids in designer parkas lionize Ahmadinejad for "standing up to the U.S. like a man."

It was a time when Iranians of all ages and backgrounds united in their pique against the United States, turning their backs on its traditions and culture. A movement emerged to replace Valentine's Day (long celebrated here in satin-hearted American style) with Armaiti Day, a love festival in honor of an ancient Persian deity. DJs began playing homegrown Iranian rap at parties, instead of OutKast and Tupac Shakur. For the first time in years, millions sat at home in the evenings watching a domestic Iranian comedy, "Barareh Nights," rather than bootleg DVDs of American films.

But on a recent two-week trip to Iran, I found the shift in sentiment palpable. This year, restaurants were booked solid for Valentine's Day months in advance. Heart-shaped chocolates and flower arrangements sold briskly enough to annoy the authorities, who reportedly began confiscating them on the street. American-style fast-food chains such as Super Star, seemingly modeled after the West Coast burger franchise Carl's Jr., are drawing crowds again. Walking through my old neighborhood, I discovered people lining up at a grill joint called Chili's, bearing the same jalapeño logo as the U.S. chain. (The Iranian government shuns international trademark laws).

I used to hear similarly pro-American sentiments frequently back in 2001, when Iranians' romance with the United States was at its most ardent. A poll conducted that same year found that 74 percent of Iranians supported restoring ties with the United States (whereupon the pollster was tossed into prison). You couldn't attend a dinner party without hearing someone, envious of the recently liberated Afghans, ask, "When will the Americans come save us?"

The most interesting aspect of the revival of such warm feelings today is that the United States has done so little to earn them. Instead, Iranians' renewed pro-American sentiments reflect the depth of their alienation from their own rulers. As a family friend put it: "It's a matter of being drawn to the opposite of what you can't stand."

I lived in Iran until last summer and experienced all the reasons why Ahmadinejad has replaced the United States as Iranians' top object of vexation. Under his leadership, inflation has spiked at least 20 percent, according to nongovernment analysts -- thanks to Ahmadinejad's expansionary fiscal policies, which inject vast amounts of cash into the economy. My old babysitter, for example, says she can no longer afford to feed her family red meat once a week. When I recently picked up some groceries -- a sack of potatoes, some green plums, two cantaloupes and a few tomatoes -- the bill came to the equivalent of $40.

Inflation has hit the real estate market particularly hard. Housing prices have surged by nearly 150 percent, according to real estate agents. For most Iranians, previously manageable rents have become tremendous burdens. On one of my first evenings back in Iran, I watched Ahmadinejad on television as he addressed Iranians from the holy city of Qom. He blamed everyone -- the hostile West, a domestic "cigarette mafia" -- for the economic downturn, just as he had previously claimed that a "housing mafia" was driving up real estate prices. Many Iranians who initially believed this kind of conspiracy talk now admit that the president's policies and obstinacy are actually at fault. In a sign that even the regime is growing impatient, one of Ahmadinejad's chief rivals -- former top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani -- was elected speaker of Iran's parliament last week by an overwhelming majority.

Another trend turning people against Ahmadinejad is the conspicuous affluence of wealthy Iranians. Instead of bringing the country's oil wealth to ordinary people's dinner tables, as promised, Ahmadinejad is presiding over an unprecedented rise in status display. New-model Mercedes-Benzes and BMW SUVs now whiz past the local clunker, the Iranian-produced Peykan, thanks to eased controls on car imports. Posh restaurants with menu items such as "risotto sushi shooters" are packed, while cartoons in newspapers bemoan the shrinking size of bread loaves. (The government controls bread prices but not loaf sizes, allowing for a de facto cost increase.)

This newly stark class polarization, together with the economic downturn of the past three years, is reinvigorating young Iranians' vision of America as a land of opportunity. "You can compete in the United States because it has a much fairer legal system than most countries," Ali Ghassemi, a struggling 34-year-old graphic designer, told me. He spoke proudly of the financial success of a cousin who emigrated to Orange County, Calif., while complaining that Iran reserved prosperity for the heirs of ayatollahs.

To add to Iranians' weariness, there are the interminable lines that have accompanied the government's new gas-rationing scheme. During the busy early evening, it takes an hour to fill up on gas, and policemen are required to direct the snarled traffic. Ahmadinejad has insinuated that the unpopular plan was a precaution against possible Western sanctions, but most people I spoke with considered it another instance of his administration's mismanagement.

Beyond the new penury, Ahmadinejad has also resurrected unpopular invasions into Iranians' private lives. On the second day of my trip, newspapers announced that police would begin raiding office buildings and businesses to ensure that women were wearing proper Islamic dress. One of my girlfriends, an executive secretary, told me that as a precaution, her office had set up a coded warning message to be broadcast over the intercom. On the third day, police swept our street to confiscate illegal satellite dishes. I climbed to the roof to remove the coding device from my parents-in-law's dish. Such gadgets are costly to replace, unlike the dish itself, and the raids of recent months have made Iranians expert in such matters. "I'm going to miss 'American Idol,' " a neighbor sighed, fiddling with her satellite dish.

Yet another issue helping restore Iranians' regard for the United States is the withering relevance of Iran's suspected nuclear program. At the height of his popularity, Ahmadinejad successfully rallied public support around the program with catchy slogans (at least in Farsi) such as, "Nuclear energy is our absolute right." But that defiance failed to win Iran much more than the disagreeable whiff of global-pariah status, moving many Iranians to reconsider the costs of nuclear enrichment. Today, a scrawl of graffiti on my old street mocks the slogan: "Danish pastry is our absolute right." (Authorities ordered the city's Danish pastry shops to rebrand themselves after a Danish newspaper ran cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in 2005 that were deemed offensive.)

Of course, a minority of Iranians -- perhaps the 10 percent of society that sociologists estimate is hard-line -- still hate the Great Satan. But the strain of anti-Americanism in Iran is more mellow than the rage found elsewhere in the Arab and Muslim world. The Palestinian cause is less deeply felt here, making it easier for even Washington's critics to view relations pragmatically. Most Iranians belong to generations with compelling reasons to admire the United States. Those old enough to remember the shah's era are nostalgic for the prosperity and international standing Iran once enjoyed; those born after the revolution see no future for themselves in today's Iran and adopt their parents' gilded memories as their own. These longings have young and old Iranians alike following the U.S. election. Most seem to favor Sen. Barack Obama, who they believe will patch up relations with Iran.

Strolling down Revolution Street, a wide avenue in the polluted heart of Tehran dominated by murals of war martyrs in outmoded glasses, I stopped to chat with a young man selling bootleg DVDs of American films and TV series such as "Lost." "Before the revolution, we had relations" with the United States, he noted. "Was that bad for us? We were at the top of the region, the world."

Many Iranians make this point. But the mullahs in power still can't figure out how to stop being U.S.-hating revolutionaries. Until they do, most people here will consider the "Great Satan" just great.

azadeh1355@gmail.com

Azadeh Moaveni covers Iran for Time magazine. She is the author of "Lipstick Jihad" and a new memoir, "Honeymoon in Tehran," which will be published next February.
Destroy The Enemy in Hand-to-Hand Combat.

"...tradition and custom becomes intertwined and are a strong coercion which directs the society upon fixed lines, and strangles liberty. " ~ William Graham Sumner

K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44,440
  • I Am Inimical
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2008, 01:50:17 AM »
Not politics.
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2008, 06:09:39 AM »
This is why Obama is stupid. Talking to the crazy short guy would legitimize him. Most Iranians want him out.

Sindawe

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,938
  • Vashneesht
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2008, 06:36:12 AM »
Maybe we should mass air drop a modern version of the Liberator Pistol, satellite-TV converter boxes, pre-paid satellite NICs.  grin
I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2008, 07:56:44 AM »
News flash; third world *expletive deleted*it-hole hates America, but wants us to come fix their miserable little lives for them. A long time resident was quoted as saying "I'm too cowardly to fight for my own freedom. America should send thousands of it's men to die to free me; then I'll use that freedom to spit on their corpses."

Same position as most of the world has towards us.
Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44,440
  • I Am Inimical
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2008, 08:23:18 AM »
"You couldn't attend a dinner party without hearing someone, envious of the recently liberated Afghans, ask, "When will the Americans come save us?"

Holy crap...
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

The Annoyed Man

  • New Member
  • Posts: 1
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2008, 12:08:40 PM »
News flash; third world *expletive deleted*it-hole hates America, but wants us to come fix their miserable little lives for them. A long time resident was quoted as saying "I'm too cowardly to fight for my own freedom. America should send thousands of it's men to die to free me; then I'll use that freedom to spit on their corpses."

Well, that sounds just like what we've been doing (apparently we believe in it so much, we could stay for a century). One twist, however, is that everyone appears to be spitting on everyone over there, not just on our guys.

I'm not too worried about Iranians. They have a leader who is growing even more unpopular, they have a media network that says what the government tells it to say, and the people are starting to see through the veil. Maybe these 3rd-world people just cowards because they don't know what goes on in the world around them (beyond what the Ahmadenijad regime wants them to know).

Ezekiel

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Intellectual Masturbationist
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2008, 12:37:54 PM »
See below EDIT:

Quote from: edited Balog post
News flash; third world *expletive deleted*it-hole hates America, and doesn't want us to come fix their miserable little lives for them. A long time resident was quoted as saying "I'm too pragmatic to fight for my own freedom for America to exploit.  Yet, America will send thousands of it's men to die to enlighten/free me as part of their capitalist Team America force; then I'll use that enlightened freedom to spit on their cannon fodder corpses, while they occupy my country."

That's better.  More accurate.  Reality.

Manifest Destiny on a worldwide scale, baby.

Quote from: nobody's_hero
Well, that sounds just like what we've been doing (apparently we believe in it so much, we could stay for a century).

You catch on FAST.

Perhaps, maybe, they desire us to clean up some riff-raff (seems unlikely), but they definitely desire us to leave, and we NEVER DO.

Then we have the audacity to wonder, aloud, why they hate us.
Zeke

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #8 on: June 03, 2008, 12:50:15 PM »
Which you know from all your time in country, right Ezekiel? Oh wait, that's right.... you're getting all your "facts" from the same media who called Iraq a quagmire before we even invaded.  rolleyes But you just keep parrotting the same bullshit MSNBC feeds you. After all, all us Iraq vets are so brainwashed by the military our observations are invalid, right?
Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

De Selby

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,836
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2008, 01:07:05 PM »
Those old enough to remember the shah's era are nostalgic for the prosperity and international standing Iran once enjoyed; those born after the revolution see no future for themselves in today's Iran and adopt their parents' gilded memories as their own.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh yeah-this is like when the propaganda lackeys of the Arab despots write about how Iraqis long for the "lion of Arabia", Saddam, because it was so good with him, in order to justify their own dictatorships.

While I think it makes sense that Iranians would like American-style freedoms, the article's intimations that they want another Iraq to happen to their country, and that Iranians are nostalgic for a murderous king (that's what the Shah was-a dictator who passed out candy to his friends and murdered tens of thousands for opposing his dictatorship) are simply absurd.
"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."

Ezekiel

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Intellectual Masturbationist
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2008, 01:41:25 PM »
Which you know from all your time in country, right Ezekiel?

I think it's called, Historical Perspective.

After all, all us Iraq vets are so brainwashed by the military our observations are invalid, right?

I can certainly see where you'd prefer to buy into perceived righteousness that does not exist: so that the actual service or sacrifice would have some kind of meaning beyond manufactured camaraderie and idealistic esprit de corp.  The CIC sold a bill of goods.
Zeke

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2008, 01:48:30 PM »
Wow, thanks for clearing that up for. I'm so glad we have you shining like a beacon of truth and reason to guide us poor ignorant cannon fodder types through our self deception. Lord knows actually interacting with the people we're discussing is nowhere near as good a source of information as Keith Olberman.

The raging arrogance implicit in your views leaves me stunned. But since we're making assumption about people we don't know, I'll just figure your disdain for our military is overcompensation for the fact that you're too much of a coward to actually do something to defend the freedoms you enjoy.
Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

Ezekiel

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Intellectual Masturbationist
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2008, 02:01:21 PM »
But since we're making assumption about people we don't know, I'll just figure your disdain for our military is overcompensation for the fact that you're too much of a coward to actually do something to defend the freedoms you enjoy.

You'd be wrong.

That said, the CIC still sold a bill of goods, that nobody in the military leadership structure -- prior to retiring -- had the cajones to publicly question.  (Must do what we're told and all, save the career, serf, etc.)  Nothing I can do about that.

Nothing currently happening in Iraq or Afghanistan positively impacts freedom, unless you believe they have nukes or biological weaponry with an ability to deliver...  Oh, wait, that's the crap we were sold...  Wrong.

History, sooner rather than later, will judge this fiasco/quagmire poorly.  In this case, as a model, I recommend re-reading your own signature, substituting "military" for "government."
Zeke

xavier fremboe

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • All-American Meanie
    • The Shop
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #13 on: June 03, 2008, 02:27:28 PM »
See below EDIT:

Quote from: edited Balog post
News flash; third world *expletive deleted*it-hole hates America, and doesn't want us to come fix their miserable little lives for them. A long time resident was quoted as saying "I'm too pragmatic to fight for my own freedom for America to exploit.  Yet, America will send thousands of it's men to die to enlighten/free me as part of their capitalist Team America force; then I'll use that enlightened freedom to spit on their cannon fodder corpses, while they occupy my country."

That's better.  More accurate.  Reality.

Manifest Destiny on a worldwide scale, baby.

Quote from: nobody's_hero
Well, that sounds just like what we've been doing (apparently we believe in it so much, we could stay for a century).

You catch on FAST.

Perhaps, maybe, they desire us to clean up some riff-raff (seems unlikely), but they definitely desire us to leave, and we NEVER DO.

Then we have the audacity to wonder, aloud, why they hate us.
"A transfer of authority to a local government re-establishing the full and free exercise of sovereignty will normally end the state of occupation, if the government agrees to the continued presence of foreign troops on its territory. However, the law of occupation may become applicable again if the situation on the ground changes, that is to say, if the territory again becomes "actually placed under the authority of the hostile army" (H R, art. 42)  in other words, under the control of foreign troops without the consent of the local authorities."  International Red Cross Website.  We're also responsible for making every effort to maintain law and order, providing utilities, etc.  Check it out at icrc.org.  Anyway, that's almost beside the point.

We've been in Europe and Japan for over half a century.  There are folks there who would like us to go, but the people in charge would rather have us close by just in case.  Bin Laden doesn't like us in Saudi Arabia, but the Saudi rulers seems to have come to terms with the fact that we offer a deterrent to the Iranians or any of the other nice people in the neighborhood. 

So, exactly who should we be taking our marching orders from?  Bin Laden?  Al Sadr?
If the bandersnatch seems even mildly frumious, best to shun it.  Really. http://www.cctplastics.com

Ezekiel

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Intellectual Masturbationist
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2008, 03:12:46 PM »
So, exactly who should we be taking our marching orders from?

A start would be the American people, represented by their rightfully elected leaders, acting on good information, in the best interests of the nation.  (Of course, none of this has occurred.)

Excellent points, though.
Zeke

De Selby

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,836
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #15 on: June 03, 2008, 03:55:08 PM »
See below EDIT:

Quote from: edited Balog post
News flash; third world *expletive deleted*it-hole hates America, and doesn't want us to come fix their miserable little lives for them. A long time resident was quoted as saying "I'm too pragmatic to fight for my own freedom for America to exploit.  Yet, America will send thousands of it's men to die to enlighten/free me as part of their capitalist Team America force; then I'll use that enlightened freedom to spit on their cannon fodder corpses, while they occupy my country."

That's better.  More accurate.  Reality.

Manifest Destiny on a worldwide scale, baby.

Quote from: nobody's_hero
Well, that sounds just like what we've been doing (apparently we believe in it so much, we could stay for a century).

You catch on FAST.

Perhaps, maybe, they desire us to clean up some riff-raff (seems unlikely), but they definitely desire us to leave, and we NEVER DO.

Then we have the audacity to wonder, aloud, why they hate us.
"A transfer of authority to a local government re-establishing the full and free exercise of sovereignty will normally end the state of occupation, if the government agrees to the continued presence of foreign troops on its territory. However, the law of occupation may become applicable again if the situation on the ground changes, that is to say, if the territory again becomes "actually placed under the authority of the hostile army" (H R, art. 42)  in other words, under the control of foreign troops without the consent of the local authorities."  International Red Cross Website.  We're also responsible for making every effort to maintain law and order, providing utilities, etc.  Check it out at icrc.org.  Anyway, that's almost beside the point.

We've been in Europe and Japan for over half a century.  There are folks there who would like us to go, but the people in charge would rather have us close by just in case.  Bin Laden doesn't like us in Saudi Arabia, but the Saudi rulers seems to have come to terms with the fact that we offer a deterrent to the Iranians or any of the other nice people in the neighborhood. 

So, exactly who should we be taking our marching orders from?  Bin Laden?  Al Sadr?

The problem with the "people in charge" logic is that we decide who is in charge by funding and maintaining their dictatorships-the Saudi monarchy would've crumbled a long, long time ago but for crucial U.S. support. 

It isn't just Bin Laden who doesn't like us in Saudi Arabia-it's the vast majority of Saudis that don't want us there, which is why radical militant organizations are able to gain recruits and money in those places.

Al Sadr not wanting us there is one of the reasons he's polling so well, and highly likely to win the elections in Basra-that's because he agrees with the 70-80 percent of Iraqis who also don't want us there, and who elected a group of Iranian terrorists to office on the false promise that they (Islamic Dawa and Hizbullah in Iraq and cohorts) would eject America from Iraq. 

Anyone who takes even a cursory look at the realities of the middle east can discover, quite easily, that the overwhelming majority of those people consistently do not want U.S. troops, U.S. backed dictators, or U.S. intelligence agency interference in their countries.  If there are arguments in favor of setting up Germany/Japan style occupations, the argument that they want or accept such an arrangement like the Japanese and Germans do is by far the most easily discredited.
"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."

xavier fremboe

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • All-American Meanie
    • The Shop
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #16 on: June 03, 2008, 04:35:10 PM »
The problem with the "people in charge" logic is that we decide who is in charge by funding and maintaining their dictatorships-the Saudi monarchy would've crumbled a long, long time ago but for crucial U.S. support. 

It isn't just Bin Laden who doesn't like us in Saudi Arabia-it's the vast majority of Saudis that don't want us there, which is why radical militant organizations are able to gain recruits and money in those places.

Al Sadr not wanting us there is one of the reasons he's polling so well, and highly likely to win the elections in Basra-that's because he agrees with the 70-80 percent of Iraqis who also don't want us there, and who elected a group of Iranian terrorists to office on the false promise that they (Islamic Dawa and Hizbullah in Iraq and cohorts) would eject America from Iraq. 

Anyone who takes even a cursory look at the realities of the middle east can discover, quite easily, that the overwhelming majority of those people consistently do not want U.S. troops, U.S. backed dictators, or U.S. intelligence agency interference in their countries.  If there are arguments in favor of setting up Germany/Japan style occupations, the argument that they want or accept such an arrangement like the Japanese and Germans do is by far the most easily discredited.
Seems almost all geopolitical problems in the modern world have their roots in Englishmen drawing lines on maps almost a century ago.  Ah well, realpolitik is what it is.  You and Zeke are correct though, they do hate us for being there, but then, they've been hating and killing each other for 1500 years over apostasies that are far too subtle for me to understand.  We're just something novel to despise.  Soon they'll get back to killing each other on a more regular basis.

My point to Zeke was that 'being there for 100 years' isn't necessarily the jackboot on the neck that it sounds like.  I personally am disturbed that all of our 'allies' in the region (sans Israel) are monarchies or dictatorships, but I don't see either the religious or tribal tradition offering the framework for either a democracy or a republic.  The leaders in the region seem to have realized that unless there is a major third party military force in the region, it will descend into utter chaos.  So, the question comes down to whether you prefer stable monarchies, or African-style tribal warlords?  I don't see much middle ground available.  The possibility of a self-generated republic arising out of that region?  Please.  There is no Attaturk in Iraq or Kuwait or even in Turkey.

Back to the occupation.  At the end of WWII, if you were to ask the average American on the street whether the occupation of Japan would have been successful, I'd wager that the answer would have been a resounding 'no'.  Based on the differences in culture and the way that Japan prosecuted the war, there was little evidence that the occupation, including the adoption of the Japanese constitution, would have gone as well as it actually did.  I'd wager that the average Japanese citizen wouldn't have given it much better odds.  Certainly they wouldn't have said that they wanted to be occupied.

Is there hope for making a functioning republic out of Iraq?  It depends on the Iraqis.  Personally I think they're biding their time, playing nice, stockpiling ammo, and hoping for an Obama victory, since they already know he'll capitulate.
If the bandersnatch seems even mildly frumious, best to shun it.  Really. http://www.cctplastics.com

De Selby

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,836
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #17 on: June 03, 2008, 05:20:42 PM »
Quote
Ah well, realpolitik is what it is.  You and Zeke are correct though, they do hate us for being there, but then, they've been hating and killing each other for 1500 years over apostasies that are far too subtle for me to understand. 

This is simply not true-there has been no 1500 year "war over apostasies" or anything like it.  The Ottomans never cared much for "orthodoxy", and that's why there are a multitude of sects and languages in that region today; they'd all be speaking Turkish if there were in fact sectarian warfare for that long, because the Ottomans won the battle a long, long time ago.

The infighting on this scale and with this much bloodshed is relatively new-as in, 20th century new.

Quote
The possibility of a self-generated republic arising out of that region?  Please.  There is no Attaturk in Iraq or Kuwait or even in Turkey.

For one thing, Turkey is a democracy-they have votes there and they are real votes.

For another, there are plenty of groups calling for Democracy-it's just that they can't name their attaturks or else the secret police will kill them.  I think the main point of this article, that these people want American style freedom of speech and the freedom to do as they please, is entirely accurate.  And the opposition groups campaign on delivering honest, democratic government...that is how they sell themselves in these countries, even the militant Islamist organizations (Hizbullah and the Ikhwan organizations being the two prime examples.)

A functioning democracy is entirely possible in these places-what is not possible is handing the reigns to whichever sect will do the most for us, and then getting everyone else to line up behind them.  That is never going to happen, but that's what seems to be the strategy right now....with the predictable result that there is sectarian warfare and instability.
"Human existence being an hallucination containing in itself the secondary hallucinations of day and night (the latter an insanitary condition of the atmosphere due to accretions of black air) it ill becomes any man of sense to be concerned at the illusory approach of the supreme hallucination known as death."

Ezekiel

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Intellectual Masturbationist
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #18 on: June 03, 2008, 05:30:48 PM »
Damn.  You guys are sharp and write well.

"Good stuff."

Thanks for the well thought out replies.
Zeke

xavier fremboe

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • All-American Meanie
    • The Shop
Re: Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes [WaPo]
« Reply #19 on: June 04, 2008, 12:52:12 AM »
Quote
Ah well, realpolitik is what it is.  You and Zeke are correct though, they do hate us for being there, but then, they've been hating and killing each other for 1500 years over apostasies that are far too subtle for me to understand. 

This is simply not true-there has been no 1500 year "war over apostasies" or anything like it.  The Ottomans never cared much for "orthodoxy", and that's why there are a multitude of sects and languages in that region today; they'd all be speaking Turkish if there were in fact sectarian warfare for that long, because the Ottomans won the battle a long, long time ago.

The infighting on this scale and with this much bloodshed is relatively new-as in, 20th century new.

Quote
The possibility of a self-generated republic arising out of that region?  Please.  There is no Attaturk in Iraq or Kuwait or even in Turkey.

For one thing, Turkey is a democracy-they have votes there and they are real votes.

For another, there are plenty of groups calling for Democracy-it's just that they can't name their attaturks or else the secret police will kill them.  I think the main point of this article, that these people want American style freedom of speech and the freedom to do as they please, is entirely accurate.  And the opposition groups campaign on delivering honest, democratic government...that is how they sell themselves in these countries, even the militant Islamist organizations (Hizbullah and the Ikhwan organizations being the two prime examples.)

A functioning democracy is entirely possible in these places-what is not possible is handing the reigns to whichever sect will do the most for us, and then getting everyone else to line up behind them.  That is never going to happen, but that's what seems to be the strategy right now....with the predictable result that there is sectarian warfare and instability.

Apologies for the implication that they have been killing each other constantly for 1500 years.  My point was more that the wars of succession that occurred for decades after the death of Mohammed seem to be playing out today.  While the scale may have increased, I would say that could also be attributed to population growth and the Kalashnikov, not just a Western presence in the region.  Again, I don't pretend to understand the intricacies of the schisms, but it seems pretty obvious that they aren't going to be healed any time soon.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I am fully aware that Turkey is a democracy, but that democracy was forged by Attaturk as a secular entity.  Recent trends in Turkey seem to be moving towards a theocratic model, and like any radical regime, they never seem to hold true to the democratic ideals that allowed them to rise in the first place.  Once in power they will seek to consolidate power and lock out opposition.  Were it not for the Turkish Armed Forces, what would the "Justice and Development Party" be doing right now?

But the article is about Iran.  The Iranians have been running their own state since they deposed the Shah and established a theocracy.  The reins of that state are entirely in the hands of the Iranians and have been for decades.  If they are yearning for an American-style freedoms why don't they rise up and choose their Attaturk?  Because of the secret police?  Those are Iranian secret police, established by the government they installed after their revolution to overthrow the puppet of the Great Satan.  Perhaps the entire idea looked a lot better on paper...
If the bandersnatch seems even mildly frumious, best to shun it.  Really. http://www.cctplastics.com