Today, I was looking everywhere for more information regarding the ongoing Iran-UK face-off. Checking different websites I found a link from a fellow Iranian mentioned here and there. The content of that post is simply pictures of a military compound east of Tehran, where some reports say the captured British navy personnel are being held. Winston, the author of that blog, proudly calls himself a “Pro-America, Pro-Israel Iranian neo-conservative, seeking regime change in Iran”. So, I guess, to him it is nothing but a patriotic obligation to help “others” overthrow the regime. The big question is, what am I doing? Am I another Winston?
I have all reasons to criticize the Islamic Republic and the mainstream Islam, and I do it whenever I have the chance to. However, I am not a fan of “Operation Iraqi Freedom” and other big names like that. If this blog has a constitution that is no lies from any side. A lie is a lie, whether it is an Islamic Republic phony information or a lie published in a Western newspaper.
As I can communicate in Persian and as I am more familiar with the Iranian politics/culture, the focal point of this blog is Iran and what is going on in that country. Accidentally, the Islamic Republic is one of those governments who still afford to have state-run and state-controlled media and thus can enjoy telling big lies. Thus, clearly, there is always something deceitful going on in Iran. That’s where I turn my computer on and start translating a piece of news.
I don’t blame Winston, despite our not so friendly relationship in the past. But I think there is a thin line between telling the truth and becoming a war advocate. I do all my best to be the first and not the second.
I think it is important to realize, and appreciate, the situation of blogging when both sides are pursuing equivalently unacceptable causes. The Islamic Republic, to my understanding, is a religious warmonger regime which does deserve criticism. However, it is important to remember that the US is not following a decent cause either. I emphasize that the US, and the Americans for that matter, do have the right to expand the US empire, as Iran did a few thousand years ago. While that’s the inevitable fate of an expansive entity, please do not ask me to hail Imperialism.
Blogging has been a great opportunity to me to understand what the politicians are engaged with. There are readers in this blog from many different, and even opposite, perspectives and I think that’s what makes this experience fascinating. When I try to follow my own moral code and yet keep different people’s friendship, I tell to myself, this is what politics is. Sometimes, this experience gets amazingly delightful. To the people who think CNN is biased, because of a Zionist conspiracy, I suggest they look at two of my blog-friends and how they have reacted to the posts in this blog. Jim (from Gateway Pundit) and Antony Loewenstein (from a blog with the same name) are both good friends of mine. While Jim is more into the idea of thinking about the US as the great freedom fighter, Antony is an intelligible Jewish person who is a serious critic of Israel and follows, to my understanding, a pacifist agenda. I guess it would be amazing to have Antony and Jim talk together, and I am not sure if that could last for more than five minutes.
It so appears that both Jim and Antony follow Kamangir selectively, and I do not blame them for that. I guess this is a good example which when manifested in a huge organization like CNN would produce what we see on TV and makes some of us irritated, if not frustrated. Jim has been so kind to me to link to Kamangir in his high-traffic blog. But, apparently, he does not like it when I speculate that AP may have misquoted Ahmadinejad. On the other hand, Antony and I do not seem to find common ground, despite a good friendship, but he does find that story important. Strangely enough, he does not find the sequel to that post interesting, where I come to the conclusion that in fact I had been wrong and AP had done a perfect job. Amazingly, Pajamas Media, so blamed by some Iranian bloggers to be a neo-con tribune, does pick both stories (1) (2).
With the experience of blogging, every one of us becomes a George W. Bush or Tony Blair or even an Ahmadinejad and that’s the aspect of blogging I admire the most.
With such nonsense you just prove you are an idiot.
Pathetic.
Comment by ghoorbagheh — March 26, 2007 @ 8:21 am
What is the US Cause? And what is indecent about it.
What US Empire? Give me a break… Empire! I know this word was a favorite of all the Anti-American folks a few years ago.. It was an incorrect label back then and it still is.
The United State is not a European country. Empire is not in her blood. The US never pursued nor desired an Empire.
If the people in the area of the world where you come from weren’t so completely incapable of governing themselves, we wouldn’t need to be over there trying to contain the Jihad.
What are you doing? that’s a good question.
Nothing has come out of the Middle East in hundreds of years other than oil and death.
The Islamic countries of the Middle East must have received trillions of dollars in oil sales in the past 100 years.
Where is there any evidence that this money was used to improve the lives of anyone?
Did all the money get pumped into the Jihad Factories?
Are Muslims that devoted to thier warlord charlatian that their immeidate instinct is to divert all resources toward fighting the rest of us?
Go ahead.. be against the united states for attempting to hold back the forces of regression.
Should Iran win.. I would expect everyone’s future will be quite grim and regressive. As the dark, energy-destroying stink of Islam subdues yet more slaves for allah.
Comment by Vince P — March 26, 2007 @ 8:38 am
Kamangir, it’s very good to hear your own voice once in a while!
Vince, America is not an empire in the hundreds-of-years-ago way, but what makes people use that term is the military actions to subjugate certain countries and arrogant demands to the rest. A global creature that respects its almost-equals by not slitting their throats at best.
On death coming out of the middle east… The death never comes out. Only the oil comes out. Death gos in and in and in. Do you honestly think the US would ever try to take it out? Do you think any middle eastern political group has the luxury of making any decision that isn’t based chiefly on the US? Face it, you like to be able to complain about the savagery of the oriental barbarians, but you’d feel very empty and weird if you had to think of them as human beings and not just a massive death toll.
Comment by zaratzara — March 26, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
zaratzara says:
Comment by tedders — March 26, 2007 @ 2:08 pm
Kamangir- Thanks for your “come to Jesus moment” :)
(That’s an expression BTW meaning to ‘Get Honest’)
As far as US imperialism, I liked Colin Powell’s response to this the best:
“We have gone forth from our shores repeatedly over the last hundred years and we’ve done this as recently as the last year in Afghanistan and put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of whom have lost their lives, and we have asked for nothing except enough ground to bury them in, and otherwise we have returned home to seek our own, you know, to seek our own lives in peace, to live our own lives in peace. But there comes a time when soft power or talking with evil will not work where, unfortunately, hard power is the only thing that works.”
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/p/powell-empires.htm
Unfortunately for the US, Germany and France did not become states after WWII or we may have better relations than we do today. If only they would behave like Japan!
Please forgive my country for bringing the gift of democracy and capitalism to where once stood brutal tyrants and poverty.
Comment by Jim Hoft — March 26, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Vince P,
With all respect, I am not criticizing your perspective on politics. The question posed in this post is, are we not selective in picking the news? Any thought on that?
Comment by Kamangir — March 26, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
Zaratzara,
I am not sure what you call my “own voice”, but the question is not whether death goes in or comes out. The question is fairness of us, as spectators, and players at the same time.
Comment by Kamangir — March 26, 2007 @ 3:06 pm
Jim Hoft,
We can talk more on the idea of any country exporting democracy. My question is regarding fairness. Any thought on that?
Comment by Kamangir — March 26, 2007 @ 3:08 pm
zaratzara says:
“is the military actions to subjugate certain countries and arrogant demands to the rest”
Only if you call the requests by the UN for countries to stop threatening neighboring countries with invasion or annihilation arrogant. The US has never waged a war to subjugate countries the way you think they have. You’ve been listening to too much Al Jazeera and CNN lately. When a country was defeated militarily by the US and the people of that nation are allowed to choose their own leaders, well you fill in the rest. When the soviet union moved into a country every freedom, both personal and economic decreased drastically, do you believe If Al Queada were in charge of the middle east things would be better for the peoples there? Saddam and Iraq are the perfect example of how to thumb your nose at the “world” and exhibit the idiotic hyperbolic “screaming sheik bluff” that’s so common from the impotent Arab leaders. Wasn’t it Saddam who was threatening the west with the war of all wars after he broke and rebroke UN resolutions voted on by the world? Isn’t Iran following the same path now? The US isn’t the only country that knows the end result if some of the madmen in charge in the middle east are allowed to continue, look at the recent UN sanctions. Iran is playing a losing game messing with the British, you’ve never seen a more potent, deadly and single minded foe as you’ll have if you choose England to start a fight with. If Al Queada was allowed to go on flying passenger airliners into buildings and the US did nothing I imagine you would find the US at fault somehow.
You also say:
“On death coming out of the middle east… The death never comes out. Only the oil comes out.”
While there are many wonderful things that have come out of middle eastern cultures the one main export right now is death. Death in New York, London, Indonesia, all over the middle east, Africa, all over the world. All of that is bred and comes from where? The middle east. The oil is miles underground and the rest of the world pays trillions of dollars every year for their crude. You sound as if the world wants to steal the oil, it does not. Those oil supplying countries are paid for their oil by mutual agreement. Those countries that buy the oil are supporting the middle eastern countries entirely with their wealth and success. Some middle eastern countries in question can’t provide for their people now with all the oil dollars they posses, what would happen if the world stopped buying from them?
You say: “Do you honestly think the US would ever try to take it out?”
That’s exactly what The US and the rest of the world is trying to do right now but you can’t see past your Pan (Persian, Arab, Islamic) nationalism. There is no Imperialism, empire building, conspiracies to steal your resources. This struggle is about the security of the world, the US included.
Do you think any middle eastern political group has the luxury of making any decision that isn’t based chiefly on the benefit of the world?
Comment by tedders — March 26, 2007 @ 3:18 pm
Sorry if the response is a little off your topic Kamangir.
I do enjoy your blog and the comments of it’s readers.
Comment by tedders — March 26, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
Tedders,
Nice to have you hear. :)
Comment by Kamangir — March 26, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Well said, Kamangir. Like I wrote elsewhere: “Cognition does not necessarily equal good results. We are cognitive misers and lazy investigators searching for information that confirms our bias.”
As to the U.S. being an empire, we are an empire, although more in an economic sense than a territorial sense with the Bretton Woods trifecta, that Cold War relic, pushing U.S. policy interests instead of defending liberal/libertarian interests. Europe would not have stopped acquiring territories if foreign direct investments still paid off. In fact any state emerging victorious from a system-wide war could be considered an empire, since they get to make and sometimes enforce international rules between states. The U.S. is the current hegemon and Iran is a revisionist state. Anyone taking offense at Empire is dragging emotions and slogans to the discussion.
Comment by Lesly — March 26, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
Dear Jim,
It really makes more sense if you say that US has the power and does what it wants or even US attack a country to prevent its attack and potential danger!
In the area “where once stood brutal tyrants and poverty”, they call gift to something that they don’t pay anything for and they have the right to accept or refuse it.
There are lots of problems there, and perhaps one of them lack of democracy, but another one is persons who try to gift others moral values, no matter heaven or democracy. I think you can be a good leader over there. Kind of your voice is heard every day in the region “where once stood brutal tyrants and poverty”.
Comment by shimbalkhaan — March 26, 2007 @ 8:19 pm
Comment by brando — March 26, 2007 @ 9:34 pm
And there is a big difference between a regime apologist like you and likes of you are and a freedom advocate at-any-cost that I am.
Keep on writing, dude!
Comment by Winston — March 26, 2007 @ 10:27 pm
Winston,
Chakerim. :)
Comment by Kamangir — March 26, 2007 @ 10:38 pm
I emphasize that the US, and the Americans for that matter, do have the right to expand the US empire, as Iran did a few thousand years ago.
Hi Kamangir,
Your objective of holding an “objective” perspective is indeed admirable.
However, to emphasize the right of a nation, any nation, to militaristic expansionism, is a model that was tried, tested and came untrue, as recently as in the second world war. Of course, the neoconservatives today are adapting many of their models based on the German’s mode of thinking; but it is a sorry state if as human beings we are endorsing that path again.
I just hope, Iranians won’t start beating drums of their aryanism! That combined with Ahmadinejad’s wiping attitude, will make us look terribly “ugly”.
Cheers
Comment by naj — March 26, 2007 @ 10:43 pm
Did you just use a Nazi metaphor?
Comment by brando — March 26, 2007 @ 11:49 pm
Let me clarify myself. I use the term “empire” for the US because that country does things that most other countries don’t. For example, when was the last time a country, except for the US, invaded another country, for any reason?
Comment by Kamangir — March 26, 2007 @ 11:52 pm
Kaman: Well done. Everyone has an agenda and everyone is guilty of cherry picking information that reinforces and confirms the said pre-conceived notions or ideology that they have been exposed to and have internalized via childhood socialization. We all have our biases and filter information through subjective prisms when processing information heuristically which in turn lead us to certain blogs or piece of info. that tend to bolster our belief and value system (called assimilation) Those information that are not congruent (called accommodation) with our internalized value system are not easily assimilated or understood and cause a phenomenon called “Cognitive Dissonance”. To relieve this dissoance, we tend to look for information that validate our own views and people who are like-minded and don’t disturb our subjective value system.
For example, some view capitalism as evil and others view it as best system in the world. Some would argue that capitalism is “tough love” as it rewards those who achieve, and punishes those who do not. Thus while it may not be a chartiable system, it is fair overall. Is it “unkind” to punish a wayward child, to encourage them to correct wayward behavior? Some might argue that it is actually more unkind to allow a child to be undisciplined, and to reward them unconidtionally. Capitalism is not perfect, but it seeks to apply such standards.
On imperialism: I do believe sociobiology can explain imperialism, it’s just one tribe taking advantage of many others. The tribe benefits its own genes by extracting resources from the others. Capitalism is similar. well, Imperialism is just Capitalism writ large. Many have propounded on the ‘natural state of man’ being that of Empire. The argument is based upon: first arisal, dominant individuals (see cultural anthropology of primates or comparative psychobiology of animal behavior or evolutionary biology), and sheer amount of time that Empires have existed in civilization. Empires are inherently repressive, non-egalitarian, prejudiced, and exist on an underclass without rights. No Empire has ever empowered people, en mass. No Empire has ever provided human rights to the majority of people, and even the Elite have harsh restrictions upon them. And even the Chinese hydraulic Empires had their bouts of internal decay, civil war, and invasion.
Democracy has had very few chances to ever stand on its own in any way, shape or form, and even the Athenian model was devoted only to a class of individuals. State-based slave ownership was still the norm, and allowing for human rights to exist was for only a very few. After that thousands of years pass, with a sporadic attempt here and there that is crushed under Empires, Barbarism, Monarchies. Republics have also had relatively short life spans, compared to Empires, and tend to become self-destructive over time.
Forgive me for being long-winded again. I have to go. I admire your attempt for not being myopic, dogmatic or parroting the talking points of both liberal left and conservative right. It’s so refreshing.
Comment by Serendip — March 27, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Arash,
In regards to post #19 above, Switzerland accidently invaded Lichtenstein a few weeks back.
Comment by Matthew — March 27, 2007 @ 12:28 am
Matthew,
Come on! You know what I mean! :)
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 12:31 am
Serendip,
Wow, I really had to use my dictionary to read your comment. Any way, Chakerim! :D
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 12:32 am
manam chakeram but this is not how it works. You either want the regime or want them TO GO. Set your goals towards something. Why do we all Iranian have to be in limbo all the time?
Comment by winston — March 27, 2007 @ 2:01 am
Archer
Define “recent”.
1999 Kargil War – The cause of the war was the infiltration of Pakistani soldiers and Kashmiri militants into positions on the Indian side of the Line of Control,
2001 Albanian National Liberation Army attacked Republic of Macedonia
1990 Iraq invaded Kuwait
Less recent (1970 + )
Iraq invaded Iran.
Russia invaded Afghanistan
Libya invaded Sudan
Arabs invaded Israel
Turks invaded Cyprus
Vietnam invaded Cambodia
Comment by ella — March 27, 2007 @ 2:19 am
Winston,
This is exactly where our conflict begins. You and I both dislike the Islamic Republic. Both of us think it should be replaced with a regime which represents the Iranian public and is chosen solely by the the Iranians through a democratic election process.
The question is, do we approve of a foreign-led coup to overthrow the regime? That’s when our answers would be different, I guess. My understanding is that democracy should be established democratically. That’s the bottom line. I guess you would tolerate not-so-democratic movements, given that they are towards “greater good”.
Any way, nice having you back here. Take care. :)
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 2:21 am
Ella,
Let’s put it this way, in terms of the number of invasions one country has been involved in, who holds the record? To this definition, backing a coup or supporting separatists is also an act of invasion, to my understanding.
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 2:24 am
I find this blog useful for providing a window into Iran that I don’t get elsewhere. I don’t think the U.S. should invade Iran in order to overthrow the mullahs, because I don’t think it would result in the establishment of democracy in Iran. I think it would just result in another horrible war like the war we’re entangled in in Iraq. I don’t want my country to be killing even more people in the middle east. But I certainly don’t approve of the Iranian regime – I’m Jewish and have many friends and relatives in Israel, and I’m afraid of what Iran might do to Israel if they succeed in making nuclear weapons. I have to say that I agree that in this case democracy can only be established by democratic means.
Comment by Rebecca — March 27, 2007 @ 2:37 am
Kamangir: maybe it’s a language thing but you write in a very ambigious style and it’s really hard sometimes to know what you really mean. Perhaps if I knew you better , I’d be able to read between the lines… but a lot of times I have to sort of guess what you mean. I know you’re well-thought-out person. you do have a rather strong anti-Israel bias.
But like someone else said.. using the Empire metaphor is good as far as it goes. the problem is, (especially when dealing with Left wing people) , the metaphor suddenly becomes the “truth”.
We’re not an Empire. We got sucked into having to deal with Europe’s disasters of the last century and ended up being the last one standing. Believe me… it’s a thankless place to be.
Comment by Vince P — March 27, 2007 @ 3:02 am
Rebeca: Iran has been killing Americans for years. If you dont think we’re already at war then you’re stupidly naive.
Comment by Vince P — March 27, 2007 @ 3:03 am
Archer
That’s debatable, but if you put “backing the separatists” and “backing the cups” (say from the year of 1960s) I would say that Russia and US can hold the primacy but other countries including China and Iran are not so far behind.
IRI
backed (failed) coup in KSA
backed fighters in Afghanistan
backed Hizbullah
backed separatists in Pakistan
backed Islamic Jihad
backed (recently) Hamas
backed insurgents in South America
and that’s only part of what IRI is/was backing.
Comment by ella — March 27, 2007 @ 3:54 am
Rebecca,
You spoiled me. :)
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 5:56 am
Vince P,
Sorry, it should be due to the fact that English is my second language. I’ll try to write more clearly next time. For being anti-Israel, where did you get that feeling?
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 5:58 am
I have found this site very informative and much more open minded than most sites. And for someone whom English is not the primary language it is as well written as many who do use English as their primary language. Communication is a problem even with people who speak the same language from the same country. The US is plenty proof of that.
Comment by thescoundrel — March 27, 2007 @ 7:22 am
Good points Ella, you got to them before I could post.
For that matter IR has invaded Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Israel recently besides the ones you listed.
Using Archers definition (backing a coup or supporting separatists is also an act of invasion, to my understanding.)
Ahmadinejad has invaded the US and now apparently going after the UK.
You’ve got to give Ahmadinejad credit for what he’s trying to do (or not!). There was a certain European leader who pressed his luck knowing that the surrounding countries didn’t have the political will or military preparedness to stop him from going against the will of his neighbors. He was successful for at most for two maybe three years. But Ahmadinejad doesn’t seem to realise he is surrounded by the worlds biggest and best military coalition with the political will to change the direction of the region for the better. An overwhelming naval, air and ground superiority is on all sides of Iran. One has to wonder if the Iranian President is as cognitive and lucid as Moreley Safer believes. He certainly is walking down a dangerous and slippery path.
Comment by tedders — March 27, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
America doesn’t hold the record for recent invasions of countries.
That honor would most definitely have to go to Germany.
Comment by Tom — March 27, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
Thanks, Vince P, for calling me stupid (not!). I try to avoid using invective and insults on websites – please give me the benefit of the doubt and don’t insult me either. On the substantive point – what are you talking about? We’re not at war with Iran (yet). American soldiers are being killed by Shi’ite and Sunni guerillas in Iraq – maybe some of the Shi’ites have been armed by the Iranians, but are there actually Iranian soldiers in Iraq fighting against the Americans themselves? (And please answer without additional insults).
I also don’t know what you mean about Arash being anti-Israel. I haven’t seen that here. I don’t necessarily agree with everything he says about Israel, but that doesn’t make him anti-Israel.
Comment by Rebecca — March 27, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
Rebecca,
Good support! Thanks! :D
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Ella,
This is a reference on some US-engaged conflicts. Can I see your reference?
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Rebecca: I dont think Kaman is being deliberate in his bias , there’s an undertone I perceive.. its not a big deal. I sholdn’t have mentioned it.
Comment by Vince P — March 27, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
Vince P,
:)
Comment by Kamangir — March 27, 2007 @ 8:32 pm
Ella:
Good job on enumerating IR’s hegemonic aspiration…
Comment by Serendip — March 27, 2007 @ 8:47 pm
IR’s latest adventurism is in Chechnya–
The Russians truning their backs against Iran was also payback for Iranian involvement in Chechnya: by not following the various agreements made between the Kremlin and Tehran, and still continuing to infiltrate into the Chechen region, Russia has pretty much had it with Iranian ‘help’. Plus Gazprom took one look at the oil infrastructure in Iran and wanted nothing to do with it… that has got to say something as Gazprom is *used* to dealing with highly neglected and run-down petro infrastructure.
More than just a billing dispute, it is islamic expansionistic outlook trumping common business sense. I find that sort of thing lacking in the regime in Iran. Common sense of any sort. And I do not like the consequences of that for the people of Iran who are the primary victims of the regime there.
Yes the regime is good at tactical move against its preceived enemies but in the long-run and strategically, it has badly miscalculated its moves.
Comment by Serendip — March 27, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
Archer
On Islamic Jihad : http://www.omedia.org/Show_Article.asp?DynamicContentID=2024&MenuID=603&ThreadID=1014010, also look under terrorist organizations in any book concerning terrorism
On KSA: unfortunately don’t have name of newspaper but you may want to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Arab_relations#Saudi_Arabia
http://americanhistory.about.com/library/fastfacts/blffterrorism6.htm
On Hamas – can’t give you the name of the newspaper but last month Hamas said that it gets support from Iran
Hizbullah: Do I really need a reference? Nevertheless go to any newspaper, book or blog from Lebanon
On South America: Read anything on Tri-border area.
I do not go by one source, prefer to have a combination.
As for Imperial wishes of IRI ……….you have read Khomeini, haven’t you?
The “war” references …………..read wikipedia under “WAR”
Comment by ella — March 28, 2007 @ 1:55 am
Many people the world over think Americans love war and want what everyone has and will take it if they have a mind to.
That is the opposite of what America and Americans want.
The fact that even our so called friends have been lead (and in some cases even taught those lies) to believe this is something that Americans just don’t understand.
I appears your one of those that we just don’t understand. It’s a pity too, because in all the wars we have engaged in, where we have lost thousands of our young people, where we have spent billions of our treasure (and it is our treasure, as we are the taxpayers) we don’t occupy any land except where our soldiers are buried.
The fact that we had our role classified in Iraq as occupiers has more to do with us being in the position to try and provide security and money to rebuild Iraq does not mean that in truth or fact we are “occupiers”. We do not intend to stay, except for bases such as we have in other parts of the world.
But no matter how much or how we explain ourselves we are still seen in this false role, the role that yourself sees us.
It’s sad, and it is stupid.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
Comment by Papa Ray — March 28, 2007 @ 4:38 pm
Kamangir, your terrorist-supporting friend Siamak Zand (Estaki) has infiltrated an iranian forum under the name “sooski” – quite a fitting name for him ;) does he still post here?
Comment by Aryamehr — March 31, 2007 @ 2:06 am