Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Iraq Shiism Could Topple the Mullahs

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
chlamor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:23 PM
Original message
Iraq Shiism Could Topple the Mullahs
Iraqi Shiism could topple the mullahs
By Cameron Khosrowshahi International Herald Tribune

Thursday, March 24, 2005

Dealing with Iran
 
WASHINGTON At the start of the last century, some time before World War I, my grandfather left his native Iran for Najaf, Iraq. It was a common journey back then for the young and religious-minded in Iran, eager for guidance.The Shiite centers of learning were located in the shrine cities of Iraq, where the brightest theologians of their time taught in numerous seminaries. This Shiite base outside Iran became one of the critical factors in the downfall of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, which culminated in the Islamic revolution in 1979. The religious classes had a network of followers and funding that existed beyond the reach of the Pahlavi state, which could never completely crush their opposition. Back then, Iraq contained the seeds of upheaval in neighboring Iran. Today, it does so once again.

American policy makers are understandably concerned with the rise of the Shiite community to political dominance in Iraq, particularly now with the candidacy of the seemingly pro-Iranian Ibrahim al Jaafari for prime minister. America does not want another Iran in the region, particularly as the Islamic Republic presses its nuclear ambitions.

At the same time, viable options against the mullahs are limited. While Europe and America are more united than ever on a diplomatic approach, their package of incentives is far from certain to be accepted. It will be difficult to convince Iran to completely give up a nuclear program that has broadly become a source of national pride.

<snip>

But there is a more organic way to effect change in Iran using the same networks that contributed to its last revolution. Rather than worrying about Iran's influence over Iraq, we should be harnessing the strength of Iraq's newly empowered Shiites against the regime in Iran. Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the spiritual leader of Iraq's Shiites, is cut from a different cloth from the ruling clerics in Tehran.
Sistani's religious credentials and learning dwarf those of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, his counterpart in Iran. There are many Iranians who would rather listen to the Iranian-born Sistani if he chooses to speak to them. Moreover, his call to freedom will be couched within a language they understand, that of tradition and religious scholarship.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/03/23/opinion/edkamran.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Maple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. There aren't
any 'emerging democracies' in the ME.

And Bush is up to his ass in alligators
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. You mean theocracy because thats what it will be
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Have you been talking to Bill Maher lately?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. "Emerging democracy" ?
Yeah, right.

And I'm glad you don't make any distinction between Right & Wrong. Of course, that's what "we leftwingers" do, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grumpy old fart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Actually, dictatorships are much easier to deal with.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yes. It's easier to buy off a dictator than a whole country.
If the dictator gets uppity, topple him or invade.

Of course, if you invade, you'll anger much of the country. They might like to see the bastard gone, but tend to be touchy about dead babies & destroyed cities. So you'd better install a friendly regime after the invasion. With the wonders of electronic voting, you can even make it look like a democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Randi_Listener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Saddam is a motherfucker.
And he had JACK SHIT as far as ICBM technology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chopper Donating Member (345 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. uh...
Dictatorships answer to no one.

the shah of iran answered to us. so did any number of dictators in central and south america.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chlamor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Democracy on the March in the Middle East
is the manufactured reality of the US State Dept. Problem is it is not the reality nor is it the desire. The last thing the WH hooligans want is a peoples movement. A perfect illustration would be the tightly controlled society of America itself. Here is more:



What the US campaign is clearly not about is the promotion of democracy in either Lebanon or Syria, where the most plausible alternative to the Assad regime are radical Islamists. In a pronouncement which defies satire, Bush insisted on Tuesday that Syria must withdraw from Lebanon before elections due in May "for those elections to be free and fair". Why the same point does not apply to elections held in occupied Iraq - where the US has 140,000 troops patrolling the streets, compared with 14,000 Syrian soldiers in the Lebanon mountains - or in occupied Palestine, for that matter, is unexplained. And why a UN resolution calling for Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon has to be complied with immediately, while those demanding an Israeli pullout from Palestinian and Syrian territory can be safely ignored for 38 years, is apparently unworthy of comment.

<snip>

The claim that democracy is on the march in the Middle East is a fraud. It is not democracy, but the US military, that is on the march. The Palestinian elections in January took place because of the death of Yasser Arafat - they would have taken place earlier if the US and Israel hadn't known that Arafat was certain to win them - and followed a 1996 precedent. The Iraqi elections may have looked good on TV and allowed Kurdish and Shia parties to improve their bargaining power, but millions of Iraqis were unable or unwilling to vote, key political forces were excluded, candidates' names were secret, alleged fraud widespread, the entire system designed to maintain US control and Iraqis unable to vote to end the occupation. They have no more brought democracy to Iraq than US-orchestrated elections did to south Vietnam in the 1960s and 70s. As for the cosmetic adjustments by regimes such as Egypt's and Saudi Arabia's, there is not the slightest sign that they will lead to free elections, which would be expected to bring anti-western governments to power.

<snip>

What has actually taken place since 9/11 and the Iraq war is a relentless expansion of US control of the Middle East, of which the threats to Syria are a part. The Americans now have a military presence in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman and Qatar - and in not one of those countries did an elected government invite them in. Of course Arabs want an end to tyrannical regimes, most of which have been supported over the years by the US, Britain and France: that is the source of much anti-western Muslim anger. The dictators remain in place by US licence, which can be revoked at any time - and managed elections are being used as another mechanism for maintaining pro-western regimes rather than spreading democracy.

Jack Straw is right about one thing: there's no happy future in the regional status quo. His government could play a crucial role in helping to promote a real programme for liberty and democracy in the Middle East: it would need to include a commitment to allow independent media such as al-Jazeera to flourish; an end to military and financial support for despots; and a withdrawal of all foreign forces from the region. Now that would herald a real dawn of freedom.

http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_16354.shtml

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
chlamor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. Afghanistan is one big US Jail-That's freedom?
I doubt you'll take the time to read and deeply consider this article and then look at the overall patterns. Of course US has highest rate of incarceration in world but it's not systemic. Or is it? World's greatest polluter? US military by far. Who will use 7.5 billion gallons of fuel for Iraq blowing holes in Iraqi children and the ozone? Take a guess. Now you can go back to supporting the regime that oppresses you if only you'd look.


Guardian: Afghanistan 'one big US jail.'

Friday, March 18 2005 @ 08:56 PM Eastern Standard Time
Contributed by: Admin

To hear Human Rights Watch tell it, Afghanistan is still the same shithole it was before the US went in - only now it contains a vast prison network, run by us.

Washington likes to hold up Afghanistan as an exemplar of how a rogue regime can be replaced by democracy. Meanwhile, human-rights activists and Afghan politicians have accused the US military of placing Afghanistan at the hub of a global system of detention centres where prisoners are held incommunicado and allegedly subjected to torture. The secrecy surrounding them prevents any real independent investigation of the allegations. "The detention system in Afghanistan exists entirely outside international norms, but it is only part of a far larger and more sinister jail network that we are only now beginning to understand," Michael Posner, director of the US legal watchdog Human Rights First, told us.

<snip>

Prisoner transports crisscross the country between a proliferating network of detention facilities. In addition to the camps in Gardez, there are thought to be US holding facilities in the cities of Khost, Asadabad and Jalalabad, as well as an official US detention centre in Kandahar, where the tough regime has been nicknamed "Camp Slappy" by former prisoners. There are 20 more facilities in outlying US compounds and fire bases that complement a major "collection centre" at Bagram air force base. The CIA has one facility at Bagram and another, known as the "Salt Pit", in an abandoned brick factory north of Kabul. More than 1,500 prisoners from Afghanistan and many other countries are thought to be held in such jails, although no one knows for sure because the US military declines to comment.

Camp Salerno, which houses the 1,200 troops of US Combined Taskforce Thunder, was being expanded when we arrived. Army tents were being replaced with concrete dormitories. The detention facility, concealed behind a perimeter of opaque green webbing, was being modernised and enlarged. Ensconced in a Soviet-era staff building was the camp's commanding officer, Colonel Gary Cheeks. He listened calmly as we asked about the allegations of torture, deaths and disappearances at US detention facilities including Salerno. We read to him from a complaint made by a UN official in Kabul that accused the US military of using "cowboy-like excessive force". He eased forward in his chair: "There have been some tragic accidents for which we have apologised. Some people have been paid compensation."

<snip>

What has been glimpsed in Afghanistan is a radical plan to replace Guantánamo Bay. When that detention centre was set up in January 2002, it was essentially an offshore gulag - beyond the reach of the US constitution and even the Geneva conventions. That all changed in July 2004. The US supreme court ruled that the federal court in Washington had jurisdiction to hear a case that would decide if the Cuban detentions were in violation of the US constitution, its laws or treaties. The military commissions, which had been intended to dispense justice to the prisoners, were in disarray, too. No prosecution cases had been prepared and no defence cases would be readily offered as the US National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers had described the commissions as unethical, a decision backed by a federal judge who ruled in January that they were "illegal". Guantánamo was suddenly bogged down in domestic lawsuits. It had lost its practicality. So a global prison network built up over the previous three years, beyond the reach of American and European judicial process, immediately began to pick up the slack. The process became explicit last week when the Pentagon announced that half of the 540 or so inmates at Guantánamo are to be transferred to prisons in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,1284,1440836,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Village Idiot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. You should change your username...
maybe to RightWingTroll, perhaps?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Randi_Listener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. You're posting this bullshit again?
It's not "right or wrong". It's fucking wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chopper Donating Member (345 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. hm...
needed change?

i didn't know that replacing a neutered dictatorship with a theocratic, Iran-friendly mullah-ocracy was 'needed'. i doubt Iraqi women will feel the same way, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. I Have Been Thinking This For Some Time, But...
now I'm certain of it. Anyone who has blue or liberal or left or Dem. in their user-names should be automatically treated with suspicion.
I mean, come on, could you be any more obvious?

Jay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Randi_Listener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. They've already been caught for the mounting bullshit.
It's another fucking invasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seriousstan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. You may want to talk to ZenLefty,Midlodemocrat or leftchick about this.
After all, they are all MODS!

OOPs, almost forgot socialdemocrat1981 and DemExpat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Well, Stan,...
I think everyone got the drift. Not surprising you didn't though.

Jay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plasticsundance Donating Member (786 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
9. Emerging democracy in the ME ... yeah right
Take a look at Lebanon recently ...

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=13685

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/23/international/middleeast/23lebanon.html

"BEIRUT, Lebanon, Wednesday, March 23 (AP) - Two people were killed and several more wounded early Wednesday morning when a bomb exploded at a shopping center in Jounieh, an anti-Syrian Christian town 10 miles north of Beirut, the police and local television stations said.

Concerning Iraq, it is likely that Ibrahim al-Jaffari will become the Prime Minister of Iraq, and Jaffari has very close ties to Iran. Unlikely candidate to push Iran in a different direction.

"Is anyone surprised that the same people who came along with the Americans -- the same puppets who all had a go at the presidency last year -- are the ones who came out on top in the elections? Jaffari, Talbani, Barazani, Hakim, Allawi, Chalabi? exiles, convicted criminals and war lords. Welcome to the new Iraq.

Ibraheim Al-Jaffari, the head of the pro-Iran Da'awa party gave an interview the other day. He tried very hard to pretend he was open-minded and that he wasn't going to turn the once-secular Iraq into a fundamentalist Shia state but the fact of the matter remains that he is the head of the Da'awa party. The same party that was responsible for some of the most infamous explosions and assassinations in Iraq during the last few decades. This is the same party that calls for an Islamic Republic modeled like Iran. Most of its members have spent a substantial amount of time in Iran.

Jaffari cannot separate himself from the ideology of his party.


http://www.aina.org/news/20050226103359.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tempest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #9
22. Egypt just arrested a candidate running against Mubarak
So much for Mubarak's "democratic" reforms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jayfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
17. SELF DELETE
Edited on Thu Mar-24-05 04:32 PM by jayfish
Jay
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-24-05 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. "Tragic Accidents"
Like beating detainees to death, smothering them to death, electrocuting them till their hearts stop.

Of the thousands of Insurgents in Iraq or Afghanistan have any ever had a trial?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC