Another perspective in Iran
The guys in power in Iran may indeed be the bad guys -- there's ample evidence. But that doesn't mean the guy leading the protest is a good guy. The Middle East remains far more complicated than chest-thumping Republican chickenhawks want you to believe. That's why Obama's careful response seems appropriate, with condemnation for the obvious excesses.
Interesting article from Congressional Quarterly illustrates how hard it is to neatly pigeonhole players over there.
He may yet turn out to be the avatar of Iranian democracy, but three decades ago Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.
Mousavi, prime minister for most of the 1980s, personally selected his point man for the Beirut terror campaign, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-pur, and dispatched him to Damascus as Iran's ambassador, according to former CIA and military officials.
The ambassador in turn hosted several meetings of the cell that would carry out the Beirut attacks, which were overheard by the National Security Agency.
Comments
Hush, Max. You're gonna confuse the chicken hawks. You know we gotta install our good guys in place of all those tinpot dictators over there.
Ok, your turn now, chicken sh . . . er, hawks, I bet you can tell us how good our tinpot dictators have turned out to be for both their countries and ours.
Posted by: Doigotta![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 23, 2009 03:22 PM
First of all reporting anything by "former CIA agent" is suspect. They are always covering their asses and pushing their secret agendas and getting the government of the USA in deep shit.
If you have a strong stomach click on eLwood for a brief history of CIA 'missions.'
Posted by: eLwood![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 23, 2009 03:40 PM
Max: "The Middle East remains far more complicated than chest-thumping Republican chickenhawks want you to believe.".
Absolutely.
Just to offer an "anecdote" (as eLwood would call it... grin... ) during my AEGON days, we had several Middle Eastern employees at Cedar Rapids. Two men were both from Iran... one Sunni, one Shiite. Normally they got along well, but we were all working late one night and during a pizza break the conversation turned to... yep... Iran. After a few minutes, I thought we were going to have a Holy War between the two men. I literally had to send them to their cubicles.
There is a degree of hatred between the Islamic factions that I don't think most Americans understand... or can even BEGIN to understand. Our previous administration assumed they were all just stupid sandrats and treated them as such... but they are a proud people who don't like being treated as inferiors.
The idea of an Iran with a nuclear device is disturbing, but hopefully President Obama is on the right path with his caution, and with his candor to them.
Posted by: Slingerland![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 23, 2009 04:42 PM
one Sunni, one Shiite.<<
One sect believes Islamic leaders must be direct descendants of Mohamed, the other doesn't.
Like Baptists vs Catholics lots of other petty differences surround the Big One. They do kill each
other over the basic difference, regularly.
I always forget which group says origins are most important.
If you really want to watch a war of words, put a Jew and just about any Shiite or Sunni in the same room and mention Palestine.
Posted by: eLwood![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 23, 2009 07:40 PM