Subscribe via Email
Subscribe via Email
Give Iran the bomb: it might make the regime more pliable
You see, if I were an Iranian politician, my mind would be made up. If we were all sitting in Teheran and puffing our post-breakfast pipes and pondering the question of Iranian nukes, I am afraid that we might come to a very different answer.
Never mind the bleating from the UN and the snarlings of the Bush Administration and the stream of démarches from Margaret Beckett, which I would file immediately in the bin. If I were the member for Qom South, I would feel that it was my patriotic duty to equip my country, as fast as possible, with the biggest, shiniest, pointiest and most explosive thermonuclear device on the market.
I would want an Iranian nuke not because nukes are some kind of national virility symbol. It’s nothing to do with the great spirit of bourgeois rivalry that normally actuates the human race: it’s not like wanting a flat-screen television, just because the neighbours have got one.
I think I might genuinely and not unreasonably believe that the possession of a nuclear bomb, and the ability to deliver it over some distance, was the only sure-fire means of protecting my country, and my poor huddled constituents in Qom South, from the possibility of an attack by America.
If I wanted any support for this belief, I would only have to look across the Shatt-al-Arab to the carnage now taking place in Iraq. There, the Americans used their incomparably superior military power to topple a regime, and plunge a neighbouring country into civil war. The tragedy and irony of the whole thing is that Bush managed to take out the one regime in the “Axis of Evil” that was not, in fact, developing weapons of mass destruction.
Indeed, that seems to be precisely why he targeted Iraq rather than the other two, and it is now retrospectively obvious why Saddam Hussein was so foxy and tricksy with the UN weapons inspectors: the silly old fool was pathetically trying to suggest that he might have something up his sleeve after all, in the hope of deterring an attack by the Pentagon.
He failed, and the result is that 58,000 Iraqis are dead as well as thousands of coalition troops, and the whole catastrophe has hugely accelerated the nuclear programme of the other two evil members of the Axis. Iran is going hell-for-leather, and North Korea is now scaring us all witless with the seismographic proof of its own entry into the nuclear club.
It is precisely because Iraq has gone so wrong that Bush and Blair are now morally and politically incapacitated from leading us through the quagmire. Who on earth would trust Tony Blair, if he were to tell us that we had to go for a military solution? Who would believe a word he said?
And how can Bush instruct the Iranians not to equip themselves with a bomb, when he has been unable to stop the secret of nuclear destruction being unveiled to the North Koreans?
Kim Jong-il beats all-comers in the global whacko stakes. If he can have a bomb, why can’t the mullahs? No one can pretend that any of this is good news. In an ideal world, the Israelis would fly to Iran and repeat their magnificent success at Osirak in 1986, where they bombed Saddam’s nuclear capacity in its desert cradle.
But I vividly remember a conversation two years ago with one of the most fearsome hawks in Jerusalem, and he told me that option was no longer available: the stuff is all fizzing away already in hardened bunkers, and the sites are too scattered.
So what is the answer? The answer, of course, is not to panic, and also not to reach for our six-guns, and not to spout the language of Wild West ultimatums. There are two very different regimes, and their ambitions call for different responses.
My despairing feeling is that, in the case of Iran, we should admit that it’s checkmate, as they say in Persian. The Iranians are one day going to possess a nuclear bomb; there is almost certainly nothing we can do about it; all our blustering and threats are pointless. Indeed, if all else fails, there may even be a case for giving the Iranians the bomb — that’s right: maybe it is time for the Americans to take control themselves of this unstoppable programme.
If I am right in thinking that an Iranian bomb is not only inevitable, but also corresponds to the wishes of the people of Iran, then perhaps we could turn this whole thing on its head. Perhaps it is time to end the sense of terror, and suspicion, and escalating menace. Perhaps the Americans could actually assist with the technology, as they assist the United Kingdom, in return for certain conditions: that the Iranian leadership stops raving about attacking Israel, for instance, and that progress is made towards democracy, and so on.
The Iranian public might feel grateful, and engaged, and not demonised. Would it mean the end of Israel, which has 200 warheads of its own? Of course not. The logic of mutually assured destruction still applies, and even the mullahs are not mad enough to take on a country that could turn their desert into molten glass.
It is true that the Iranian regime is scary; but there have been movements towards pluralism. China and Pakistan both have the bomb, and these are not conspicuously democratic. I am acutely conscious that this may seem faintly barmy, and I should stress that this is not a policy, and certainly not a Tory policy, but simply an idea I am running up the flagpole, and I suggest it only because we seem to be short of anything better.
The tragedy of growing up is that human beings acquire the means of killing themselves and others. The human race now collectively has that power. The Iranians will join in soon enough. It might be sensible if they did so in an atmosphere of co-operation and understanding, and not amid intensifying threats and hysteria, especially when those threats are known to be bogus.
As for North Korea, it is obviously time to talk and not to threaten, though, if there was some way of quietly disabling Kim’s bombs until the end of his hideous regime, we should certainly consider it. Where is James Bond these days?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Boris, very well said. I think that is the most rational argument I have heard yet on the subject. Of course, with the Americans stubbornly refusing diplomatic relations with Iran (thus proving them right, America *does* hate them, clearly.) this may be difficult.
It reminds me very much of a policy from Sec. Stimson in 1945, which I wrote about here. His advice, had it been taken would likely have avoided much of the intensity of the cold war.
Mutually assured destruction is the best force for peace in the modern world.
Just because they might achieve this by themselves, it doesn’t mean that we should help them to do it.
If your neighbour wanted to cut down a tree in your garden, you don’t help to do it. You’re still going to have a fallen tree.
Tom? I agree it seems crazy, but there is no might about it. Iran will develop Nuclear weapons. Even worse, Iran and North Korea trade, and then they can share technology. Would we rather create a stronger Nuclear alliance against us, or stretch out a hand and welcome some people to the international community?
“it is now retrospectively obvious why Saddam Hussein was so foxy and tricksy with the UN weapons inspectors:”
The key word here is “retrospectively “.I have to be honest I think this article is rather silly . Yes Saddaam did look very guilty and that was one of the reasons for the action. According to this logic the guiltier they look the more likely they are not to be.
This does not work looking forward and Conservative carping about the mistake of the war is weak weak weak.They supported it with or without WMDs and rightly so.
I entirely agree with Boris, if only because I’ve been saying exactly this for the past two or three years: if you’ve got nukes, you’re not going to have the US army driving through your streets any day soon. The result will be a reginal balance of power, rather than the present imbalance.
But I don’t see that the Americans should be the ones supplying them, given that it’s the Americans who pose the greatest threat to Iran. No, it has to be Pakistan, or China, or maybe even France.
And with luck, they’ve already taken delivery of a half dozen or so.
Newmania? So now suspicion alone is enough to authorise military invasion and the killing of civilians? Nonsense. Hans Blix said they didn’t have weapons, we trusted the weapons inspectors until they gave the wrong answer then we went in anyway and thousands of people have died because of it. The war in Iraq is a moral blackhole.
The thing that I hate most about the ‘coallition’ is how utterly morally bankrupt they have become. I detest what has been done in my name and refuse to accept that it was the right thing to do at the time. If anything time has proven that lose of us who were against it at the time were correct, although to be honest, I know of no one who would want to have thousands of children to die brutal deaths just to prove they were right.
‘even the mullahs are not mad enough to take on a country that could turn their desert into molten glass’ (Boris)
Perhaps not directly but they were happy to pass all those rockets onto Hezbollah. They are happy to spend their oil dollars giving handouts to the victims of the war in Lebanon, buying support for their Hezbollah ‘resistance’.
I think Iran will continue to threaten Israel, now most of the Arab states have stopped threatening them Iran seem to have taken up the fight. It’s a popular policy in the Middle East to promise the destruction of Israel, and Ahmadinejad seems to be a popularist president.
I don’t think its right that Iran get off scot free for what happened to Lebanon either. They were messing directly with European and US interests (i.e. a peaceful and democratic Lebanon) by arming Hezbollah against our will.
There should be sanctions than ban Iran from exporting any weapons whatsoever, and the US should adopt a hardline Israel-type stance against them (i.e. mess with us and we’ll turn your clock back 20 years).
Bush started all this, why is he going soft all of a sudden? He should finish his work in his ‘axis of evil’ or a nuclear ‘axis of evil’ will be his legacy.
Pete - WMDs were not the reason for the action which was defence.As the consequences of doing nothing are never going to happen we will never know for sure whether it was the right thing to do. I see no special need to have a high minded moral reason to attack a genocidal dictator in the furtherance of our interest and safety. It is certainly tragic that the Iraqui people cannot be dissuaded from killing each other but I think there is a limit to which you can ascribe blame elsewhere.
Speaking of a moral abyss I often listen to the high moral clap trap of the Liberal Party . I find it therefore quite unspeakable that for local gain they have made an alliance with the BNP in Calderdale . I only hope that they will learn that you cannot be a national party and change your position by geography.
I am a committed Conservative but was such a thing to be allowed to happen in our wonderful party I would leave that very day. Time for the National party to react can be allowed but not much . Have they no shame? It seems not .
There’s another reason the average Iranian might well feel justified in supporting its government in pursuing a nuclear weapon: what on earth gives America (and Britain) the right to go round telling all and sundry who should and shouldn’t have nuclear weapons when THEY’VE QUITE CLEARLY GOT HUNDREDS OF THEM THEMSELVES.
I think the Iranian regime sucks. But the world doesn’t belong to the West, no matter how superior we might be tempted to feel at times.
WMDs were not the reason for the action which was defence. (newmania)
Defence against what, if not WMDs?
NewMania, I agree absolutley that I too would leave any party that linked themselves in any way, no matter how local to the BNP.
But for the war in Iraq how did we attack to defend ourself? Sadaam was so demasculated after GW1 and all those sanctions that he couldn’t have launched a credible attack on anyone. It was not defence, it was agression. Sadaam posed us no threat. And clearly the Iraqi people are no better off now anyway, arguably they are worse off. Yes he was an evil bastard, but the same crimes are going on now, more people are dying, and its heading towards being a Muslim nation instead of a secularist one, which it was previously. There was no link between Sadaam’s Iraq and Al-Quaeda, now Iraq is a hive of Al-Quaeda activity. If Sadaam was a threat how come he couldn’t even defend the country?
As for North Korea, some scientists are saying it looks like they either didn’t test an atom bomb or that they cocked it up.
Their attempts at rocket manufacturing have also proved to be a bit patchy too, so I doubt the US are too worried.
US defence companies such as Lockheed Martin, on the other hand, must be rubbing their hands together at the thought of Japan re-arming. One good reason why the US might want to avoid military intervention.
“The logic of mutually assured destruction” does not work here, because we are looking at a fanatic Islamic regime that approves of suicide as a means of destroying one’s opponent. If you are headed straight for Paradise, why would you care that your country gets turned into molten glass in the process. You are a holy martyr, a shahid, and your 72 virgins are waiting for you…
Hi Boris
You got a mistake here.there is no Qom south in Iran!it is just Qom a religious city in central part of Iran beside the salt desert.I am totaly agree with you but don’t forget that this Malls never think about democracy even they have nukes.but about Israel they are good traders.
Hi Boris,
Why bomb is good?????
Lets go after any body India, Pakistani, Israel, …, France, UK, USA make then give a way or lets every body have it
It is not fair you have it and make me force Kill my nation why because 1 or 3,000 people die from your nation.
What kind of democratic way killing 650,000 people is good or no problem but dieing of 3,000 people is wow.
(I am sorry for every single life but can be this excuse for killing another nation????)
Ok if bad for every body of not then fuck off.
“The logic of mutually assured destruction” does not work here, because we are looking at a fanatic Islamic regime that approves of suicide as a means of destroying one’s opponent. (Simone)
Suicide bombing is a tactic, not an ethic.
Japanese kamikaze pilots were the suicide bombers of their time. But Japan itself did not commit suicide.
Iran won’t commit suicide either.
It seems even Iranians read Boris’ blog.
Perhaps we can do the negotiating here that George W Bush is incapable of doing?
PETE: Well my reading of it is this. The US after, in effect, suffering another pearl harbour was going to snuff out whatever rogue states in the Middle East they could. Discussions of the UN legality and the effective causus bellum (WMDs) were a pantomime which even down to junior level was not taken at face value. They were gestures at best .The Conservative Party at least were well aware of that as they have since admitted on more than one occasion, . So was Tony Blair
The US is our closest and only meaningful ally, the main strut of international security and the power that has, in the last resort been our friend. We could, of course, behave like France, a legend for amorality in International affairs, and hide behind American power as the guarantor of security, while sulking of in a dream of La Gloire. Or we could support our ally and play an honest part in the real international relationships that defend Liberal democracy.
The key to this, by my reading, is in understanding both of the impact of 9.11 andthe insubstantial ness notions of legality in international relations (International law is a myth !). Servile news coverage mostly played along, focussing on what was ephemeral opinion management.
I also think the lurking knowledge that this is the case is what so riles Liberals and other fantasists. The people they so despise, protect them as they protected Salman Rushdie (who sucks). This is a corpse under their tea table. It gives a rotting savour to the dainty hypocrisies they nibble upon and the querulous fury we hear in the fury of a child who knows he is in the wrong…
Once you throw away the veil (ho ho) it all starts to make more sense. The creation of a free and friendly Iraq was a laudable but secondary motive. We were there as part of our defence strategy in a wide sense and whether or not we could actually find WMDs at that time was not the issue. They would certainly have come. In part, the US was taking advantage of a political window of opportunity to shore up its own security.
This dissonance between the real relationships in the world that are centred around NATO not the UN or the EU is why it is so easy to pick holes in play moralities that crop up . It resolves itself back to “rightness ” in this way If Iraq had been a real sovereign state with real freedom then there would not have been problem in the first place ( With Iraq)
So far so good. Where, in my opinion we have gone wrong is in being tempted to play the major power on the world stage. We are no such thing and therefore have fewer obligations to do our bit. Some time ago we had done more than enough and should have set timetables for withdrawal that were achievable.
Tony Blair would not tell this truth, he played his phoney hand because it’s all he knows .Also he has (like other long serving Prime ministers) come to think of himself as a colossus on the world stage. All of this exaggerates our obligations to the point where we are risking British lives for the sake of “Looking important “. Nothing new there. You might put it this way. He has come to believe his own lies .I would like us out now and we would agree on this at least.
The core of my argument is in these ideas.
1 Continuity of international anarchy regularised only by ad hoc military accords and tribal loyalties
2 The strange language in which this is described for domestic consumption . ( UN baloney)
I would be interested to hear STEVEN L`s view, and also his brief history of business as usual is highly instructive …I think
All of this by the way is why some of the Conservative Party are so furious that in backing the war they have been placed in the position of being liars . Some would have supported the war on the traditional grounds I describe. Not all though, and I believe it would have been a similar story had they been in power. I have only a limited sympathy for the Conservative position. “We would have gone to war for the right reasons”
Now, the young men and women are driving around in death-trap jeeps. They are poorly supported and used as toy soldiers. They should be home and safe as soon as reasonable practicable. They have ,as ever , performed marvellously despite scandalously inadequate equipment .
Dear Boris,
You were lied to by Blair in Parliament over Iraq, and you knew it, and he assumed that you would make nothing of it, and that was justified. The suggestion that Iran should be given nuclear weapons to avoid the prospect of being made an invasion target by the country that you represent seems to avoid the question of responsibility. Also, Cicero is hardly an authority on the clarity of the distinction between law and civil war, since he managed to aggravate the Roman body politic by ensuring that plotters could be executed without trial if they failed to assemble their legions of veteran soldiery first.
Horace said that for the follies of their princes, the Greeks felt the whip. Perhaps we might better discuss what the member for Henley can achieve, in the one chamber we have left of our Parliament. I am unsure what my government’s policy is on our invasion of Iraq, and on what legal basis our troops remain. Has Parliament relinquished the authority to declare and end wars, essential to democracy? How often must Parliament authorise the occupation? Why has the United Nations not taken over the process of ‘regime change’? What steps has Parliament taken to ensure that it is not misled once more by the government over Bond’s vastly overemphasised intelligence reports? It seems that if the Iranians want to destroy British democracy, they have an ally in the prime minister- and if the Opposition remains as ineffectual as it has, they might be entitled to regard offers by our MPs to give them bombs as being somewhat after the fact. Would it be accurate to observe that the Commons not only includes former terrorists who have been excused the oath to the Crown, but that the most notorious terror attacks on this country have been carried out by bombers shown around Parliament by one of our politicians?
You touch on the subject of mutual assured destruction. Yet modern wars are not fought by states across borders, but by financed insurgency groups, or small cells of fanatics. I have read that the Americans have dismantled their search for bin Laden, his four wives and seventeen sons, though it seems scarcely credible- but in any case, they have scrupulously limited their extra-legal attentions to actual armed al-Qaeda terrorists, or those taking mystery bus tours among them, rather than hunting down sources of terror funding and propaganda in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. All I have learned about the London bombers is that their families didn’t know anything about their activities and resent any enquiries. They are meant to have been indoctrinated somewhere in Pakistan. Suppose they had used more effective methods or weapons and thousands had been killed, or tens of thousands- would mutual assured destruction be relevant then? Will we ever have a Report dealing with the invasion of Iraq and assessing its effectiveness at countering potential terrorist acts, rather than just one which fails to answer the question of Blair’s integrity on intelligence?
Boris, if you are interested, you could start with the issue of Cabinet committees, created for defence as this country emerged from Splendid Isolation and fallen into disuse because they threaten Blairite methods of decision-making without ultimate responsibility. However, it may be that your talents are better suited to the defence of English culture. After the defeat of France in 1940, Saint-Exupery mourned ‘Had France been France, she might have stood to the world as the common ideal round which the world would have rallied.’ The British don’t stand for some awful armed police state presided over by a media control fanatic who uses his own version of the language, and anyone who represents our culture defends us from that.
Best wishes,
‘Anecdota’
No worries, Boris! We will be making the bomb real soon. Don’t actually need the help of Americans either; you know we don’t want to be indebted to somebody. Just tell Israelis to keep out of the game, so as to avoid getting into a war, or else they will be wiped out of the map some time. We don’t want to make trouble for somebody, just want to protect our own sovereignty, but if Israelis want to get wiped out of the map, we will be happy to do them this favor, as you cannot deprive us forever.
Very insightful and still surprising from a Westerner. If Iran gets Nuclear weapon it will never use it because it knows well it will be completely gone the minute after. Therefore, there is no real danger from a nuclear Iran. The problem of the U.S. and its allies is not Iranian Atomic bomb or the danger for Israel, they don’t want to loose their current master-slave relations with Arab countries which will be gone by the emergence of a powerful Iran.
After suffering another Pearl Harbour? Thats incorrect, they suffered an attack from terrorists, not from a country. If Iran attacked America tomorrow, that would be different, but no nation attacked America this time. Are we to punish every Arab for what those ones did on 9/11? If so we’re no better than the terrorists.
Yes, Bush and Blair had decided before using the UN, I agree, but they obviously saw even then that they were in dodgy territory or they would not have looked for just cause via the UN, which came up with the answer they did not want.
The power of the US was not exactly helpful in 1940 when it was punishing any US citizen who came here to help defend freedom by removing their citizenship. Yes they were friends still, but there was no shoulder to shoulder when Hitler was trying to flatten London. They joined the military war when they were attacked. Yes, they made a huge impression on it, but they didn’t come in just to help their buddies. If your best friend chose to kill someone because they were nasty, would you help him dig in the knife?
You hear know ‘fury of a child who knows he is wrong’ from me, on the contrary, I’d not state my case if I didn’t believe it 100%. Yes, Sadaam was evil, but I believe that the west should prove itself better than evil by behaving morally better and treasuring the things we say we do, not by indulging in whatever two faced lies we feel like and devaluing human life. You don’t have to be a fantasist to believe the invasion was wrong, you just have to look at the chaos and the turmoil, you have to look at the suicide bombings, the rape, the murder, the secretarianism, the roll to civil war.
You have yet to name one way Iraq was a threat to our security, you throw your argument in that it was defence strategy and shoring up security, but how? Sadaam was not a threat. Tell me how Iraq was a threat to us, please.
You’re right tho, I agree we should bring them home, right now. Totally agree. But, I can’t see how you can think we should withdraw, yet support going in? Can we just globetrot destabilising countries and then leaving? At any rate, I agree, they should be home, not risking their lives everyday.
PETE: I am familiar of course with the point of view you express and have dealt with the points you raise ( I think )or at least intended to.I think your opinion is naieve and overly concerned with being “good” .I am chiefly concerned with the safety of this country , its interests and relatively unconcerned about being morally better than this or that regime . Generally moral equivalence is misused by the other side ( on this) I feel .
Sorry I didn`t mean to be rude I was on a mental soap box and got a bit carried away ….About half way through I seem to have morphed into Young Winston.I laughed when I read it back…..when will I learn
I think,you don’t know mollas.
If they achieve nuclear power, it will be the beginning of a new story. Cold war against Israel is the only excuse that help them to govern to Iranian people. So they don’t lose it even you grant them advantages.
Iranian people have a proverb. we say they are like a cat, when you threw them up, They come done to the ground on their feet very calmly.
You need a mola against a mola to win, find that mola.
Good,Boris
I am an iranian medical doctor and in political issue,I am opposed to my goverment.I belive west
democracy as my ideal regim
but I am nationalist and completely accept your opinion about our(iranian)
nuclear program although we are peaceable people and don\\\’t like to have atomic bomb.However I thank for your justly idea and I wish that you be elected as britain first minister as soon.
Be successful
NewMania, worry not, you weren’t rude, or at least, I didn’t pick up on it if you were. Apologies likewise if I was.
I understand your point about Morals, it leads back to arguments such as that over Dresden. However, I still just can’t see Iraq as a threat to us.
Anyway, have you seen Young Winston? With Micheal York? Not a bad movie.
BJ, who’d have thought you had such an Iranian following? If we find out you have a Ppongyang based branch of your fan club too, surely you’ll have to be PM.
The creation of a free and friendly Iraq was a laudable but secondary motive. We were there as part of our defence strategy in a wide sense and whether or not we could actually find WMDs at that time was not the issue. They would certainly have come. In part, the US was taking advantage of a political window of opportunity to shore up its own security. (newmania)
Once Al Qaeda, WMDs, spreading democracy, and all the rest has been disposed of, the invocation of “defence strategy in a wide sense” and “window of opportunity to shore up its own security” sounds to me like a slightly coded way of saying “securing control of vital Middle East oil reserves”.
Why not just say this? Why beat about the bush? Why not call a spade a spade?
My question is: did they succeed in this primary geopolitical goal? As best I can make out, they didn’t even manage to do that.
they don’t want to loose their current master-slave relations with Arab countries (Arj Tuba)
Quite so. But it appears they are losing it anyway. And what will be the consequences of that?
You need a mola against a mola to win, find that mola (alireza)
I suspect these ‘molas’ must be the Islamic clerics that us poor dumb Westerners call ‘mullahs’.
Well said Borris
I wish all British politicians could be as liberal as you are .
You are right we ( Persian people ) see our politicians as traitors if they don’t do any thing possible to protect our sovereignty.
Well done Borris
Dear Boris,
You are Right, that’s the only and real solution, I think world should think about it very seriously before making any unrealistic judgment.
Wish you good luck,
Nick
Hi Boris
there is a solution in there. iranian regim proud of themselves to challange big powers. to move them back from their postion and see their humiliation, and how fearfull they are start with United Emarat.3 island in Persian Gold. 1-Emarate should claim back those islands.2-US should support his alias (UE).3- US set nuke missles in UE, pointed to Qum city in iran, if iran wanted to attack Emarat.
4- all this should happen to support UE, not in the context of argues beween US and Iran.
Iran regim will fear of UE claim, because they don’t want put themselves down in front of Iranian nation.
Boris, I’m Iranian, and I think if Iran spends its money and energy on infrastructures of the country, it would be a “real” and “better” powerful Iran than if spending them on making atomic bombs, as you think. However, your argument seems logical and interesting as an Englishman, certainly it’s towards the benefits of UK, not the people of Iran, who are the “real Iran”.
Now that we seem to have briefly opened up a direct line of communication with our Persian brothers and sisters, perhaps we might ask them what us Brits should do in the parlous present state of affairs:
1) Not worry too much?
2) Stock up on good single malt whisky?
3) Convert to Islam, and all start wearing burqas? Men too.
4) Dig ourselves graves, and throw ourselves into them, and hope that we will subsequently Rapturously arise from them?
5) Try a bit harder to get the white ball near the baulk cushion when playing snooker safety shots? …and remember Paul Hunter.
Well,
We don’t agree with Nuclear weapons but in an unequal world of western powers against middle eastern countries what we can do, what can we do?
We never suffer dictation of their programs to control the world for their own.
An Iranian Student
As an Iranian I still don’t believe that Iranian government is looking for nuclear bomb at all. Why should they? Have a look at the Persian or IRAN histories have they ever sought war?
I am quite sure you will see the answer as “NO”. We always seek peace for the whole world.
What’s hilarious about that, apart from the perfect English?
Sounds to me like a pure Iranian sentiment.
Hi Boris,
as an iranian I think
America will give us the Atomic bomb,finally,
and then, our desert will turn into molten gravel,rapidly.
Speaking purely in my capacity as a very senior Islamic cleric, with dreams of a future Caliphate that extends all the way to Glasgow, I generally tend to find myself agreeing with Future Sultan Boris’ intriguing suggestion.
Although I will agree that Glasgow will be almost certainly be a bit of a tough nut to crack, Muslim-wise…
Hi Boris,
As an Iranian, I think the best way to protect a country against the foreign threats is formation of democracy there. The regime without A-bomb is trampling the certain civil rights of people; suppose what will happen when they acquire to nuke weapons!
Dear Mr. Boris,
I am not sure if what you said today was for the sake of your liberal thoughts toward a country like mine, or for the sake of your own….you know all the stories on Britain and Iran all through history , and I am definitely not a political analyst. Yet, as an Iranian who is learning not to stress on being one, but rather being a universal human (and I believe everyone must begin to think that way and see the right and wrong , not in a certain nationality but in what we all are), I think as much as my country has the right to claim nuclear power, it might be dangerous , since the rulers are not to be trusted….that is the paradox here which makes me understand the world’s concern, but no administration has the slightest right to consider itself as the lord of all others and dictate policies, rights, etc.
And one little comment for dear Indlex : The Iranian women do not wear BORGA, you should probably visit there soon to have a better understanding of people’s ways there, also another commenter has stated that when mollas die, they will expect 72 virgins!!??? Please take the time and study a bit more on Islam if you care to commnent as there is no such words in Muslims’ book,I assure you have been greately misinformed!
Hi Boris,
As an Iranian, I think that your idea has fair enough for both sides. However, I should mention again that we don’t care about nuclear weapons! Who dares to use it these days? Supposedly we have it, do you think that Iran can use it? USA and others will flat Iran with a good excuse! I’m totally against to have any nuclear weapon for all the countries included USA! But we have to have our independency to western countries in all the aspects such as nuclear energy.
And one more for people who madly love war! I think before making any war with others it’s good to think about them and respect others idea. As far as western countries think that they are the LORD of the world, other countries such as Iran, North Korea, will try to break this point of view.
It’s good to see that still there are some realistic persons in your country to stop idealistic mistakes!
K.
Dear Boris
Please cut the crab and take Iranian oil and let them live! Stupid Ahmadinejad and dictator Saddam came to power indirectly by the west. Forget about the economical losses, hundred of thousands of Iranians have suffered under torture of Shah and stupidity of mullahs after overthrow of Dr. Mosaddegh and revolution of 1979. Any movement at any nuclear sites or military bases in Iran could be seen by the USA’s satillites and whole Iran could be nuked to ashes.
Please stop the game and take only their oil not their lives.
Thinking about local (national) economy before thinking of its direct effect on extreme polarization of world, about local cultural enrichment before thinking to fill the extreme gap of ilitracy in the world which prevents a real dialogue between nations, and let me say sending solidiers to resolve the problems before social workers, before responding to questions. Boris I want to add a mixture of egoistic relativism from one side and militaristic incomprehension from the other side has ruined our world. There is no idea of a politicosphere, i.e. any political action in one part of the world has its practical consequence in the other extrem of the world. Iran is suffering from many things but not surly from lack of atomic bom.
THE WESR SHOULD NOT BE WORRIED. THE TARGET IS IRAN ITSELF.
As an Iranian, I think the western world should not be worried about Iran’s acquiring nuclear weapon. In my view, the main victims of such a policy and the primary target of any potential use of the bomb will be the Iranians themselves. As cynical as it might read, in my opinion the Molas’s objective is above all achieving a strong deterrent against the democratic aspirations of Millions of Iranians inside as well as the large Diasporas to change the theocratic and totalitarian regime any time soon. The western world should not be worried at all. The Molas are actually smart enough to make deals with any government (even US and Israel) around the world not to disturb their pleasure of their ruthless rule. The number of political prisoners inside Iran’s prisons, students killed on daily basis in demonstrations against the regime and the chain persecution of the opposition is the best illustrator of the wicked plan in their minds to even more strengthen their grip over the country and smother the voices crying for freedom. The target is only Iran. Don’t worry!
Interestingly, nobody seems to have a problem with Egypt re-starting its nuclear program. The US has even vowed to support it. Strange, given the Egyptian links to the whole anti-American movement.
What happened to the idea of a “democratic” Middle East? Egypt doesn’t quite count as a democratic government despite the move in 2005 to have more than one candidate for president (CIA, World Factbook). Perhaps it has something to do with Egypt’s resources (”petroleum, natural gas, iron ore, phosphates, manganese, limestone, gypsum, talc, asbestos, lead, zinc”) and geography (”controls Sinai Peninsula, only land bridge between Africa and remainder of Eastern Hemisphere; controls Suez Canal, a sea link between Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Sea”) (CIA, World Factbook). Or perhaps it is as simple as the Mubaraks (father and son) being seen as “Pro-western” (CRS, 2001) and of “assistance” in the U.S. “war on terrorism.”
Which is the least they can do, given that Egypt has supplied some of the most prominent leaders of the terrorist movement.
More background on the Egyptian issue here.
With at least 80 million inhabitants, Egypt is not only the most populous nation in the Arab world but in many ways its intellectual and political nexus, the fount from which nearly every major political or religious force to spread through the region in the past century has emerged. And while much has been made since September 11 of the danger posed by such Muslim fundamentalist trends as the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia, it has been the much broader fundamentalist trends first fostered in Egypt, with their specifically anti-Western tilt, that have probably most fanned the flames of jihad throughout the region.
The pattern is unmistakable, should one bother to look. The Gama’a al-Islamiyya, a social movement espousing a rejection of Western values and a return to Islamic traditions, originated in Egypt in the 1970s before spreading throughout the Middle East. Islamic Jihad also has its roots in Egypt. Osama bin Laden was a disgruntled Saudi rich kid bankrolling Resistance fighters in Afghanistan until he came under the sway of his Egyptian spiritual mentor, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and decided to go global; for that matter, 4 or 5 of the 10 original founders of al-Qaeda were Egyptian. Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, one of the masterminds behind the first World Trade Center bombing? Egyptian. Mohammed Atta, the ringleader of 9/11? Egyptian. Wherever one turns in the arena of Islamic jihadists, one is likely to find either the direct or spiritual influence of an Egyptian.
Hejj
I am Iranina and I would assure that you dont know the Iranian goverment at all. They are ready to kill Iranian people to sruvive more. Then you want them to have Atomic Bomb and keem it in the Shelf. It is not possible the first one that they acquire they will fall out in one of these city, New York, London and Telaviv
ja, buddy
idlex said:
Now that we seem to have briefly opened up a direct line of communication with our Persian brothers and sisters, perhaps we might ask them what us Brits should do in the parlous present state of affairs:
1) Not worry too much?
2) Stock up on good single malt whisky?
3) Convert to Islam, and all start wearing burqas? Men too.
4) Dig ourselves graves, and throw ourselves into them, and hope that we will subsequently Rapturously arise from them?
5) Try a bit harder to get the white ball near the baulk cushion when playing snooker safety shots? …and remember Paul Hunter.
_______________
To idlex : First of all I don’t think you know Iran at all.
To answer your questions:
1st Question: It is up to you to be worried about what Iran may or may not do, but I would worry more about what this (UK) Government will do with our lives.
2nd Question: I don’t think you need a reason to drink Whiskey, as a brit you are very good at drinking.
3rd Question: Convert to Islam? You don’t have to. For your info: In Iran there are other religions (Christian and Jews and Zaratostrian ) living with Muslims in peace. I would say there is less religion racism in Iran than UK. Women don’t wear veil/burga. They only cover their hair and I can say %70 of them only do it as it against the law to walk out of the house without head scarf and they will be like European countries when they are inside their house or in parties. No VEIL for Iranian. It is something for Arab tribes.
4th Question: You don’t have to dig your grave. Tony will do it for you. He has already started.
As an Iranian, I am totally against the government on the power in Iran but like every other Iranian I don’t like other countries tell me what I can and what I can’t have.
I think Iran will have the access to atomic energy in a near future.
Yes that is right and USA can not do anything. The war can not be a solution too.
I am irainian. I am agree with you. We are interested in nuclear weapons because The US an UK and Israeil governments threat us. We are not crazy.. we can produce nuclear weapon without US help. We have the best young scients that can produce. We dont want to kill US or UK or ISRAEIL people. you must accept that they want to kill IRAINIAN peaple such as palestine,Iraq,Afghanistan,Lebonan people. And we MUST defend our country not any more. We dont want to attack any country. We love our government, leader, president Ahmadinejad. WE WANT NUCLEAR WEAPON. I LOVE YOU BORIS
have you ever seen an iranian terrorist? suicide bomber ? or …..?
iranian regim wants this power for protection against usa , not for terror.
To those who are still snarling against my Country IRAN
It seems you are still missing the point . Remember what Boris said : The Iranians will join in soon enough and the threats are known to be bogus
“In Iran there are other religions (Christian and Jews and Zaratostrian ) living with Muslims in peace”
Sara, I hate to disagree on this point but…
Islam is the official religion in Iran, and all laws and regulations must be consistent with the official interpretation of sharia law. Whereas the deterioration of religious freedom for Christians started with the victory of conservative parties at the beginning of 2004, a new wave of persecution of Christians followed the election of a hard-line conservative president in June 2005, bringing the country to position number 3 in the World Watch List. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hailed his election triumph as a new Islamic revolution that could spread throughout the world and pledged to restore an ”Islamic government” in Iran, implying that the previous administrations were not sufficiently Islamic. Since 2005’s election, many Christians have not only been rounded up for harassment, but many have been arrested and beaten. One house church pastor was killed in November. Ethnic Christians are still allowed to express their faith within their own church walls, but those who come from a Muslim background face tremendous risk because the government wants them to return to Islam. Allegedly, local authorities throughout the nation have been given the order to crack down on all Christian cell groups. Because the churches are forbidden to assist any Muslim background believers, many ethnic churches removed their support from their brothers and sisters of Muslim origin. The new policy threatens evangelism and discipleship efforts. Muslim background believer cell groups are now meeting in secret.
It hardly seems liek religious freedom and it is far from the absolute freedom which Muslims in this country are granted.
Brandon morawaska said:
Have you ever seen an Iranian terrorist? Suicide bomber? Or…..?
Absolutely true. You got the point.
But I am quite confident that most people have seen Saudi terrorists (Bin Laden ) , Pakistani terrorists (Khan) , Egyptian terrorist ( Mohammad atta and zawaheri ) , Jordanian terrorist ( zarqawi ) . And who can deny British alliance with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan , Jordan and Egypt.
Hi Boris,
There is only one thing wrong with what you’re suggesting; The Iranian people have no desire for ANY nuclear technology. This goes for either peaceful means or in the form of a bomb! If you had been a MP representing Qom, you would have been arguing the urgent needs of your constituency such as proper schooling, health care, unemployment, and above all, a free and democratic society! These are the urgent needs of the people of Iran and NOT nuclear power stations. Iran has a wealth of oil and gas to take us all through for another 150 years, not to mention other resources which have not yet been discovered!
The problem with having the bomb is who has his finger on the button? Parviz Mosharaf is a different politician to Ahmadinejad. A leader who awaits the resurrection of the 12th Imam from the bottom of a well, can not poses a stable mind and hence could wage his 12th Imam’s war on the rest of the world!
The general US and UK foreign policies during the last 18 years are to be blamed for such problems.
The UK has egged on the mullahs for the past 28 years and now I’m afraid is payback time! Just as did the US with Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan against the Russians and later paid the price.
You modern British politicians truly amaze me! Why don’t you learn from the master of your politicians i.e. Sir Winston Churchill and foresee what’s coming rather than make a quick fix for what you have brought?
When are the modern British politicians going to learn that religion is EVIL! It does NOT work any more! It’s sell by date is passed due! It backfires and it bites back where used to manipulate nations! Look at Bin Laden, Ahmadi Nejad, Nasrollah, Moghtada Sadr…….
Weigh up the costs of installing these people and their regimes against the gains!
For goodness sake, you are British and supposed to have a sound economic mind!
The Human lives’ cost alone outweighs the hard cash lost out of your national income!
Take my word for it. Iran needs help to establish its long due democracy. Get behind the people of Iran and help overthrow the evil Islamic regime and the world will be your oyster!
Please take note of the following and learn a thing or two:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.
The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.
A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.
No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.
– Sir Winston Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 [London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899]).
Dear Pete
I believe your comments about religious discriminations in Iran are based on Western Media propaganda (Baseless).
I would like to draw your attention to these facts:
1. Iran has the second largest Jewish population in the Middle East (Israel First)
2. The oldest Iranian church was founded in Iran in 60AD which is still respected in Iran
3. Jewish, Christian and Zoroastrian Iranians have their own representatives in Iran Parliament.
4. Religious minorities Students are not obliged to attend the Islamic Lectures in universities while others are.
5. There is no Sharia Law in Iran. Iran is a shiet country with Islamic laws and not necessarily Sharia Law.
If you need some more facts just drop a line
Boris ! I can just say “Shame On you” . I’m an iranian journalist that live in IRAN and you don’t know what a silly man you are !
Dariosh said:
October 13, 2006 11:48 AM | permalink
The Iranian people have no desire for ANY nuclear technology
——————
RUBISHHHHHHHHH , darioush look around yourself and keep your Ignorant idiotic comments for yourself.
To Pete:
Pete
I do agree with you. I was born in a Muslim family but I don’t consider myself a Muslim. I chose not to have any religion bcuz I think all our problems come from religion. But when wrong things is being said about Islam I like to correct it.
When I said all the religions are leaving in peace in Iran I mean individuals. Yes Ahmadi Nejad’s government must be one of the worst one in Power after the revolution and there are still so many stupid hard liner religious people in Iran who doesn’t like other religion but all together still people with different religions live in Iran and consider them selves Iranian first them Jew, Muslim, Christian and … .
All the religions in Iran have their own school, government funded. During religious occasions like Christmas, there are program’s specially on Iran’s TV. According to BBC ” Although Iran and Israel are bitter enemies, few know that Iran is home to the largest number of Jews anywhere in the Middle East outside Israel.
About 25,000 Jews live in Iran and most are determined to remain no matter what the pressures - as proud of their Iranian culture as of their Jewish roots.
It is dawn in the Yusufabad synagogue in Tehran and Iranian Jews bring out the Torah and read the ancient text before making their way to work. and they have been allowed to go to Israel freely in the past 5 years.”
It is the same in every other country in Middle east. All the religions came from this area, remember?
But if you think there is no discrimination about religion in UK, you go it wrong. I have seen a lot of it. The biggest one is people see any terrorist action as every single Muslim faults.
Do you remember not so long ago people in a plane asked to Pakistanis to get out of the plan cuz they looked like terrorist?
as a iranian in iran, would someone belived in 1977 that in 2 years time SHAH and his great glorys will be fade away, remember islamic republic of iran is the most clever goverment ruling, they are too strict about everything but they change it all the time just for the favor of governing, like it or not this is the goverment of iran for all our lifetimes, so my point is you will never know what they gonna do since we all forgetten the mastermind of this. I promiss iran will act in a way that no one would ever belived it. you are right we are far to further than what we saying to the world. they have it and they might prove it soon.
How fascinating, I never knew that the Axis of Evil was so well represented on Boris’s blog.
Some interesting comments:
‘have you ever seen an iranian terrorist?’ (brandon morawaska)
Iran arm Hezbollah and shi’ite militants in Iraq. Iran is a sponsor of terror and should be ashamed of itself!
‘Iran has the second largest Jewish population in the Middle East (Israel First)’ (Hamed)
Only because all the Arab nations exiled their Jewish populations after they lost the 1948 war (which Iran, under the leadership of the Shah didn’t join in).
—
Personally, I think if we are going to have a nuclear Iran, then we shouldn’t allow the Russians and Chinese to have a monopoly over conventional arms sales to her.
The Saudi’s were worried enough to buy 72 Eurofighter Typoons off us, so Iran must be posing some threat to the dominant tribal leadership on the Arabian peninsular.
Now that the Russians have annouced there will be no state funding for the MiG company until they come up with something worthwhile, a 5th Generation Russian fighter plane looks unlikely for quite some time.
The UK should get in there and flog the Ayatollah some Typhoons before the dastardly French slime their way into Teheran with their Rafael.
This should put the s**ts up the Saudi’s and the Israelis some more and then they’ll need some more weapons off us too.
—
Once more thing, back on March 2nd (see archives) Boris informed us that:
‘If the Government decided to build a nuclear reactor today, there are only half a dozen people who have the experience to do it in this country, and they have all retired.’
So it seems there is a worthwhile trade to be done with the Axis of Evil. They supply us with civil and military nuclear technologies, we supply 4.5 and eventually 5th generation fighter jets to the Mullahs.
As a Zoroastrian, I should say that Iran is my country and I feel Iranian more than any thing and do not need any defense of my religious rights with the aim of undermining the dignity and criticism of my Muslim fellowmen.
Our president just like yours loses sense while speaking sometimes. But it does not mean that we can deny the most clear historical facts about Iranians having set the Jewish people free from slavery and serfdom in Babylon and offered them shelter and home in Iran. The fact that you might not have been born yet at the time of Israeli- Iranian friendship and alliance before the revolution won’t erase the reality from the face of the history.
I think we should respect the great traditional Persian spirit of religious tolerance and support for diversity put in place by the great Persian Kings and be patient for this unpleasant period of Iranian history to come to its due end. Never forget that Iran is a country with great history and that 27 years of Mullah regime is nothing in comparison with more than 2500 years of just rule in the Persian empire.
Well! Boris
You made a very reasonable discussion. Personally I think the problem of nuclear proliferation have only two outcomes. Either all the countries reach a state to produce nuclear weapons or all the countries would be disarmed in this regard. The second option does not seem to happen since US and Israel never give up their unique “source of superiority” to other nations. Exaggerated concentration on Iranian nuclear power issue would allow other countries to go ahead in this way under the shadow of media focusing on Iran and North Korea. So even if negotiation with Iran and N. Korea reach a reasonable result for both parties, we will certainly have more countries trying to reach nuclear technology and the next step would be negotiating with 8-10 countries. The human nature cannot accept discrimination and the only question that is proposed by any human kind in countries without nuclear facilities is that “Why US (the only nation ever used nuclear weapon against other nation), UK, France, Russia, China, Israel,…” can have this technology but we cannot?”. Whenever western countries find an appropriate response for this, we might seek a solution for the whole problem.
Thanks again
I think Boris is unfortunately right about the best way to prevent somebody invading your country on the excuse of you having WMDs is for you to actually have some.
For my text on that i would take the earlier example of Yugoslavia. In the 18790s Tito deliberately decided not to aquire the Bomb because it would make the whole NATO/Waesaw Pact fight even more unstable. I doubt if anybody would believe we would have started “recognising” Bosnia, Croatia or even Slovenia in direct defiance of our undertakings at Helsinke, if they had been part of a nuclear armed state.
So long as we oppose the principles of international law all that is left is force.
That this makes the world a much more dangerous place is not more the responsibility of the governments of Iran & Yugoslavia than of the US & UK.
‘Our president just like yours loses sense while speaking sometimes’ (Anahita)
Our Zoroastrian friend does have a valid point about his Blairship here. However I would point out to you guys from the Axis of Evil that we at least get a chance to vote our lunatic ‘president’ and his cohorts out sometime before May 2010 though.
When are the Ayatollahs going to give you guys the opportunity to have a vote on whether or not you want to live by their mediaeval interpretation of justice?
In fact didn’t they have Ayatollah Mohammad Kazemeini Borojerdi arrested the other day for expressing an opinion about the separation of church and state?
Then they keep trying to tell us that Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance? Yeah, right, peace on the condition you do whatever they tell you and tolerance providing you don’t dispute a word of it.
Hi Boris,
As an Iranian Ph.D. student I entirely agree with you. For those who oppose you, I just want to mention something. Iranians do not like another war since they suffered for 8 years from an unwanted invasion by Saddam while supporting by the western countries.
But for God sake and just for a moment see how the western countries threaten my country. We just want our position in the world. I’m pretty sure that most of you know the history of Persia and their contribution to the progress of science in the world. Many of you guys have Iranian friends. How many well educated and successful Iranian doctors, engineers, lawyers, businessmen, researchers and scientists do you know? Let me tell you the answer. There are millions of them all around the world. So do you guys think Iranians let the western countries to exploit them? Definitely not. Today or tomorrow, we’ll progress and build our country. We are a peaceful nation and we don’t like to attack any countries in the world. But, please read the following news by the Joe Matyas from the London Press and ask yourself or your politicians why they store that much nuclear weapon. If you find the answer, then talk about a sanction against my country because of using nuclear technology for civilian purposes and electricity generation.
“The former chair of the United Nations disarmament committee states there are more than 16,000 strategic and tactical nuclear weapons ready for deployment and another 14,000 in storage. The U.S. has nearly 7,000 ready for action and 3,000 in storage and Russia has about 8,500 on hand and 11,000 in storage, he said. China has 400 nuclear weapons, France 350, Britain 200, Israel 200, India 95 and Pakistan 50.”
The clearest, most refreshing view on this debate so far.
It’s time for us to stop sticking our nose into other people’s business and start getting our own house in order first.
And as for the whereabouts of James Bond? He returns next month, sadly his gaze appears to be focussed on baccarat in French casinos rather than an impending nuclear war. Maybe 007 knows something we don’t.
STEVE “How fascinating, I never knew that the Axis of Evil was so well represented on Boris’s blog”
Yes indeed , and do you remember when the long winded thingy got all cross with me and I decided discretion was the better part of valour.
As I said . I can be found. I live 400 yds away from where , two years ago a stache of arms was located.They are near my house with their banners , they shout their hate outside TESCOS. You do have to be careful. I had a similar problem with the BNP who threatened to track me down.
They are all tainted by association and one is not to know which one is which . In London this is a real problem and will remain so until Westernised symathisers distance themselves from murderers.
Thus far the British Muslim Coucil have not.
I think this must be one of the most astonishing threads ever on Boris’ blog.
Boris floats an interesting idea about Iran, and within minutes a whole bunch of Iranians are responding to it. And what diverse opinions they have. And none seem to be we-hate-your-freedom Islamic fundamentalists.
Such is the power of the internet. This discussion would have been impossible 10 or 15 years ago.
It’s riveting isn’t it Idlex.
Don’t be fooled though, they can be nice when they want to be, but when you want a refund for the fake fags that came out of their vending machine they can be very rude people.
I for one will never by my cigarettes in an Iranian shop, pub or restaurant again.
idlex, computer and internet have and will change the world around. I believe soon all nations become one. yet, who knows what radicals of everyside of this world would do. prediction: WWIII. may god bring peace.
Dear readers, I do not agree with Boris’s idea however it does make sense. I am an Iranian myself, an Iranian who does not agree with most of the governments policies, but there is indeed a sense of American abhorrence in my heart. They talk about bringing democracy to the region not recalling the time when they fully supported the monarchy and abandoned the country when a popular revolution occurred. Iran is now a democratic country in its own sense although we do recognize the deficiencies but it is just a matter of time. The west brags about the absence of human rights in this nation but they fail to reflect to countries such a Saudi Arabia wherein the human rights case is even more severe. Well, why should they?! They are the west’s ally after all. So lets face it, for the west, it is not the matter of crafting democracies and monitoring human right violations. It’s creating alliances.
How dare you talk about nuclear weapons when you yourselves have a complete arsenal of WMD. Have the Americans forgotten about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
When was the last time Iran committed an aggression? When was the last time Iran started a war with another nation? When was the last time an Iranian held a suicide attack? Who armed Iraq’s regime during the 8 year war?
WE IRANIANS DON’T NEED NUCLEAR WEAPONS, but if the threat would not stop and mutual respect would not rule the region nothing and nobody could stop us.
i forgot to mension all i said was a personal view of the situation. and of course all your ideas all well respected
It looks like most of our Iranian friends aren’t really up for regime change, no point in starting another disaster by invading them then.
It might help their case if they apologised for taking those US embassy staff hostage after the revolution. I don’t think the US has ever forgiven them for that violation of international diplomatic accord.
Instead their government scream on about ‘the arrogant powers’ and ‘the Zionist regime’ whilst arming nutcase movements like Hezbollah.
Perhaps they could make some sort of a deal whereby the apologise for the US embassy saga and the US take them out of the ‘Axis of Evil’.
Once they agree to stop imprisoning political prisoners, arming terrorists and stoning people then perhaps they can be declassified as an ‘Outpost of Tyranny’ aswell.
Steven, I think you are quite confused in your view of the world around you. You should take a clear stand whether you see the Iranian regime a democratically elected one or a dictatorship. In case of deciding for the latter, we cannot blame all the misdoings of the regime on the Iranian people as their politicians are not elected by them. Please stop mixing “Iranians” and the “regime” in your arguments. It might also be that you have had some personal problem with some Iranian individual. In this case I suggest that you speak with him/her in person to clear your mind instead of trying to take revenge in this forum.
‘Please stop mixing “Iranians” and the “regime” in your arguments.’ (Anahita)
I take your point. So I’ll re-iterate. The Iranian regime should start by publicly apologising for the US embassy hostage crisis. That would be a good start in any negotiations, it would demonstrate good faith.
The British have been very good to the ‘Iranian people’. We’ve allowed many thousands of you to make your homes and start your businesses here, have given many of you social housing, welfare, protected your human rights as we do our own, provided free healthcare and free education to your children and provided a healthy, safe environment for you to bring up your families or persue whatever interests you in life.
Would I get all of that if I moved to Iran?
Hi everyboday,
First of all, Pete, with all respect to Arabs, we are not an Arabic nation. You can call us an Islamic nation, but not an Arabic one.
Well, Boris, more than 50 years ago when our beloved late Dr. Mosaddeq nationalized our oil, which should have been done even earlier than that, the government of your country called Iran a threat to the UK security. In his defence, Dr. Mosaddeq mentioned something very important which I supposed must be considered right now as well. The bottomline of what he said was: “Can you spot even a single Iranian gunboat in the Thames River? How about UK Navy in Persian Gulf?” Ok, now who is the threat to the other’s security? Where is the US? Where is Iran? If Iran were as close as Canada, Mexico or even Chile to the US, then security concerns would be justified. Yes, US is threatening Iran security by being in the region. I do not care who rules Iran, but I know that Iran has never attacked any other country since more than 200 years ago. No one seems to care, because there should be this childish game: I define some allies and some enemies everywhere, so that I have enough excuses to poke my nose whenever I want to. US and UK are respected and welcome as long as they respect us, as long as they stand in the line just like the next country and politely ask for our oil.
I am sure that if Mosaddeq were alive, he would defend our right again in this case. Iran never was and never will be a slave of West. If West understands it, major problems will be solved. US and UK overthrew Mosaddeq through that infamous coup, what do you expect now? A red carpet for another coup?
ALIREZA SAID-
. How many well educated and successful Iranian doctors, engineers, lawyers, businessmen, researchers and scientists do you know? Let me tell you the answer. There are millions of them”
………Leaving Iran to come and live in the free West; well quite . It must be difficult to have nothing to be proud of but I feel we have handed out enough therapy to privileged guilt consciences . What are any of these people actually doing to help their own country I wonder . Coming here to become or practice Law and medicine does not count. There is room for differences of opinion here and one opinion is that the middles class of the Middle east have been conspicuously ready to leave the country they claim to care about .
“Can you spot even a single Iranian gunboat in the Thames River? How about UK Navy in Persian Gulf?” Ok, now who is the threat to the other’s security? Where is the US? Where is Iran?”
The Liberal democracies are able to defend themselves , yes. The people living under fascist theocratic dictatorships are not. You make an equivalence ha does not exist . A liberal might pat your head and say of course you must have your insnane society .I do not and the fact that Westernised emigres remember the old country the as all emigres do is irrelevant.
STEVEN L SAID-Would I get all of that if I moved to Iran?
Tricky one but after much thought and serious contemplation I have to say probably ….no.
steve l , seems you are an american more than iranian cos you think what g.bush thinks hizbollah is not terrorist but israel is (look at the 3 last days of lebanon war they dropped loads of granade bombs that is killing childeren days , months and even years after the war) you like it or not great IRAN is still great with shah or mullahs or enybodyels and you ,israel or usa cant do nothing about it and IRAN is the power of the region with all those enemies who are against it
“enybodyels and you ,israel or usa cant do nothing about it and IRAN is the power of the region with all those enemies who are against it”
Well I`m glad we cleared that up then.
I am an Iranian who lives in Iran, and I studied the entire history of Iran’s and America’s history. what i noticed was a huge misundrestanding between iran and usa (even befor islamic revolution) i mean after the terror of kenedy established. 8 years war and 28 years of being in sanctions isn’t something that we forgive any europian and north american country.as an iranian we achieve our goals when we kick americans out of persian gulf and control the entire middle east. no matter if you help us to achieve our goals or go against it , it is something that we will make it in less the 14 years. trust me what iranians want has nothing to do with going against western’s security. anyways i appreciate you’r comment boris but we are in a bad unwanted game. i still cant wait to see this game endup peacefuly in both sides benefit.
Does tooth fairy exist?
Come on we cant take it from the kids.
This is a kid’s world and nobody really likes to believe the truth.
You are either very wise or very bold Boris.
The Iranian regime should start by publicly apologising for the US embassy hostage crisis. That would be a good start in any negotiations, it would demonstrate good faith. (Steven_L)
Oh, tosh. The hostage crisis brought down the Carter administration. Ronald Reagan did a deal with Iran to make sure they weren’t released until Carter lost the election. If anything, Republicans should be thanking Iran for bringing down a Democratic president. None of the hostages died. Heck, they weren’t even tortured.
And why has Iran got to show ‘good faith’? They’re no threat to the USA, which has been conducting war games against Iran all year, openly discussing bombing options. If anything, America ought to do something to demonstrate its good faith to the Iranian people.
It’s not that Iran is a threat to the USA, but that the USA is a threat to Iran. This is the whole basis of Boris’ essay.
fascist theocratic dictatorships (newmania)
‘Fascist’ doesn’t mean anything in this context.
In fact, it seldom does in any context. It’s just another word for ‘nasty’.
You’ve just been listening to George Bush again. Much like Steven…
What I would like to ask our Iranian friends is this: why are Sunnis and Shias killing each other in Iraq?
They didn’t used to do this. At least not in Saddam’s time.
Dear Idlex,
I guess you’d better ask this question from British and American soldiers who invade Iraq. I have a question to ask from them as well. Why there is no country whose name is Iraq, Emirates, Bahrain, Kwait, and Quatar when you see the world’s map before 1930.
guess you’d better ask this question from British and American soldiers who invade Iraq. (Alireza)
I am perfectly well aware that the invasion of Iraq began with any number of lies by both the British and American governments - Saddam’s non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction, links with Al Qaeda, the fake ‘War on Terror’, ‘bringing democracy’, etc.
I’m also aware that the conduct of the invading forces has been frequently utterly despicable - Random shootings. Abu Ghraib. Fallujah. Guantanamo bay. Little or no attempt at reconstruction or democratisation.
This isn’t for the most part the soldiers’ fault, however: it is in almost every case entirely the responsibility of the Bush administration.
Given this miserable performance, I am not surprised that American and British soldiers have come under intensifying attack.<
Boris, before the lefty liberals come here and tell you what a silly boy you are and demand you apologise personally to every country you’ve mentioned for offending them, can I just say that you’ve hit the nail on the head as usual.
Boris for PM.