93 Comments

1. the Anti Jihadist:

Wheels within wheels, as one of my Persian friends recently described the situation to me…or at least attempted to describe. It’s downright Byzantine, if you’ll pardon the historical irony here. This is more than a mere air-quotes laden farcical election, but the juiciest bits about this entire saga may not be retold until many years from now.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:25 am 2. Joshua:

The salient question may not be what Obama has learned from this whole mess, but what he is willing to do about it. If Tehran (or for that matter Pyongyang) is really in trouble they may try to conquer their way out of it, or at least take their neighbors down with them. No doubt Obama would like to avoid that at all costs, as it would probably mean dragging the U.S. into another shooting war, which not only would Obama find unacceptable on its face, but would also throw a great big wrench into his administration’s attempts to socialize rescue the U.S. economy. If preventing that means propping up these odious regimes so that they aren’t ever tempted to take up arms in earnest, well, that’s just the price of peace in our time.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:27 am 3. Bill R:

“stupidity without precedent”…We may finally find out just how much like Jimmy Carter President Obama is.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:41 am 4. dan:

I’m sorry, I still believe the Golitsyn thesis applies: an elaborate display of character change, brought about by exploiting the people’s sincere desire for change, for the purpose of “rejuvinating” the regime in the eyes of its people – but more importantly of “the international community.” The crowds are chanting ‘freedom’ and against the angry dwarf – but they are also chanting for Mousavi. Mousavi too was a candidate selected by the regime. Who would deny the popularly acclaimed new boss, a “reformer,” certified by blood, just wants peaceful nuclear energy? An Israeli strike against evil dwarves may survive public scrutiny, but against smiling reformers aloft on the shoulders of its people?

A reorganization of the security forces beginning last year suggests that this is the case: wouldn’t want to mow down too many people when you temporarily open the gates – that might undermine the legitimacy of the guardian council itself. But the council will not be undermined by this. And Iran will have its nuclear weapons while its people will get a few of its freedoms – which, from the point of the view of the strategists, meaningless anyway. See USSR -> Russian Federation for reference.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:43 am 5. Charles:

hmm imho the saudis should be included in any decision to bomb the iranian nuclear facilities.

the veep is already talking tough but that’s not saying much.

obama’s grandma makes pilgrimage to mecca this year. if she comes back talking tough on Iran — that would be more serious.

more serious than biden? can’t be. she also said obama was born in Kenya. biden merely joked about it.

shesh.

I have wondered lately why it is that Proverbs 27 (NIV)
15 A quarrelsome wife is like
a constant dripping on a rainy day;

16 restraining her is like restraining the wind
or grasping oil with the hand.

Is followed directly by

17 As iron sharpens iron,
so one man sharpens another.

I thought about that in a much different context.

If the iranian shias get the bomb the sunnis from the gulf to north africa will have to do the same just to remain beautiful in their own eyes. That’s not fair. They will want nukes so as to have their own deterrence. (no deterrence is needed with the israelis because they play by different rules.)

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:02 am 6. Doug:

Twitter Joins the Revolution:
Faster, Please! » So How’s it Going in Iran

But the key element is the people. They are only just beginning to understand the reality of their situation. Virtually none of them imagined that they would be in a revolutionary confrontation with the regime just two days after the electoral circus, and few of them can realize, so soon, that they can actually change the world. I think the Mousavis now understand it (they know that they are either going to win or be destroyed). It remains to be seen if they can instruct and inspire the movement.

Much will depend on their ability to communicate. The regime has been waging a cyberwar against the dissidents, shutting down websites, cell phones, Facebook, and the like. As most people have learned, the basic communiations tool is Twitter, which somehow continues to function. Bigtime Kudos to Twitter, by the way, for postponing its planned maintenance so that the Iranians can continue to Tweet. Would that Google were so solicitous of freedom.

We don’t know who’s going to win. The Iranian people know that they’re on their own; they aren’t going to get any help from us, or the United Nations, or the Europeans. But paradoxically, this lack of support may strengthen their will. There is no cavalry on the horizon. If they are going to prevail, they and their unlikely leaders will have to gut it out by themselves. God be with them.

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:14 am 7. Anon:

@dan: Interesting idea. What if the elections were a double-sham, where the mullahs intentionally engineered upheaval, but first put in place means to “resolve” it when the time is right via regime pre-approved personnel.

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:32 am 8. Nomenklatura:

What Obama really wants is to come back from Teheran holding up a piece of paper and saying “Peace in our time!”

Obama’s diplomacy is the expression of an academic cargo cult.

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:42 am 9. Gordon:

#5–”born in Kenya”? Do you have a reference on that? I hadn’t heard that.

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:58 am 10. Doug:

Foreign Policy as Social Work
It has suddenly become much more difficult to pretend that you are not betraying the Iranian people by engaging with the junta in Iran.

Jun 16, 2009 - 7:13 am 11. Starko:

@Dan,

Along those lines, there was an interesting quote in a Wall Street Journal article taken from a senior unidentified Sunni country. He said something like: “With Ahmadinejad we know where he stands [regarding the nuclear issue]. It could take us months to understand what the other guy thinks.”

I believe the quote really did use “other guy” which I thought was humorous.

More importantly, while this is the silver lining to Ahmadinejad, my understanding is that the nuclear issue has broad support in Iran, and I don’t think we’re going to get a “no nukes” leader in any case. If we got a true reformer in office, we might see less meddling in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, West Bank, etc.

Side note: Intentionally or not, this election has been framed in a similar manner to the US election- it’s the Iranian people voting for “hope and change”. While that may be an accurate view, the economy in Iran has not been doing well for a long time, and dramatically lower oil prices haven’t helped. Some of the discontent is no doubt economic in nature.

Jun 16, 2009 - 7:58 am 12. buckets:

We’re going to see some heads exploding on the Left in the coming days. How can they reconcile “Sit down with Ahmadinejad and Iran, they aren’t dangerous, McChimpyBushHitlerCo made Iran an enemy to keep us in a false state of fear and push for a police state in the U.S.!!!” with the meme of “the secular reformist stylish urban lightbringer had an election stolen from him by dangerous and evil theocrat Ahmadinejad and needs our support!!!!”

Cognitive dissonance. The only way to resolve it is erase the pre-June, 2009 Iranian rhetoric and talking points down the memory hole. These Leftists are truly incredible with their DoubleThink – able to hold directly contradictory thoughts in their head at the same time while acknowledging both as dogma.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:06 am 13. dan:

7, 11 – yep. we are blinded above all by the media, which aggressively inserts images and explanations where – it is true – there is a natural void, but which common familial anglo-american sense would otherwise fill with truth. but of course, we’ll have too see i guess.

the real question remains: what happens when they get the bomb? i think it’s time to take the Convergence thesis seriously. Deadly seriously, Horatio.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:09 am 14. RWE:

Funny, isn’t it?

When it came to South Africa, a country willing to be our friend and which presented no threat to the U.S., “engagement” was a dirty word in the 80’s.

Now, with a country whose leadership – and unfortunately many of whose people – hate everything we stand for and would like nothing better to see us wiped off the face of the Earth, “engagement” is presented as The Answer.

The only “engagement” that will fix the Iran problem is M1A1’s and A-10’s against T-72’s in downtown Tehran.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:26 am 15. Mark:

I’m not sure how one gets a handle on Iran and it’s people/politics.

Some of the Iranian film production is good and worth seeing. The graphic novel ‘Persepolis’ is an interesting representation of post-Revolution politics and political exile politics.

Any other recent Iranian-produced sources out there anyone would recommend, i.e. not western analysis but Iranian-produced? After reading and seeing these kinds of productions, I’m not very surprised at the outpouring of anti-Regime emotion. Iranians seem to have wanted the Revolution to work, to have it exhibit national virtue, etc. But the reality, as usual, was economic winners and losers. Rafsanjani and Khatami in their elegant, expensive robes symbolized the divide.

Bush was right, as usual, though it’s taking the Iranians (and western media) some time to figure out.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:27 am 16. starling:

The Boston Globe has quite a nice photo essay of recent events, including street fighting.

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/06/irans_disputed_election.html

Twendz is one among many twitter feeds where you can follow the Iranian Election “hashtag”, i.e. #IranElection

http://twendz.waggeneredstrom.com/

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:38 am 17. w:

i think it’s interesting that this US president wants his own internal US security force as big and well armed as their army is already. reading the above, i can only wonder why…

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:43 am 18. Insufficiently Sensitive:

The Basij-IRGC merger and the Mosaic Doctrine may not do much for national defense, but they certainly suggest strengthening of the IRGC in internal politics of the Islamic Republic

No wonder Obama wants to get together and schmooze with the Iranian leadership. The reorganization of the forces to ’shape’ internal politics may offer a model for the AmeriCorps/ACORN metastastasization.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:44 am 19. Tarnsman:

“Bush was right” should be shouted from the rooftops. He knew instinctively that the seeds of democracy planted in Iraq might/could sprout elsewhere in the Middle East. I think the people in Iran have been watching what has been taking place next door and asked themselves “Why not us?” The mullahs thought they could offer the people of Iran a half loaf of an election, giving them the illusion that they had a choice in the government. Obviously the Iranian people wanted the whole loaf. Whether or not they are willing to die for it is another question.

Re: Obama non response to events in Iran. Did anyone think he would take a strong position on the side of the people of Iran?

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:52 am 20. Mad Fiddler:

Further contemplating posts 4 and 7…

It’s never seemed reasonable to regard Ahmadinejad as anywise independent of the Majlis and the Guardian Council. Presumably candidate Mousavi must have been vetted and approved so as to ensure continuity rather than rupture of the Mullah’s policies. So the theory that the present disorder is being amplified (possibly by government agents provocateur)even where the dissatisfaction is genuine, must be considered viable.

Then you have to ask: Who benefits from the disorder? Who benefits from showing willingness to either ruthlessly suppress or negotiate with the “leaders” of the dissidents, depending on how it unfolds?

United States culture and commerce come to a skidding halt when a SINGLE protester is killed, or even punched in the mouth, by a law enforcement officer. But in most other countries, shooting a few hundred bystanders around a group of protesters is generally the regime’s way of saying “I hear you.”

I’m not suggesting we abandon our higher standards of dissent tolerance. I am saying we need to be able to take off our cultural prism goggles and understand how other societies look at the world. And in better understanding our differences we can anticipate how an adversary might be playing our emotions and attitudes like Chet Atkins strumming a favorite Martin Dreadnought.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:56 am 21. Mongoose:

OT,

But has anyone seen this?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_RUSSIA_SUMMIT_TALKS?SITE=TNKNN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

(hattip instapundit)

I still have to wonder what Obama and Co. with has to do with this, particularly in light of Bill Clinton’s rather traitorous speech the other day.

Just who are Obama’s paymasters?

We are being undone by our own elites. Has any nation see such a thing in history?
An elite dismantling a leading nation so that competitors may eclipse it.

They are now reaching the full pitch of their program to destroy us.

The Amazing thing is that without American markets, the BRIC countries would still be basket cases.

It is worth noting that all the BRIC nations have political histories colored by Socialism and collectivism. Makes one wonder what would have happened if Reagan and not ended the Cold War at the time that he did.

And they get away with this in the light of day. It is beyond belief.

In a matter of years, America could well be a peer of these nations.

It need not have been.

What is wrong with us?

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:59 am 22. Mongoose:

Buckets: You give them to much credit. You imagine that they are rational, sane and honorable people. You imagine that they hold beliefs out of moral or intellectual desire for moral or intellectual truth, no matter how misguided or addled-brained they may be.

They will change positions as it suites their vanity and narcissism.
They could care less about contradictions. No head will exlode on the LEft ddue to a change in the wind.

The Won will magically transform the world, including past beliefs and postures.

Soon it will be the case that Bush covered up all along what evil creatures these mullahs truely were. Bush lied, people died.

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:13 am 23. exhelodrvr:

Buckets,
“How can they reconcile “Sit down with Ahmadinejad and Iran, they aren’t dangerous, McChimpyBushHitlerCo made Iran an enemy to keep us in a false state of fear and push for a police state in the U.S.!!!” with the meme of “the secular reformist stylish urban lightbringer had an election stolen from him by dangerous and evil theocrat Ahmadinejad and needs our support!!!!””

Easy – the Bush policies obviously drove the Iranian government to take these steps.

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:21 am 24. DG:

If there is really no difference between “the crude and brutal Mahmoud Ahmadinejad” and “the slick and deceptive Hossein Moussavi,” then perhaps the action in Iran now is all a big game, well under control by the authorities, to make the West think something is really changing, but it really isn’t.

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:31 am 25. buddy larsen:

Mongoose/20; here’s two articles from august and december of 2006, out of the 2006 nyquist archives (yeah i know i’m a depressing bore with this soviet-defector analyst), which speak directly to your post (the first one ends “Wake up! Wake up! Wake up!”):

http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/pastanalysis/2006/1215.html

http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/pastanalysis/2006/0825.html

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:52 am 26. Robohobo:

Mad Fiddler @ 19: “Presumably candidate Mousavi must have been vetted and approved so as to ensure continuity rather than rupture of the Mullah’s policies. …Then you have to ask: Who benefits from the disorder? Who benefits from showing willingness to either ruthlessly suppress or negotiate with the “leaders” of the dissidents, depending on how it unfolds?”

Bang on! What we may be seeing is the grand play. Change the masks of the kabuki actors to convince the rest of the world or maybe just the ‘Master Lightworker’ that “change” has truly come. Fits his meme. Now he can say, “See, they ‘changed’ and are no longer a threat. Now we can talk.” The Mullahs get the bomb and nuke power, The 0bamanation gets his ‘engagement’ and validity for his policies.

But you are right, “Who benefits…”? is the right question.

As The 0bamanation deconvolves the greatest capitalist experiment in history and the best experiment in a democratic republic, that is the question I ask myself. Who benefits? The answers I keep getting keep me wakeful at night and strategizing as to how to survive.

Jun 16, 2009 - 10:19 am 27. veracious:

Mongoose,

I agree that buckets and others are giving too much credit to what remains of our national coherence. Those supporting the current USA regime are blind to the nature of those running it.

Wretchard,

Surely you or others here have already caught the irony of the article, claiming that we shouldn’t view the Iranian elections thru our our perspective:

…the U.S. election in 2004. The worst thing an analyst can do, however, is engage in projection and assume that politics in countries like Iran are like those in America. …

Quite the _contrary_ I see remarkable similarities between (substitute 2008) the “elections are part of a wider struggle for power whose intensity is beyond anything ordinary citizens in the West know”. The real difference is that plenty of Iranians know that they are in serious trouble; I’m sorry that I believe the percent within USA is much lower. We are headed down a dark shaft so fast that it is going to shock people how slow they were to fully react to the clear and present danger; threat; attack, from within the USA upon our very foundation stones.

Jun 16, 2009 - 10:47 am 28. Salt Lick:

Odd to think of how the left savaged Dubya when he named three countries in the Axis of Evil. And now which two are scaring the world?

Jun 16, 2009 - 11:34 am 29. Eggplant:

Wretchard quoted:

“The IRGC is normally called the “Revolutionary Guards” in the media. It is a state within a state. The IRG is separate from, and parallel to, the other arm of the Iran’s military, which is called Artesh (another Persian word for army).”

Wretchard also said:

“Michael Rubin at NRO warned against the danger of seeing events in Iran through the prism of Western Democratic politics.”

It’s certainly a mistake to see the Iranian theocracy through the prism of western democracy. Obama is obviously being stupid in doing so (we at Belmont Club all know this).

However it is highly appropriate to see the Iranian theocracy through the prism of western totalitarism, e.g. Nazism. The historical parallels between Ahmadinejad’s IRGC and Hitler’s (or rather Heinrich Himmler’s) SS are very striking. The SS was also a “state within a state” and represented a separate branch of the German military that was directly loyal to the Nazi Party. Hitler and his crew originally used the SS as their own private army as a counter to Ernst Roehm’s SA (Sturm Abteilung). The SA was naturally Ernst Roehm’s own private army. During the “Night of the Long Knives”, the SA and SS slugged it out with the SS becoming victorious thus propelling Hitler into undisputed power. There has been some indications that the IRGC is loyal directly to Ahmadinejad and NOT to the mullahs. In some ways this recent Iranian election can be seen as a historical parallel to the Nazi party’s election to the Reichstag on 31 July 1932.

RWA said:

“The only “engagement” that will fix the Iran problem is M1A1’s and A-10’s against T-72’s in downtown Tehran.”

This is obviously true. Tyrants like Ahmadinejad only respect naked power and despise weakness such as shown by Obama. Obama like Neville Chamberlain is precisely the wrong politician to be facing a tyrant like Ahmadinejad (again, we all know this).

A world wide depression, coinciding with the rise of savage dictators confronting feckless democracies…

They say that history does not repeat itself but instead it rhymes (about time for someone to post a poem).

Jun 16, 2009 - 12:22 pm 30. veracious:

Yes EggPlant!
Parallels to Persian SA and I’m convinced ACORN brown shirts.

All,

I meant to mention this here/there relationship (earlier):
The current Iranian regime is not so much a government as it is a criminal conspiracy.

Jun 16, 2009 - 12:35 pm 31. Charles:

9. Gordon:

#5–”born in Kenya”?

See This post and check the links at comment 13 & 14

Jun 16, 2009 - 1:08 pm 32. dan:

“criminal conspiracy”

yes – as are all totalitarian states. thus the wisdom of “conspiracy theory,” possibly.

Jun 16, 2009 - 1:11 pm 33. RWE:

I just thought of something, spurred on by Comment no.18.

Do y’all recall when Hamas took over Gaza from Fatah and Wretchard’s analysis was that while Fatah had played at devout-based Islamic extremism as a useful image, with Hamas in charge the people of Gaza were going to find out what the Real Thing was.

Is that perhaps a way of looking at how Obama looks at the Iranian Mullahs? As “Community Organizers” seeking to stick it to Da Man, no more devout than Rev Wright but just playing a scam that looks good on TV and sounds nice to the unwashed hoping for a bigger welfare check?

Jun 16, 2009 - 2:31 pm 34. hdgreene:

Right after the election I speculated this might be the start of a “Cultural Revolution” in Iran. While cultural revolutions cause turmoil throughout the nation they are aimed at one part of the ruling clique. There is an event that draws out the “Counter Revolutionaries” and then, after the 100 flowers bloom, their heads are cut off. Cultural Revolutions (Stalin in the 30’s and Mao in the 50’s and 60’s) are about one part of the ruling clique devouring the other. But the patronage relationships being what they are, not just the leader of a faction is taken down but the entire faction. And a lot of innocent people besides.

The dominant element in the regime, which launches the purge, needs a lot of chaos to mask what they are doing and to paralyze their opponents within the regime into inaction. If an existential threat to the regime can be conjured, than action on the part of the “secret police” can be justified while torpor on the part of the victims (still loyal to the revolutionary project) is rationalized. They are like a part of the body being sacrificed for the health of the whole. In fact, Stalin’s Bolshevik prisoners often remained loyal to the regime while in the labor camp being worked to death.

They will need someone to play Nikolai Bukharin.

One thing, though, if they do it they will need peace abroad, at least in the early stages of the purges. So Obama may enjoy some initial success while it plays out.

Jun 16, 2009 - 2:47 pm 35. Alexis:

President Obama is incorrect when he presumes that the initiative must be made by the United States to have better relations with the Iranian state. If Iran wants better relations, the initiative must come from Iran. If Iran’s de facto government wants to be recognized as the legitimate government, perhaps Iran’s ongoing state of war against the United States since 1979 should also be recognized!

The so-called “Islamic Republic of Iran” has set out as its primary reason for existence the utter eradication of the American people. As an American, I regard Iran’s advocacy of genocide against my people as unacceptable. It is not America’s place to apologize. It is not America’s place to grovel. If anybody is due an apology for appalling conduct, the people of the United States of America are due an apology from Iran!

So, if any new government of Iran wants better relations, it could start by showing contrition for Iran’s continuing policy of advocating the annihilation of America. If the Iranian people desire to end the war between the mullah’s republic and its enemies, the Iranian people can overthrow their tyrants and call for a new beginning. However, any new beginning must come from Iran and fundamentally from the Iranian people. As it is, President Obama has been far too willing to reason with a pharaonic state run by monsters that think the only good American is a dead American.

Jun 16, 2009 - 3:43 pm 36. Doug:

This is what insufficiently sensitive is refering to, btw, for those left behind by the speed and scope of Obama’s Corruption:
—
MORE Money for ACORN!

AmeriCorps IG accuses prominent Obama supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money. Prominent Obama supporter has to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money. Obama fires AmeriCorps IG.
LINK

Byron York correctly identifies the bottom line in this matter.

It’s that simple. A clear case of political corruption by a loyal supporter of our Dear Leader, and Obama responds by firing the government employee doing their job by reporting the corruption. This is what passes for “transparency” in the reign of democrat Barack Hussein Obama.

Jun 16, 2009 - 3:46 pm 37. Doug:

» Obama’s Americorps scandal — and the First Lady’s meddling

Jun 16, 2009 - 3:46 pm 38. Doug:

Obama co-sponsered the bill requiring 30 days notice of the firing of an Inspector General.
Now he fires an IG with 40 minutes notice!
—
Said IG is a 78 year old prosecutor with impeccable credentials going back to the Nixon era.

Jun 16, 2009 - 3:50 pm 39. Gordon:

#31–Sorry; that link only feeds on to another where one comment makes the same unsupported claim about the grandmother. In #s 13 and 14 I didn’t see anything about the grandmother. But thanks for trying to help.

Jun 16, 2009 - 3:53 pm 40. Mongoose:

hdgreene: I wonder if they are really that clever.
That does not preclude, however, some other player from using this sort of stratagem to monkey around over there. No shortage of foreign Bolshivecks yonder it seems to me.
(I also cannot help but wonder if Mossad’s gentle hands are not at work over there as well.)

Neither is it necessarily the case that chaos or sheer pig-headedess to the crisis would not produce the same results had the mullahs not possessed the sort of Bolshevik cunning and cogitations you ascribe to them.

In any event, they hardly seem a subtle lot to me, and i wonder if they either have the raw brute power or the political support to get away with what either Mao or Stalin got away with.

Time will tell, but these demonstrations are huge, millions of people, and Iran is hardly in the position that Russian and China were at the time of those catastrophes.

But you could be right, of course. We will know soon enough. If you are right, then we will see what the rest of the world is made of. Now that may be sobering to see.

Jun 16, 2009 - 3:55 pm 41. Marie Claude:

“Michael Rubin at NRO warned against the danger of seeing events in Iran through the prism of Western Democratic politics. The elections are part of a wider struggle for power whose intensity is beyond anything ordinary citizens in the West know.”

here is an interesting analyse from Stratfor

http://bit.ly/6OS3A

Jun 16, 2009 - 4:54 pm 42. twobyfour:

hdgreene/34

The whole thing has “miscalculation” written over it. Khamenei wanted to keep his poodle in, it is simply matter of the least resistance, why installing some new face if the old one serves just well? He just did not think that the resistance from general public would be so strong.

The question is to what degree it is possible to contain the insurrection. Perhaps some kind of recount carrot? Khamenei would still end up with decent margin for his poodle–he does not have to control the horizontal, controlling the vertical is all that is needed.

But the situation may be already out of hand. It depends on may factors and some may be rather fluid and uncontrollable, it depends how ruthless Khamenei is willing to be and how the opposition would react–recoil in fear or being in the corner and nowhere else to go but forward. It may not even be about Mousavi anymore.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:11 pm 43. twobyfour:

Four conjectures

1. Mousavi Declared Winner

This appears to be the second least likely scenario but the one most problematic for the Supreme Leader, who has already endorsed Ahmadinejad’s victory. For this to happen, Ahmadinejad would have to lose about 10 million votes. The scale of voting irregularity would then appear so brazen that it is difficult to see how it could be sold to the Iranian public without permanently damaging key institutions. It would require several high-level scapegoats, probably all high-ranking officials in the Interior Ministry and maybe some Revolutionary Guards tasked with guarding ballot boxes. Some administrators on the ground would doubtless also be fed to the wolves.

This decision would almost certainly bring Ahmadinejad’s supporters on the streets in huge numbers and potentially see as much, or even more, disruption and violence on the streets. The humiliation of Ahmadinejad, who has been packed off to Moscow, would be a huge boost to political heavyweights like former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, but it could spark a backlash from others in the political establishment, with hardliners playing the nationalist card by highlighting international pressure for a Mousavi victory. (To its credit, the Obama administration has so far done well to avoid providing this ammunition and would probably continue to do so.)

2. Ahmadinejad confirmed as victor

This appears to be the most-likely scenario. The Guardian Council may remain confident in the result and that any manipulation remains undetectable. They may have, before making this morning’s announcement, quietly taken soundings amongst Iranian elites and institutions to confirm these assumptions.

Ahmadinejad’s lead would almost certainly be cut, and the election would appear much more competitive, but he would still win outright. This would still ask some tough questions as to why the President’s majority was initially so huge and would probably still require some scapegoats.

This result would obviously not convince many core opposition supporters. Their reaction, however, could swing in one of two different directions. They could feel that, even with a re-confirmed Ahmadinejad victory, this unprecedented enquiry means the establishment can be pushed further. On the other hand, they could feel that they have reached the limits of what they can achieve. Meanwhile, the political establishment could see this gesture as their final offer and then crack down hard on any further opposition.

3. The election goes to a second-round runoff

This appears perhaps the second most likely scenario but would pose a huge political and logistical question for all parties.

Ahmadinejad’s vote would be cut to below 50% so he would enter a head-to-head contest with Mousavi. The numbers would be altered to increase the first-round vote for Karroubi and Rezaei, whose poor showing, even in their home provinces been greeted with extreme suspicion. Again, scapegoats would be needed.

A second-round ballot would re-establish some legitimacy without provoking the violence that would likely follow scenarios 1 and 2. It is likely that this re-run would be supervised by figures with substantial credibility in Iran (maybe Speaker of the Parliament Ali Larijani). Such a body was proposed for the first election but rejected by the Supreme Leader.

This would be expensive and logistically difficult, with much of the infrastructure on the streets and in the various campaigns is paralysed. There is certainly no guarantee that Mousavi would win, either. His campaign may want to go back to the polls quickly, whilst their supporters are mobilised. On the other hand, they may want a cooling-off period in which they can recompose their strategy, redefine their message, and normalise their communications.

4. Election is declared null and void and new election called

Although this is the option apparently favoured by the Mousavi campaign, it has apparently been rejected by the Guardian Council and is thus the most unlikely scenario. Writing off the first election as irredeemably corrupt and mismanaged would be enormously embarrassing for the political establishment and, again, even more logistically problematic. Would candidates de-selected by the Guardian Council be able to re-apply, would there be more television debates or campaign messages? When would the election occur and how would it be supervised to guarantee legitimacy? This scenario would, like all of the others, require heads to roll at a local and central level.

Again, there is no guarantee that Mousavi would win and there is a real question whether Mehdi Karroubi would even stand. This could essentially be a second-round contest between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:39 pm 44. Doug:

What would you know about revolutions, 2by?
-
“Perhaps some kind of recount carrot?”

…also serves to satiate the MSM’s need for a narrative.
In service to The One.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:43 pm 45. buddy larsen:

The Iran regime has been the hands of terror for thirty years and now it’s on the ropes –this could be huge –this could be the end of the endless war. Cripes! if I was Obama, i’d be pulling out the stops to help make that happen –i’d be thinking about me & Mount Rushmore, and my party in *consensual* power for a generation –i mean, this is a mighty gift of providence! Yet the guy won’t even add the littlest dab of emphasis to a single word of his dry pro-forma dissembles. I think he identifies with the mullahs, is what i think.

Jun 16, 2009 - 5:48 pm 46. Doug:

“It’s not productive, given the history of US/Iranian relations to be seen as meddling.”
—
…blame America First.
I inherited this.
Real leadership would be terrifying, Buddy.
Fear of the unknown.

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:00 pm 47. RAH:

This is a fight to the death now. Khamenai has to win to retain his seat as Supreme Ayatollah. He has put other Grand Ayatollah under arrest and his religous credential have been challenged by Rasfanjani who is the power behind Mousavi.

Ahmadinejad ran to Russia maybe to do a deal about the gas fields and set up a safe haven.

As to similar disarray happening here. I hope not. The best is that we do not have foreign mercenaries as Hezbolla and Hamas in riot police uniforms.

We have local and nationa gurad and FBi as domestic police to supress insurrections. Plus insurrections are treason by definition so that it is a worst case we don’t want to get to. I really don’t expect that our anger has to get that high.

Obama will submit to the will of voters in sufficient voters vote him out of office.

But he was just voted in ofice nad has not turned off the majority of voters yet so that case is not yet. If he violates law extremely then impeachment is an option, but he has to tick off the Democrats and right now that has not happened except for a few like ,McCaskill.

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:38 pm 48. twobyfour:

Doug/44

Well, in this case:

Mousavi insisted on Tuesday that he would “protect” his supporters’ votes “at all cost, even if I am at risk.”

Shouting from a car roof to a roaring crowd of supporters, he declared: “The pillars of the revolution have been shaken… We must not be silent.”

Notice the comment about pillars of revolution. He means the one that happened and established itself in 1979, and in which he participated.

If the counter-mullah-revolution spreads to other cities (as it seems it does), if part of the IRGC switches sides (rumor has it that so far 14 commanders were in negotiations with army elements about that, Khamenei got a whiff and they are detained, but the question is if they were only the more in-your-face participants of a trend) and if the Mousavi supporters have stamina and guts not to back down…

The Basij and Hezboys use motorcycles to attack the protesters. How long it would take for someone getting an idea to use fishing line or few to transverse the street?

I know, ifs…

Jun 16, 2009 - 6:52 pm 49. Dan:

<>

Ah, yes… what movie was that?

Jun 16, 2009 - 7:03 pm 50. RAH:

The real question is which side the army will support. So far they have been neutral but there was Twitter report that the army was entering north Tehran.

This goes to to the question of who will be the Grand Ayatollah not who is President. The mobs will not accept a recount that is a pacifier anymore.

I saw the video of the murder in the dorms that was cold blooded murder, not the panic shots in the street that killed some people.

Jun 16, 2009 - 7:15 pm 51. Charles:

39.

Here is a video of Obama’s grandmother saying that Obama is born in Kenya.

Jun 16, 2009 - 7:28 pm 52. buddy larsen:

RAH/47; This is a fight to the death now –with all those faces now recorded and saved, and the methods of the prisons and legal system, that copius public neck-stretching, oh yes, it’s a fight now for sure.

Jun 16, 2009 - 7:36 pm 53. The Wobbly Guy:

(Posted on the prior thread)

I’m sorry, but the only outcome I see is Moussavi cutting a deal with the mullahs, under the guise of saving the lives of those who perceived themselves fighting for freedom.

The mullahs win – the revolution loses its nominal figurehead.
Moussavi wins – whatever deals and concessions he can extract out of the mullahs.
The revolutionaries? They lose.

In their world, the only thing that matters is “I win”.

At this point, they can’t afford to let Moussavi win, even if he is in their pockets. The people will have gotten a whiff of their own power, and will not be easily ignored in the future. The mullahs will have to clamp down NOW if they are to retain their unchallenged authority.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:15 pm 54. hdgreene:

Moongoose and 2×4,

What is intersting in this election is that nobody seems sure how much fraud there was. I’ve read anywhere from a little to so much that it constitutes a coup d’etat, rather than a stolen election. If there was only a little fraud, than the Iranians got the guy who got the most votes and there is some misunderstanding based on very bad exit polling or the urban tea house crowd talking to each other and voting one way — and not knowing any peasants who all voted the other.

But if the “revolutionary progressives” bumped Ahmadinejad up from 13 percent to 62 percent and the slightly less progressive (but protest vote magnet) Mousavi down from 65 percent — as I have also seen suggested — then they are going to have to shove “the winner” down the nation’s throat. If that is the case (and I certainly do not know that it is) it would require a lot of advanced planning by a very powerful group ready to take on another powerful group. And probably take them to the mat as well.

If that is so they might start out by picking up some low level types, squeeze them, and then start working their way up. If you want to take out someone like Rafsanjani and his network, then you might need to come at him from 12 directions at once.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:18 pm 55. blert:

Mousavi became the unfavorite son…

Ayatollah Rafsanjani is the player that brings out a unified opposition — within the regime.

That Mousavi is as repressive as any is fact.

So one must take the election as merely a flash point.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:35 pm 56. Tarnsman:

Operation Valkyrie, Iranian-style, anyone?

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:37 pm 57. Lifeofthemind:

When people are fighting totalitarians it does not help to point out that the only available locus for them to rally around is imperfect. It can be seriously flawed even but what we need to consider is that the very act of rebellion build a space for liberty to grow. Let us support Mousavi and not criticize him while the Iranian people use him as a tool to rally against Ahmadinejehad. Once the currently dominating forces of repression are weakened we can then focus on the next problem. Keep your eyes on the prize. As long as we do not allow ourselves to fall into the error of supporting someone even worse then we should be OK in championing the opposition to the governing tyrant. The perfect should not be the enemy of the sufficient and we should ensure that we do not enable the merely sufficient or even undesirable to fall to the benefit of the truly dangerous and evil. When we (that is Carter) withdrew support from the imperfect Shah we did not consider that Khomeini would be far worse. When people say that we should accept the current illegitimate leaders in Iran because the only alternative on the stage is also linked to hateful or antagonistic doctrines they are similarly short sighted.

Jun 16, 2009 - 8:51 pm 58. Alexis:

If one were faced with a feud between Hermann Goering and Heinrich Himmler in the 1960’s over which Nazi faction would control the Third Reich, one would be caught between the fact that one faction is clearly worse than the other and the fact that each faction is Nazi.

Although Ahmadinejad should be utterly opposed, Mousavi should be given a cool reception pending a significant change in attitude from him. It is understandable that Iranians should rally behind Mousavi; he is their banner at the moment. The United States should take a “wait and see” approach; if this is a real revolution, any welcome the new regime receives should be cautious.

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:01 pm 59. buddy larsen:

i keep hearing wonderment that Achmadinejad *way* overdid the margin (62%) and has done some impossible speed-counting. What if he’s trying to set off this insurrection?

Achmadinejade left town, went to Moscow (there was a long-scheduled meeting, i think) where Medvedyev (and China) today endorsed his victory and will now take the position that the anti-Achmadinejade forces are illegitimate threats to peace and Russia’s ‘near abroad’.

Time to refresh on the map.

Iran is only a short march thru Georgia and Russia-friendly Armenia. If Achmadinejade ‘invited’ Russia in to help restore legitimate order (and how many times has Russia & puppets set up THAT situation?) the march would delegitmize a Georgia (which would have to grant transit or die), would wrap up under “protection of the only force that can guarantee regional peace” ALL the pipelines including the new one under construction that so dilutes the Russ monopoly, would en passant solve another “frozen conflict”, which would drop –via alliance if not repatriation –oil hyper-rich (and perfectly located for Caspian and central Asian petro commerce & politics) Azerbaijan and its great oil hub city (and site of spilt Russian WW2 blood) Baku.

Soon enough Turkey would have to drift out of Nato –a longtime Russian goal, quietly as important as Putin’s public goal of reestablishing the ‘border stability’ of the USSR borders. Bonus now, no more NATO, what would be its point?

China and India too, would have to play ball with a Kremlin shadow across the entire Persian Gulf. Hell, oil-less Japan and the Asian Tigers –and Australia –would need to rapproch, too. Saudi Arabia and the kingdoms too.

…and there would go the oil, there would go the USA economy, too late for Pelosi to relent and let us drill, too late to build the hundred nuclear plants we need, too late for jack shit (thanks greenies you ignorant fools). All at the worst possible time to have a price spike to that $250/bbl the head of Gazprom floated the other day.

Russia’s ancient dream of a warm water port on the Persian Gulf would be as good as realized via Iran. The risk-laden war on Georgia last year would make more sense as Russia’s need to base south of the Caucasus range of winter (nearly) impassable mountains.

Oh, on it goes –we’ll probably lose Alaska too –Moscow loves Sarah Palin and would never treat her like USA’s dominant culture does –not to mention USA’s dominant culture’s proscription against Alaskans using their own freaking resources.

oh hell.

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:27 pm 60. dan:

That’s a great point, whoever made it above:

Whatever occurs, the people have gotten a profound taste of their power – this will be the major formative event of at least the younger generation. Without an ingenuity that is probably beyond the power of the present order, these demonstrations herald a change that will inexorably change that order. The Revolution’s generation is fading, and the ideology is dissolving into mere ethnic nationalism. Khamenei is an old man. Whatever may have been intended by the various powers, the egg has been cracked.

Maybe I shouldn’t have been so skeptical.

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:32 pm 61. Leo Linbeck III:

There once was a man named Mahmoud
Whose plan was remarkably shrewd

After casting his vote
He began then to gloat

‘Cause he knew the Great Satan was screwed.

— —

In a country long ruled by mad clerics
It is crucial to keep a full barracks

For the people may say
That they’re filled with dismay

Leaving no other choice but barbarics.

— —

As we face a regime based on crime
Our new Prez spouts out speeches sublime

Though it looks like we’re stuck
With a wee bit of luck

He may yet get us peace in our time.

— —

L3

Jun 16, 2009 - 9:55 pm 62. Tamquam:

Obama, I believe, has only one question to ask in regards to his regime’s policy towards Iran (or anything else): will this or that action make my position stronger or weaker, increase or diminish my power?

Jun 16, 2009 - 10:13 pm 63. Mad Fiddler:

Most Belmont Club regulars well remember that the Ayuttolahs, the Majlis, the Guardian Council, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard are the regime that came into being with the seizure of the U.S. Embassy and the almost two years’ imprisonment, degradation, and torment of American diplomatic and support personnel.

The enormity of this outrage has faded from the public mind, and with the present intellectual torpor of the educational system, many people simply don’t have a clue about how much of a disruption of international norms this represents. Since the late Renaissance, governments painstakingly have been crafting a tradition and a set of international rules for “permanent diplomatic missions.” The inviolability of embassy diplomatic staff and property have been respected even when countries have been at war, ready to destroy each other. It is a system that works, that has proven its worth to nations in conflict, as a means for transmitting the actual views and intentions of governments that cannot afford to speak plainly to each other in the clear of public discourse.

I’m aware of only a handful of occasions in which an embassy has been violated in modern times:

1) The 1984 murder of Metropolitan Police Service Constable Yvonne Joyce Fletcher, victim of a hail of bullets aimed generally at Libyan nationals behind London police barriers in St. James Square protesting recent Libyan political executions. The machine gun bursts came from inside the Libyan People’s Bureau (i.e., the “Libyan Embassy”) where thugs loyal to Colonel Moamar Gadaffi served in place of any actual trained professional diplomatic staff. The British government was sufficiently outraged by this atrocity that they blockaded the place for eleven days, eventually allowing the criminals to leave under diplomatic immunity.

2) The 1996 siege of several hundred Japanese diplomats, bureaucrats, military officers and guests in Lima, Peru, by 14 terrorists of the Movimiento Revolucionario Túpac Amaru. Although many of the initially siezed hostages were released early, the terrorists held a number of them for 126 days, until Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori ordered a raid which had been planned and rehearsed for weeks, to overwhelm the terrorists and free the hostages.

3) The invasion of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran, and the seizure of 52 diplomatic, service, and military staff in 1979, by Iranian “students.” The Ayutollah Ruholla Khomeini had just returned from years of exile in Paris some weeks before and summarily dismissed the interim provisional government. The clerics and radicals who had helped cast out the Shah months earlier were still in the early stages of setting up a replacement government. They did not immediately condemn or support the action – which amounts to a tacit acceptance and approval. The “students” took this as full endorsement, and continued tearing apart the embassy offices, parading blindfolded hostages before the Western news crews each day. Presently, Khomeini and the other clerics observed that the international outcry against them actually served to consolidate support for the infant Islamic Republic, among the faithful. They ignored international outrage, and proceeded with the process of arresting and eliminating dissenters, communists, leftists, union organizers, and infidels of all other faiths, meanwhile cementing Shari’ah in place, arresting, trying, and imposing condign punishment upon adulterous and immodest women, thieves, homosexuals, blasphemers, et cetera.

Of those three incidents, only the Iranian seizure stands as an unresolved act of international outlaw behavior, an outrage not merely against the USA, but a violation and mock of the entire diplomatic system the international community has depended upon for half a thousand years. It’s taken decades for the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Republic to slowly re-open diplomatic and trade relations with a substantial number of other nations. This has been at least partly because many of the Islamic middle eastern countries are ruled by authoritarian secular regimes, and view with deep alarm the prospect of spreading Islamic Theocratic rule that would supplant them as emphatically as it would any government of unbelievers.

In many ways, you can see how a Radical Leftist pointy-headed Law School Academic with celebrity-unrepentant-bomb-making terrorist personal friends – “OUTLAWS” – would tend to admire and want to emulate the Regime of the Mullahs.

You can see it in the oceanic pronouncements, skimpy on details, but toplofty in sweeping emotion and uncritical grandeur.

You can see it in the imperious irritation shown in the dismissal of protest at the torrent of fresh enormities and dismantling of institutions held as irreplaceable by most of the country.

You can see it in the generation of encyclopedic new rules, so akin to the recorded instructions from the Great Ayutollah to his followers on every aspect of human activity, from sexual relations, to eating, bathing, attitudes, and proper bathroom hygiene.

And finally, you can see it in the threats, bullying, and sheer intimidation of those who fail to knuckle under with the desired promptness.

Andrew Young, the civil rights activist who was elected to serve as Mayor of Atlanta, to the U.S. Congress, and who was appointed by James Earl Carter to represent the USA in the United Nations, predicted that the Ayatollah Ruholla Musavi Khomeini would eventually be regarded as a modern-day saint.

It’s true.

I can imagine a certain cosmopolitan chief executive (PBUH) standing in front of the mirror trying on the sacred robes and turban.

“You know the difference between you and me?” he grins boyishly at the shade of Khomeini and shoots his cuffs. “I make these look GOOD!“

Jun 16, 2009 - 10:58 pm 64. Doug:

Tamquam,
Indeed.
You have plumbed the depths of the man’s character.

Jun 16, 2009 - 10:58 pm 65. Pajamas Media » Iran’s Revolutionary Guards: A State Within a State:

[...] Read the rest of the story here. [...]

Jun 17, 2009 - 12:36 am 66. twobyfour:

http://thespiritofman.blogspot.com/2009/06/updates-from-tehran.html

Jun 17, 2009 - 1:18 am 67. Mongoose:

Buddy: you are hardly being boring by pointing this out. Depressing, yes; boring no.

But a sane man can not help but be depressed by this. The trcik is rousing to anger and then action.

Jun 17, 2009 - 2:42 am 68. whataloadacrap08:

#41 Marie Claude: That article was the most prescient piece that I’ve read about the Iranian election situation since this whole pot started boiling over. Thank you!

Personally, I think the so-called reformers are being drawn out into the light of day in order to make them more visible to the real state power in Iran, namely Ahmadinijad. When he is ready, I fear the blood is going to flow in Tehran, and when the slaughter is over
Ahmadinijad’s power will be uncontested for the next few decades.

Ironically, a regime that has been notoriously insular in its relations with the world is now allowing Twittering university gnats almost unlimited access to correspond with those Western sources who are encouraging them to revolt.

Why?

It doesn’t make any sense unless you consider it part of Ahmadinijad’s scheme to let his enemies paint themselves with Dayglow targets prior to his unleashing of the Basij, eh? The fools are being lead by the nose like cattle and they don’t even know it.

I hope I’m wrong, but the sick feeling in my guts tells me otherwise.

Jun 17, 2009 - 3:06 am 69. blogstrop:

#63 – Mad Fiddler: Thanks for that. It has not faded from my memory, and it should “live in infamy”, like Pearl Harbour. The USA would have been perfectly justified in declaring war on Iran right there, in return for that act of extreme belligerence, which was,legally, an act of war in itself. You don’t hear much about that aspect these days, despite the increased appetite for spouting the term “international law” at every turn. But the USA had President Carter at the wheel back then, who thought some fireside chats might sort things out.

Jun 17, 2009 - 4:55 am 70. Marie Claude:

whataloadacrap08

people can’t believe that they are manipulated by the new kind of virtual armada, the internet twitterers & Cie.

The Mullahs evilness has no limits.

oh yes, we the smart “educated” Net addicted mobs, we’d like to dream of a change there, Musavi is fitting our cultural criteriums of a good nation leader, while Ahmadinijad’s are disgusting us, how comes, he represents our plebe’s revendications too, but we know how he is reacting, how his mind works so we can adapt a crear response to.

While Musavi, the elegant looking ol orientalist is much more perverse, he isn’t working for us, but still for the theocracy, he is kind of strategist of the mullahs’ doctrine.

I am afraid the both candidates are 2 faces of the same system, one is titilling above the belt and the other under the belt.

I don’t buy any of them. I feel sorry for the iranian youth that really thought somethin would change there, they’ll pay their naivety in the next day, Musavi’s wife is counting their heads !

Besides, they still attack us, our embassy in Teheran has been “hitted” by rioters, of whatever camps, since we voiced against them ; easier to target a “small devil” than the “great Satan”, from which regards, whatever camps is playing the act for.

Contrary to the majority, I think Obama, considering the stakes, had the good responses, “leave them sort out their candidate, since they’ll be making the same policy”

Jun 17, 2009 - 5:49 am 71. twobyfour:

whataloadacrap08/68

I think the so-called reformers are being drawn out into the light of day in order to make them more visible to the real state power in Iran

As if Interior Ministry did not have thick files on every shade of a reformer…

… Ahmadinijad’s power will be uncontested for the next few decades.

Ahmadjihadi power just got contested.

Stratfor analysis presumes static Iran, with unchanged distribution of political and cultural structures as 20 years ago. But that is not the case. Demographic change just transpired there in the last decade. 55% of population is under 30. 40% is under 25. Any assumptions that Iran’s base societal structure is as always was are misguided. The young generation sees the Shorty’s occasional fiery speeches against mullah corruption as a ruse. They noticed that it is always a certain segment of mullahs that are corrupt according to Shorty–the reformers.

They also see something remarkable in the neighborhood–an attempt for democratic governance in Iraq. Not set in stone that it will be a success, but Iraqis are trying. It has a powerful attraction, especially for the young people that know their chances for personal advancement in the current political niveau in Iran are slim.

Is it possible that Ahmadjihadi and Khamenei are planing a crackdown? Yes, they may try.
But people know the actual election results that were leaked from the Interior Ministry, that put Ahmadjihadi in third place and the fact that the leaker just got killed in na suspicious car accident seems to confirm these figures rather than put them in doubt.

Remember the demographics. Young people that don’t see much of a future with the current regime may simply decide that they’ve got not much to lose.

Mousavi is not that different from Shorty, I am sure that people can discern that fact. But the battle is not as much for the presidency as for the position of gray eminence behind it. People know that if they would be able to influence the presidency, they may be able to influence the real power behind it as well. That is what is really at stake.

Jun 17, 2009 - 6:05 am 72. twobyfour:

MC, you don’t get it. BHO voted “present”, with a hint that there is really no totalitarian he dislikes.

Jun 17, 2009 - 6:20 am 73. Wadeusaf:

What a tremendous effect Hong Kong has had on the Chinese people, yet the antics of the Politburo continue. Iguess the choice is between a Cultural revolution of sorts and a more open society. What a difference a head scarf makes.

Jun 17, 2009 - 6:28 am 74. Marie Claude:

72 Twoby, do you think that your former administration was absent of the backyards ? hey, they were playing the same act, while saying the contrary

Jun 17, 2009 - 6:34 am 75. Instapundit » Blog Archive » IRAN’S REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS: A State Within A State….:

[...] IRAN’S REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS: A State Within A State. [...]

Jun 17, 2009 - 7:15 am 76. Fletcher Christian:

How about this idea? Close the Tehran embassy, and leave a message that they aren’t getting the building back. Enforce that decision by booby-trapping the building; if anyone walks in, the place blows up.

(I presume that the US embassy in Tehran actually belongs to the hosts; that’s usually the case.)

Jun 17, 2009 - 7:18 am 77. twobyfour:

Wadeusaf/73

Name two fastest growing religions in Iran.
Headscarfs… one thing that was quite surprising on images/videos from the past few days is how many young ladies don’t wear any… seems that the attire police has a caseload too large to handle.

MC/74

Hmmmm, no and no.

Jun 17, 2009 - 7:19 am 78. onesimus:

Consider Spengler’s take on this at Asia Times.

Onesimus

Jun 17, 2009 - 7:20 am 79. Mad Fiddler:

Doug, are you saying in your #64 that Our Sainted Leader has all the depth of the image on the ten-thousandth copy from a Brother Color Copier?

Jun 17, 2009 - 9:13 am 80. Doug:

Don’t mock the brother, brother.
-
– Innocent Googling? No Such Thing in Tehran –

Jun 17, 2009 - 9:51 am 81. Doug:

Iran Tightens Crackdown and Claims U.S. Interference
-
Iran expanded a crackdown on journalists and for the first time directly accused the United States of interference in the disputed presidential election.
Media Decoder: In Iran, Fewer Journalists Each Day
-
Washington Taps Into a Potent New Force in Diplomacy

Jun 17, 2009 - 10:11 am 82. buckets:

Drudge:

“Iran seeking nuclear weapons technology: ElBaradei”

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE55G21V20090617

OMG – WTF is up with Iran lately??? Back when McChimpyHitlerBushCo was ruling our country with an iron fist, Iran seemed pretty cool. They were just pursuing peaceful nucular technology – I know that’s true bcuz ElBaradei said Bush was lying about Iran being part of that totally BS “Axis of Evil” stuff. Keith Olbermann told me that Bush was lying about Iran being dangerous to whip up war fever.

Iran TOTALLY must have gotten scared by BushCheneyHalliburtonExxon’s saber rattling and threats to “wipe Iran off the map,” so now Iran is so frightened that it is trying for nucular missiles tech now. I mean, I would be scared if BooshRumsfeldTheDevil was threatening me, too – those Rethuglicans are Christianist psychos!

It will take us YEARS to convince Iran that we aren’t a threat to them now, but luckily (TG) we have a leader now like Obama (PBUH) who will do his best to placate, grovel, beg, and withdraw American armies from the Mid East. I’m sure if Iran can get a comfortable buffer zone by taking over Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc., then they will be convinced WE AREN’T EVIL ANYMORE AND OBAMA IS PEACEFUL – and then Iran will give up trying for nukes!!!!!

Jun 17, 2009 - 10:14 am 83. El_Heffe:

“The reorientation of the IRGC mission to face internal threats is a tacit admission of political weakness. Contrary to the narrative that Iran has been strengthened by the events of recent years, it is strongly suggestive that the opposite is true. And now that the internal threat has actually materialized, the Obama administration should ask itself whether it is wise public policy to throw a regime racked by internal dissention and possibly collapsing upon itself the lifeline of “engagement”; whether it is opportune to give it international legitimacy and remove the sanctions at a time when it is beating itself up. In others words, the administration must ask whether it makes any sense to ring the bell just as Teheran is on the ropes. Following the lead of Kim Jong Il can be described as an act of dialogue without precondition, or it may simply be stupidity without precedent.”

For the media to admit that iran has been weakened by the events of recent years would require an presumtion that a weakened Iran is good for the US, as well as requiring ascribing some level of virtue to Bush. That is not something that the media will readily allow. Look for Iran to receive tacit if not overt moral support from the bush-haters in time. that or the weakness and instability will be cast and a bug not a feature.

The alternative for them would mean eating an awful lot of crow… not gonna happen unless something figuratively grabs them in an arm lock, takes them by the hair of the head, points their face to the evidence and then prys their eyelids open.

A semi-plausible if optimistic scenario involves Obama “getting it” and then turning the lefty media types recomendation to “wait to engage” into an indefinite “delay” thus allowing the internal disention to gain some traction.

I’m not gonna hold my breath on this though.

And if all we are seeing is in fact one set of thugs trying to dislodge another from the seat of power then it may not make much difference anyway.

Oh the world we live in!

Jun 17, 2009 - 10:45 am 84. Marie Claude:

“Zahra: “Terrorism is embodied by the great powers, especially the US. Through their State terrorism which they have exported to all parts of the world, they have been behind the martyrdom of the great Muslim thinkers such as Dr. Ali Shari’ati, Murteza Muttahari, Ayatullah Beheshti, Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir al-Sadir, Sheikh Raghib Harb, the family of martyr Faruqi, Sheikh Subhi al-Salih, and many others, as it is they who fanned the flames of the war forced on Iran, who bombed Libya and who were behind the murder of Sulaiman Khater and Khalid al-Islambouli and his brothers in Egypt.

Nor is that all. For American political factories in all areas of the world are at present engaged in training women who have put themselves in the service of the oppressors and the US interest through their conduct and attitudes and minds. We see them in the same trench with those who deceive people and their Islamic ambitions for their countries. It is impossible for America and taghooti states to tolerate a mujahid or mujahida. The have been at receiving end from all-sides. Consequently, whenever they see a Muslim woman who has risen to combat kufir, shirk and imperialism with conviction and with all her being – they spare no effort – through their stooges and their recruits – to portray her in a terrifying image in order to prevent her true personality, which is hostile to oppression, from becoming an example to be followed by other women. I have myself been suspected of terrorism and of training girls in terrorism. Perhaps the reason behind giving me a distorted image of terrorism goes back to my being the wife of the prime minister Hussain Musavi. In this way they want to level a charge of terrorism against the Islamic leadership as a whole. In me they found their opportunity, since I am an activist and since I have my own independent personality which had been known to the Iranian people before they knew my husband. That is because I worked in the cultural sphere in my own name and through my stand against the US and the Shah. My objective in all this was to oppose foreign and secular culture disorientation or disinformation against weaker nations and against the Muslim Ummah.”

Zahra Rahnavard, Musavi’s wife, isn’t she a nice chick ?

http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/tale-of-two-muslim-feminists/

Jun 17, 2009 - 10:45 am 85. Marie Claude:

Zahra Rahnavard and her husband were communist opponants during Shah regime and endorsed Khomeiny islamist views and thus escape to the communist purge, some escape to Irak, but a lot were eliminated

so who need such good fellahs like that ?

Jun 17, 2009 - 10:48 am 86. Mad Fiddler:

thanks for the link, Doug. I followed it and found a New York Times article under the byline “BILL KELLER.”

It was a really engaging “read” with a seemingly sane POV.

But… BILL KELLER???? Isn’t that the chief editor of the organization, not just some roaming beat reporter?

I would love to know if this is the same guy who has made vicious anti-government/anti-American statements in the past. Maybe he’s not so rabidly anti-American under the Obama presidency.

Jun 17, 2009 - 11:04 am 87. OGLiberal:

@Fletcher Christian

You do know that we haven’t had a functioning embassy in Iran since 1979?

Jun 17, 2009 - 11:06 am 88. Marie Claude:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQgc5Tp1Gsw

Al Jazeera about the farce

Jun 17, 2009 - 11:14 am 89. Self-hating Boomer:

The reorientation of the IRGC mission to face internal threats is a tacit admission of political weakness.

Don’t underestimate the effect of their economic problems on both their unpopularity and the weakness of their security apparatus. The general level of economic suck may end up being the deciding factor in the outcome.

Jun 17, 2009 - 1:41 pm 90. Fletcher Christian:

OGLiberal: oops, missed that one. Maybe you should move back in then, very publicly, and THEN blow it up. What are the Iranians doing with the building now? And is it still American territory by international law? Not that Iran cares about that in any case.

Jun 17, 2009 - 2:38 pm 91. Wadeusaf:

Bahá’í (had to search for that), and Christianity.

Gotta love them fashion police, I am sure somewhere there is photo shoot on how to accessorize for the revolution.

Jun 18, 2009 - 5:53 am 92. My News Summary, 6/19/2009 « Mr. Smith Goes Conservative Blogging:

[...] articles on the situation in Iran: What Just Happened?, The moving finger writes, Khomeini’s Arabization of Persia, Hamas helping Iran crack heads?, Wanted: ‘Hope’ [...]

Jun 19, 2009 - 7:05 am 93. john from cinncinatti:

well the big O did well in saying nothing. the mullah spoke today and still smashed us for meddling. whats that ? death to America, i heard…hmm big O can take the gloves off and smack the mullah back with them. in the immortal words of the great poet James Brown “don’t start none won’t be none” from the song papa don’t take no mess. maybe he can get his wife to beat him down, she’s got the bigger guns

Jun 19, 2009 - 3:12 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.