dagblog - Comments for "A Dangerous Game: Playing Politics with Iran"

In case I haven't made it

acanuck — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 18:10:41 +0000

In case I haven't made it clear, Obama's approach has been absolutely correct, reasoned and astute. He hasn't burned any bridges to Ahmadinejad, whom he's going to have to deal with if he wants Mideast peace and stability.

I think even Supreme Leader Khamenei recognized this (in a backhand way) when in his Friday speech he singled out Britain, not the U.S., as the biggest meddler in Iranian internal affairs.

By contrast, you've got morons like Krauthammer who are frothing over the prospect of blood running in Tehran's streets: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061803495.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Wisely, the opposition apparently backed off the idea of another mass protest today. The 2,000-3,000 who turned out anyway are not necessarily the best representatives Mousavi has to offer. Reports suggest that some torched an Ahmadinejad office, and that a suicide bomber struck at the shrine to Ayatollah Khomeini -- not the kind of actions that solidify public support; Khomeini continues to be widely revered. Still, aside from the bomber, there's been no reported bloodbath -- always a good thing, in my book.

As I said above, today was the day the defeated candidates were invited to make their cases to the Guardian Council. Mousavi and Karroubi didn't show up. If they are abandoning their legal appeal, I think that's an admission they really have lost.

As of right now, Orlando,

acanuck — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:09:24 +0000

In reply to A Dangerous Game: Playing Politics with Iran

As of right now, Orlando, Mousavi is not calling for another demo on Saturday. So that ratchets back a bit the risk of bloody confrontations. Instead, he and the two other defeated candidates will be making their legal pitches to the Guardian Council, which in turn promises to respond Sunday on how it intends to proceed.

There are 646 separate complaints, so I can't see any way that they can summarily dismiss all of them. If they did, that' would be pretty solid evidence of a coverup, and would reinvigorate the opposition. So there will be some kind of probe and/or recount. The question is how probing the probe will be.

You're absolutely right about the American right. They couldn't care less about Mousavi, or about promoting democracy in Iran. All they can see is a chance to destabilize the country; if there's a backlash and a crackdown leading to more totalitarian rule, all the more reason to bomb.

You're absolutely right about

Orlando — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:55:42 +0000

In reply to Many partisans--Republicans

You're absolutely right about their being partisans on both sides. I'm so sick of it. I wrote this post before they voted. Now that they have, I hate them all. The resolution passed 405 to 1, with only Ron Paul voting against it.

I hope the Democrats feel all warm and fuzzy tomorrow when the crackdown starts. Assholes.

Many partisans--Republicans

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:36:00 +0000

In reply to A Dangerous Game: Playing Politics with Iran

Many partisans--Republicans and Democrats--disagree with everything their opponents say for political points, and Pence and Berman may well be among them, but there are also plenty of Republicans that seem to genuinely believe that shouting their opinions about foreign elections is helpful to the opposition. Bush-Cheney undercut sympathetic political parties from Venezuela to Lebanon plenty of times by cheering for their favorite horses. I don't get it. The folks who subscribe to this philosophy seem unable to grasp the subtle possibility that speaking out is not always the most effective way to support your allies.