Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[LEFT]Senior officers in Iran's Revolutionary Guards have written to their commanding officer demanding assurances that they will not be required to open fire on anti-government demonstrators.
After the violent clashes during anti-government protests in nearby countries, the officers argue that it is against the principles of Islamic law to use violence against their own people.
...
It goes on to state unequivocally: "We promise our people that we will not shoot nor beat our brothers who are seeking to express legitimate protest against the policies and conduct of their leader."
The Iranian government has called on its supporters to take to the streets on Friday to demonstrate their "hatred" for the opposition Green Movement.
Read more: Iran guards vow to hold fire (http://www.vancouversun.com/Iran+guards+hold+fire/4303158/story.html#ixzz1EFNBGcr5 - broken link)[/LEFT]
It sounds like the military might follow the lead of Egypt's.
[/LEFT]
Unfortunately, because of how we've meddled in the past (think '80s), we've strengthened the government there to such a degree that it seems unlikely the citizens will be successful on their own.
I do not envy the President, Secretary of State and all others in a position to have to make the decisions of how to proceed.
It's important to understand that Iran is more problematic than other countries. Ahmadinejad is the mouthpiece for the theocracy, but he has very long-term and deep ties to the Revolutionary Guard. And the Revolutionary Guard over the past 4 decades has not been merely the military part of the government. The Revolutionary Guard has positioned itself as a key player in Iran's economy. Overthrow the theocracy does not mean a democracy automatically comes into play. In fact, the odds are that if the theocracy is overthrown, the Revolutionary Guard will assume control of the country. Egypt's military assumed control, but with evidently with the intention of fostering a democracy. That would be unlikely in the case of the Revolutionary Guard assuming control. Their involvement in the economy makes them much more interested in controlling the political sector. And they already have people in place. Ahmadinejad may be a puppet in some ways, but he's a puppet with some autonomy, and with that autonomy, he has appointed other people with ties to the Revolutionary Guard to important posts in the government.
So, no, don't envy the President and the State Department, because if the theocracy begins to fall in Iran, they will have to be poised to either intercede against the Revolutionary Guard, or to deal with a militaristic regime in Iran.
It sounds like the military might follow the lead of Egypt's.
Interesting, indeed. However, not necessarily good, as DC points out below. . .
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
It's important to understand that Iran is more problematic than other countries. Ahmadinejad is the mouthpiece for the theocracy, but he has very long-term and deep ties to the Revolutionary Guard. And the Revolutionary Guard over the past 4 decades has not been merely the military part of the government. The Revolutionary Guard has positioned itself as a key player in Iran's economy. Overthrow the theocracy does not mean a democracy automatically comes into play. In fact, the odds are that if the theocracy is overthrown, the Revolutionary Guard will assume control of the country. Egypt's military assumed control, but with evidently with the intention of fostering a democracy. That would be unlikely in the case of the Revolutionary Guard assuming control. Their involvement in the economy makes them much more interested in controlling the political sector. And they already have people in place. Ahmadinejad may be a puppet in some ways, but he's a puppet with some autonomy, and with that autonomy, he has appointed other people with ties to the Revolutionary Guard to important posts in the government.
So, no, don't envy the President and the State Department, because if the theocracy begins to fall in Iran, they will have to be poised to either intercede against the Revolutionary Guard, or to deal with a militaristic regime in Iran.
We are definitely living in interesting times. I'm just grateful John McCain isn't at the helm at the moment. His stated position regarding Iran would have me utterly terrified -- seriously -- actually terrified.
It's important to understand that Iran is more problematic than other countries. Ahmadinejad is the mouthpiece for the theocracy, but he has very long-term and deep ties to the Revolutionary Guard. And the Revolutionary Guard over the past 4 decades has not been merely the military part of the government. The Revolutionary Guard has positioned itself as a key player in Iran's economy. Overthrow the theocracy does not mean a democracy automatically comes into play. In fact, the odds are that if the theocracy is overthrown, the Revolutionary Guard will assume control of the country. Egypt's military assumed control, but with evidently with the intention of fostering a democracy. That would be unlikely in the case of the Revolutionary Guard assuming control. Their involvement in the economy makes them much more interested in controlling the political sector. And they already have people in place. Ahmadinejad may be a puppet in some ways, but he's a puppet with some autonomy, and with that autonomy, he has appointed other people with ties to the Revolutionary Guard to important posts in the government.
So, no, don't envy the President and the State Department, because if the theocracy begins to fall in Iran, they will have to be poised to either intercede against the Revolutionary Guard, or to deal with a militaristic regime in Iran.
You make a strange differentiation between the Ayotollahs and the Revolutionary Guards.
They are actually one and the same. The Revolutionary Guards are exactly what their name describes them to be. They exist to protect the Islamic Revolution. The theocracy cannot be overthrown as long as the Guards exist. That's the problem. The theocracy IS a militaristic regime.
...I'm just grateful John McCain isn't at the helm at the moment. His stated position regarding Iran would have me utterly terrified -- seriously -- actually terrified.
In what way? He is pretty much "Obama lite" in most regards. Just with more experience.
You make a strange differentiation between the Ayotollahs and the Revolutionary Guards.
They are actually one and the same. The Revolutionary Guards are exactly what their name describes them to be. They exist to protect the Islamic Revolution. The theocracy cannot be overthrown as long as the Guards exist. That's the problem. The theocracy IS a militaristic regime.
They are not one and the same. If the theocracy is overthrown, the military doesn't just fade away. The theocracy can be overthrown if the military leaders choose not protect the ayatollahs. Your argument is akin to saying that the President and the Secret Service are one and the same. They aren't.
Senior officers in Iran's Revolutionary Guards have written a letter to their commanding officer demanding assurances that they will not be required to open fire on anti-government demonstrators.
Quote:
In a suggestion of a major split within the Islamic Republic's ruling hierarchy over its handling of anti-government protests, the letter has been circulated widely throughout the ranks of the Revolutionary Guards, the body responsible for defending religious system.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.