Browse News+Opinion
Browse Calendar+Scene
Browse Arts+Movies
Browse Food+Drink
Browse Music+Clubs
Sunday, October 4, 2009
10 Things You Should Know About Iran
Posted by Jack Hunter on Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 12:31 PM
The following is why guys like William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, who were wrong about everything in the lead up to war in Iraq, are considered solid foreign policy analysts worthy of television time, and Juan Cole (the author of this list) is not:
Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the US.Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war in modern history (unlike the US or Israel), and its leaders have a doctrine of “no first strike.” This is true of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as well as of Revolutionary Guards commanders.
Belief: Iran is a militarized society bristling with dangerous weapons and a growing threat to world peace.
Reality: Iran’s military budget is a little over $6 billion annually. Sweden, Singapore and Greece all have larger military budgets. Moreover, Iran is a country of 70 million, so that its per capita spending on defense is tiny compared to these others, since they are much smaller countries with regard to population. Iran spends less per capita on its military than any other country in the Persian Gulf region with the exception of the United Arab Emirates.
Belief: Iran has threatened to attack Israel militarily and to “wipe it off the map.”
Reality: No Iranian leader in the executive has threatened an aggressive act of war on Israel, since this would contradict the doctrine of ‘no first strike’ to which the country has adhered. The Iranian president has explicitly said that Iran is not a threat to any country, including Israel.
Belief: But didn’t President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to ‘wipe Israel off the map?’
Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that “this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.
Belief: But aren’t Iranians Holocaust deniers?
Actuality: Some are, some aren’t. Former president Mohammad Khatami has castigated Ahmadinejad for questioning the full extent of the Holocaust, which he called “the crime of Nazism.” Many educated Iranians in the regime are perfectly aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. In any case, despite what propagandists imply, neither Holocaust denial (as wicked as that is) nor calling Israel names is the same thing as pledging to attack it militarily.
Belief: Iran is like North Korea in having an active nuclear weapons program, and is the same sort of threat to the world.
Actuality: Iran has a nuclear enrichment site at Natanz near Isfahan where it says it is trying to produce fuel for future civilian nuclear reactors to generate electricity. All Iranian leaders deny that this site is for weapons production, and the International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly inspected it and found no weapons program. Iran is not being completely transparent, generating some doubts, but all the evidence the IAEA and the CIA can gather points to there not being a weapons program. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate by 16 US intelligence agencies, including the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, assessed with fair confidence that Iran has no nuclear weapons research program. This assessment was based on debriefings of defecting nuclear scientists, as well as on the documents they brought out, in addition to US signals intelligence from Iran. While Germany, Israel and recently the UK intelligence is more suspicious of Iranian intentions, all of them were badly wrong about Iraq’s alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction and Germany in particular was taken in by Curveball, a drunk Iraqi braggart.
Belief: The West recently discovered a secret Iranian nuclear weapons plant in a mountain near Qom.
Actuality: Iran announced Monday a week ago to the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had begun work on a second, civilian nuclear enrichment facility near Qom. There are no nuclear materials at the site and it has not gone hot, so technically Iran is not in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, though it did break its word to the IAEA that it would immediately inform the UN of any work on a new facility. Iran has pledged to allow the site to be inspected regularly by the IAEA, and if it honors the pledge, as it largely has at the Natanz plant, then Iran cannot produce nuclear weapons at the site, since that would be detected by the inspectors. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted on Sunday that Iran could not produce nuclear weapons at Natanz precisely because it is being inspected. Yet American hawks have repeatedly demanded a strike on Natanz.
Belief: The world should sanction Iran not only because of its nuclear enrichment research program but also because the current regime stole June’s presidential election and brutally repressed the subsequent demonstrations.
Actuality: Iran’s reform movement is dead set against increased sanctions on Iran, which likely would not affect the regime, and would harm ordinary Iranians.
Belief: Isn’t the Iranian regime irrational and crazed, so that a doctrine of mutally assured destruction just would not work with them?
Actuality: Iranian politicians are rational actors. If they were madmen, why haven’t they invaded any of their neighbors? Saddam Hussein of Iraq invaded both Iran and Kuwait. Israel invaded its neighbors more than once. In contrast, Iran has not started any wars. Demonizing people by calling them unbalanced is an old propaganda trick. The US elite was once unalterably opposed to China having nuclear science because they believed the Chinese are intrinsically irrational. This kind of talk is a form of racism.
Belief: The international community would not have put sanctions on Iran, and would not be so worried, if it were not a gathering nuclear threat.
Actuality: The centrifuge technology that Iran is using to enrich uranium is open-ended. In the old days, you could tell which countries might want a nuclear bomb by whether they were building light water reactors (unsuitable for bomb-making) or heavy-water reactors (could be used to make a bomb). But with centrifuges, once you can enrich to 5% to fuel a civilian reactor, you could theoretically feed the material back through many times and enrich to 90% for a bomb. However, as long as centrifuge plants are being actively inspected, they cannot be used to make a bomb. The two danger signals would be if Iran threw out the inspectors or if it found a way to create a secret facility. The latter task would be extremely difficult, however, as demonstrated by the CIA’s discovery of the Qom facility construction in 2006 from satellite photos. Nuclear installations, especially centrifuge ones, consume a great deal of water, construction materiel, and so forth, so that constructing one in secret is a tall order. In any case, you can’t attack and destroy a country because you have an intuition that they might be doing something illegal. You need some kind of proof. Moreover, Israel, Pakistan and India are all much worse citizens of the globe than Iran, since they refused to sign the NPT and then went for broke to get a bomb; and nothing at all has been done to any of them by the UNSC."
Link
Comments (30)
Showing 1-30 of 30
Sounds to me like you are ready to move to that "wonderful" Country. I say do it and take your secession ideas with you.
like
dislike
Surprised/disappointed to hear this come from you. The Southern Avenger becomes an Iranian apologist. I'm saddened.
Congratulations for the excellent article. We need much more of this kind of cool and factual information.
Iran has clearly smuggled weapons to Syria and Hamas, an identified terrorist organization, for use against the U.S.'s closest ally in the Middle East. Does this not conflict with Iran's "no first strike" policy?
Would supplying Hamas with a nuke conflict with Iran's "no first strike" policy or would this be allowable due to the use of an intermediary?
The only thing I would agree with is that Juan Cole and his commentary are not worthy of television time.
How odd to see a man, so distrusting of his own, arguably transparent government (at least with the bright lights of the press set upon it) come out to post defense of a government that grinds dissenters into the pavement. Sure, they're not a militarized society, they're a mostly low-income nation of regular people with a church at the helm. However, your tacit support of Iran's actions following the elections is a bold stripe of hypocrisy for someone so enamored with Jefferson.
So let me get this straight... In being anti-imperialism and against getting involved in "foreign entanglements (to borrow George Washington's phrase), and pro-decentralization to the point of being a secessionist (a hallmark position of Thomas Jefferson), I'm somehow anti-American or pro-big government? For agreeing with the Founding Fathers?
Many self-described conservatives would do well to revisit the philosophy of this republic's founders - as opposed to swallowing liberal internationalist/ Wilsonian globalist philosophy (please Wikipedia either term, please...) of today's Republican (and Democratic) Party.
Just because Iran hasn't attacked any of its neighbors doesn't mean it isn't aggressive. "No strike first" doesn't mean "never strike first." Iran is smart. They've learned the lessons of Iraq and Saddam and what it means to attack one's neighbors, especially when surrounded by larger powers like the USA and the EU. That's why they MUST go nuclear! The best way to secure your borders isnt with a wall, its with a WMD. Once procured..."no strike first" becomes "won't be struck at all" When the music stops...Iran will make sure the Persian Empire has a seat to sit on!
Hexagram...Iran needs WMD to ensure they "won't be struck at all"?!? The WMD's are the reason that there is even any talk of war! Without WMD's Iran would not be on the UN's radar. The road to peace requires disarming the world, not creating more destructive weapons.
So if someone doesn't diss Iran in every breath, he is either an "apologist" or showing "tacit approval" of one or more of that country's policies. The assertions made by this article are cogent and backed up by fact. To infer that its author is somehow un-American for having written it only exposes the desperate fear and contempt held by neo-conservatives for anyone who doesn't march in lockstep to their foreign ambitions.
I used neither the phrase "anti-American" nor "pro-big-government." Dissent and debate from prevailing trend is essentially American.
Your article, if seeking to diffuse the notion of logic in war with Iran, is perfectly reasonable. However, the tone and wording of this piece certainly leave open the notion that you're endorsing Iran's government's take on the matters discussed. If it is important that we consider all these items that you listed, then all the points are up for scrutiny.
Here's another "fact:" the enrichment plant at Qom wasn't accidentally kept from outside eyes. Giving them a little credit, one should believe that Iran is completely and painfully aware of the scrutiny under which their nuclear program is held. They "broke their promise" not for the purpose of waiting for a good moment to let everyone know, but really so that they could get the plant in motion as long as possible before anyone found out. "It is easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission." If Iran's government is interested in getting the world off of its back, they're certainly going about it in a most peculiar way.
Factoryconnection, could you help point out specific phrases Jack used to defend the government of Iran? You seem well read so I figure you'd be willing to elaborate on that comment. Plus, I want to know if I'm being naive by not seeing it on my own. :) I looked into the actualities he listed and they appear to be back pretty firmly with evidence.
Another excellent article based on actual facts and not on xenophobic nonsense, thank you Mr. Hunter.
I am a retired military officer with nearly 30 years service time, including training for and a lengthy stint as an intelligence analyst. Jack, your analysis of the anti-Iran fervor would do any analyst proud.
It's long past time to get the Wilson/Roosevelt/Johnson international meddling policies, sociofascist policies, out of the national dialogue and on the dung heap of history where they belong.
For a free South.
Why did Iran make ANY attempt to hide the Qom plant ? Why not immediate disclosure of its existence, as was required of them ?
And how often CAN inspectors be on-site to inspect ??
Iran may well – probably is ?? - be hiding more than we know or can guess at. There is NO way to be sure, short of militarily intervening in Iran.
Wonderful posts by everyone..however, to all defending this article... how do you reconcile Iran's "no first strike" policy with the fact that Iran clearly supplies Hamas and Hezbollah, two well known terrorist organizations, with weapons to use indiscriminately against Israeli civilians? Until someone can explain this hypocritical foreign policy, this article is nothing more than nonsense!
Wonderful posts by everyone..however, to all defending this article... how do you reconcile Iran's "no first strike" policy with the fact that Iran clearly supplies Hamas and Hezbollah, two well known terrorist organizations, with weapons to use indiscriminately against Israeli civilians? Until someone can explain this hypocritical foreign policy, this article is nothing more than nonsense!"
Supplying weapons to freedom fighters defending their lawful homeland is both honorable and defensible.
Of course, we only have the word of the US government and the so-called Israelis that Iran is so engaged, neither is trustworthy in the slightest.
Further, what does or does not happen in Iran is none of our business as Americans, what Iran does or does not do with regard to Palestinian Freedom Fighters is none of our business, unless of course, they come to America in general, and South Carolina in particular. The US government has no lawful authority to interfere with Iranian activities. The US government has already abrogated the Non Proliferation Treaty by making unlawful demands that Iran cease nuclear fuel enricment, therefore Iran is NOT required to honor that treaty, yet they continue to do so.
Not so the Zionist government that calls itself Israel. That state has routinely made war against its neighbors, beginning with its unprovoked attack in 1967 and its unsuccessful war against Hizbollah in 2006.
The upshot of this is to say, leave Iran alone, they are no threat to America now and have no chance of being a threat in the future.
I love Israel. I love Jews. The Jews desperately needed a home after the holocaust and Israel seemed the perfect place. But it obviously wasn't. Land had to be taken from non Jews. They were displaced, or worse, killed. And now some of those displaced people are fighting Israel using nasty tactics. I believe I would do the same if someone invaded S.C. and tried to kick me out. So, Iran has helped some of these groups. If you could call it that, it's more like they threw them a bone. Anyway, thank you Jack and Pat H for providing some factually based insight to Iran. I would love to hear your opinion of why we are really in Afghanistan. We know we can't dismantle the Taliban when the "organization" is so dispersed among such a variety of war lords. We know that our presence, or British presence, will never establish peace there. We've had a presence there since at least the late seventies which has only seemed to strengthen the Taliban, the fighting, and the war-lord isssue in general. So why are we there? To feed the war machine? He who controls Afghanistan controls a pipeline to China? I've researched this to death and the more I research, the more I really don't know. Does anyone really know? And if we really don't know why we're there, then how can we support this? How can we support yet another war that we don't understand?
To Pat H .. should we all wake up one day to the news that a large crater / radioactive slagheap is to be found where Tel Aviv should be, will it still be your opinion that it's 'not your business as an American' ?
If that's the case, what were Americans doing in Nuremberg, at the end of WW II, playing a decisive role in the Nuremberg Trials ?
What was America doing, taking ANY role in post-Holocaust judgments ? Why was any of what the Third Reich did to six million Jews any of America's business ?
.. Fact is, Pat H, that humanitarian decency - not to mention friendship with Israel as a Nation State .. DOES make the threat of harm to Israel its business. I'd argue that this is the business of US ALL.
@Jessica S.: my original phrase "tacit endorsement" comes into play, in that his sharing of this piece as a rebuttal to the (questionable) authority of William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer. I take that wording, since it was quoted wholly, as an endorsement of its message.
This cited piece does a fine job of painting Iran as someone that shouldn't be at the top of any "to-do" list for the US. However, the writer glosses over key arguments against the de-escalation of our policy with Iran. Even as someone that desperately wants to see the US disengage Iran, their leadership's actions to dodge nuclear treaties and crush their people's will have me quite troubled. So, Mr. Hunter in effect succeeds in supporting his non-interventionist viewpoint but also glosses over the following:
1. Their government, while it holds elections, does not honor them and thus cannot be placed in check by its citizenry. The zealots are calling the shots.
2. Their government is being incredibly dodgy about uranium enrichment... which is a huge foreign policy concern not merely for the sake of Israel (and their willingness to escalate militarily) but far more importantly: the strait of Hormuz.
Even without our meddling, the rest of the world needs that sea lane open and Iran doesn't get along with the Arab states around it. Close off the Persian Gulf and we'll learn quickly how much of a US concern an over-armed Iranian government is.
Super-brit said,"To Pat H .. should we all wake up one day to the news that a large crater / radioactive slagheap is to be found where Tel Aviv should be, will it still be your opinion that it's 'not your business as an American' ?
If that's the case, what were Americans doing in Nuremberg, at the end of WW II, playing a decisive role in the Nuremberg Trials ?
What was America doing, taking ANY role in post-Holocaust judgments ? Why was any of what the Third Reich did to six million Jews any of America's business ?
.. Fact is, Pat H, that humanitarian decency - not to mention friendship with Israel as a Nation State .. DOES make the threat of harm to Israel its business. I'd argue that this is the business of US ALL."
Well, no, humanitarian decency is the province of individuals, not governments. The US government was in Nuremberg to divide up the spoils and continue to make eastern Europe safe for communism. Certainly not as humanitarians, that is a rather silly myth. The trial of the Germans who'd murdered 12 million people partially by the Soviet Union who'd already murdered over 50 million people is the true height and depth of hypocrisy.
As far as the risk of a crater in place of Tel Aviv, the risk to Iran for the same is significantly greater. The Zionist state has between 200 and 300 nuclear weapons and a demonstrated will to murder thousands of innocent people already. You should see the map of targets struck by so-called Israel during their War Against Lebanon in 2006, pay particular attention to the Christian areas targeted intentionally all around Lebanon by the IAF, disgusting really.
As to the things assserted by factoryconnection, most of those are neoconservative balderdash. Always it's the refrain, "Poor Little Israel", all alone in a sea of hate. The reality is quite different. It's so-called Israel that is the bad actor in the area and has been since before World War Two, look up the Stern Gang and the Deir Yassin Massacre for examples of that history. So-called Israel is actually Palestine occupied and run by a organized criminal gang of illegal European immigrants, a gang that we as Americans should spurn completely.
Back to the actual subject here, the Iranians, Americans need to demand the US government cease and desist its meddling in all of the middle east, not just Iran.
Bgk...personally I hate Iran! But looking at it from their perspective...Iran MUST get a WMD in order for it not to be attacked. Understand: Nuclear brinkmanship is the only reason North Korea is still strutting its stuff. A mushroom cloud over Seoul would be a catastrophe of unimaginable magnitude. Iran knows this. So does Israel. So does the USA. And there's no doubt the Iranians are craaaazy! Imagine: Iran will nuke Jerusalem in the NAME OF ALLAH! That is really, really scary! Kim Jong Il wants only to keep his opium, counterfeit money, and 5 year-old little boys flowing in/out of his country. But Iran has much bigger ambitions, backed by religious ferver. The nuclear genie is out of the bag. Now Israel must hit Iran! Because if Iran gets a WMD...they become untouchable.
I'm the only Iranian here so I represent my country.
Dear "Hexagram " Please don't hate Iran.Believe me , we're good people.
I watch lots of Hollywood movies. In general , I found US constitutions quite right.Americans are like other people of the world, logical, reasonable; intelligent.
But the fact is everybody in this world has his own interests.
Yes , we are muslims but not that kind of BIN LADEN's.He managed an attack to American soil by Saudi Arabia's money.The so called" Al-Qaedes " ( trained by CIA in late 80's) were responsible , NOT IRANIANs.
We would never think of doing such a thing.Those who say "Death to America" are simple minded.
The need for a defense shield doesn't mean getting NUKE. Everybody knows that the slightest move in the world is under surveillance of US intelligent agencies .So how come Iran can do anything stupid like attempting to get nuclear weapons and a plan to use it specially against Israel?
Yes dear friends , 70 millions are not so emotional deciding to wipe out a country. It's delirious.Our president said his personal view but believe me it is not the wish of all Iranians. Our government thinks and acts just like it should be. NATIONAL INTERESTS. The so called Arab –Israel's CONFLICT is their own business . It has nothing to do with antisemitism , holocaust or anything else that" we the Ordinary people" in Iran are not interested to comment about anymore. We can't solve the Palestinian's problem.It's The Arab World's Business.
WE wish to live in peace and harmony with other nations.I personally believe that Mr Obama is doing the right thing.Everything should be done within negotiation .""Threatening is not the solution.""
We have never invaded a country and will never think of.
Those who seek military solutions to every problem are doomed eventually.
Thanks to Pat H and Miriam.
If Iran is a peace loving country, and is concerned for its survival, why don't we give them a few nukes from our arsenal. That would eliminate the need for them to build one in secret. It is child's play to identify the source of a nuke from the radioactive signature of its fallout. If one of the bombs we furnish to Iran is detonated anywhere on the globe, we simply deliver several replacements to the Iranian regime - via the bomb bay doors of several B-2 stealth bombers. Problem solved, you're welcome. Next issue please?
Dear I P Yuengling YOU SAID:
"" If one of the bombs we furnish to Iran is detonated anywhere on the globe, we simply deliver several replacements to the Iranian regime - via the bomb bay doors of several B-2 stealth bombers. Problem solved, you're welcome. Next issue please?""
Do you think is that so simple to bomb a country?
Killing thousands of innocent people?
I'm so sorry for your attitude .
Hossein,
Yes, I do think it is that simple. And no bombs will be used if Iran does not use or proliferate their own nuclear weapons technology. My point is: If Iran uses a nuke on anyone - they should expect retaliation in the same form. No one likes the policy of mutually assured destruction, but that has become a frightful reality now that the nuclear genie is out of the bottle. Would there be no innocent deaths if Iran were to bomb Israel? Many people fear that a desperate regime willing to use explosives laden children as suicide/homicide bombers (dumb bombs as it were) in a war with Israel, might actually be stupid enough to use a nuclear weapon. If that awful scenario comes to pass millions of peaceful Iranians will die. Iran's youth should take responsibility for their country by deposing their radical president and the mullahs who would sacrifice them all in an effort to bring about armegeddon. Nuclear weapons and hand guns both require human action/responsibility to kill. Who will hold the Iranian regime responsible for their actions? Sadly, I have doubts that it will be the peaceful Iranian people, considering the aftermath of the last election there.
Thank you Southern Avenger for getting out the TRUE news about Iran! It is about time the Sheeple of this country get educated about who the real aggressors are. I'm sure that there are alot of Bible Zombies that will not accept reality and perhaps even Fox News will put a hit out on you!
One Nation-UnderEducated.
Oh people PLEASE!!!!!!!!! You want to see the Israeli government as such a victimized government that you are not willing to see past your own bad judgements and understand Iran is no different than the US. Why do we seek to demonize a government and it's people for not agreeing with our foreing policies. Iran provides Hamas and Hezbollah with weapons yet US provides Israel with much grander weapons. Who was the first to strike there?... Take a second and realize, they are GOVERNMENTS at war, and the only victim's are the people run by them!!!
- Author William G. Lord is a cold warrior for Christ7 comments
- Lata's Ordinary Oyster Hall revealed5 comments
- The same-sex marriage debate is a distraction48 comments
- Do conservatives want Obama to throw citizens in jail without trial?2 comments
- Five tips for surviving Spoleto Festival5 comments
- Truth & Salvage Co. sift through 50 songs to make the perfect record1 comment
-
Charlie Brown Seafood
Garlic crabs we're delicious. Wish it was a small restaurant where you could sit and… -Danielle Ashe England
-
Little Tokyo
ITADAKMASU = Let's eat! -Christopher Bernique
-
Brittlebank Park
Tehn maybe you should go back to New York. -Chrystal McConnell
-
Diamonds North
There is nothing worse than a bitter fired employee. I work at a plant near… -boeingguy51
-
Pearlz
Fantastic service!
We visited on a busy Friday night and the restaurant was… -twa318
-
The War on Women enters its Creed years thanks to Nikki Haley and Pinata-Gate
-
Is S.C. State University's board of trustees really so bad?
A Matter of Degrees
-
50 Shades of Grey's most notorious scene as read by Stephen Hawking
No strings attached
-
Author William G. Lord is a cold warrior for Christ
The thinking Baptist's Glenn Beck sees socialism as a pervasive enemy of the church
-
Do conservatives want Obama to throw citizens in jail without trial?
A Permanent Police State
