Jebadiah
pre 12 godina
Ben,
though I appriciate your view point and undedrstand where you're coming from I do not think that you're being fair to the current situation at all. you ask who is threatening Iran's existance. I'm surprised by that rhetorical question, but I will answer in clear form. USA and Europe and Isreal are threatening Iran's existance. The act of impossing sanctions is a clear threat to a nations existence. The invasion of soverign national airspace is easily construde as a threat to national soverignty and existence. There very existence is being threatened and it is outragesous that you claim the opposite.
Ben, in 1945+ UK and France could not develop these technologies without sacrificing quality of life for their citizens. They had developed these weapons prior to completing the rebuilding of their nations. They opted to protect their nations under some artifical threat from Stalin. No one was threatening Paris, yet De Gual decided to build weapons of offensive force instead of helping the everyday needs of his people. This seems very similar to the Iranian situation. London was in rubble yet the British government saw it fight to continue their maintenance (or attempted maintenance as it ended up) of world supremacy. They bitterly defeneded their currency and right to weapons while building up a welfare state the likes communisim could almost be shocked with.
We've seen images flashing across the world of the police oppression in USA, UK, France, Russia, China and Iran (to mention simply 6 offenders) over the past year. These nations are less interested in helping the people than the people think. In all of these nations. If the people choose to mobilize against the elected ruling class, the people will, and have, been silenced.
The fact that Iran is surrounded by instability give more credence to its inalieanable right to existence and self defence. Iran speaks of retaliation, where Isreal, USA and France speak of initiation.
I can except that many people believe that these western european nations are democracies, but alas all they are a variations of a republic with representative democraticly elected officials. this is what we've now learned to call democracy. However I ask you if you let the people of France and UK cast their opinions would the nation have done what it has done, would those countries still be on the same path? Consider this with respect to the transfer of citizens taxes into privateers banks? However it is a known fact that Iranian tax dollars have been used to help the impoverished people of that country. In fact what the west likes to call a farcical election last year during the failed green revolution was predicted by no less than 3 US ngo pollsters a week prior to the election. A certain degree of fraud is possibile (no more or less than classic 2000 Floridian fraud likely) by the trend of the rural voters outweighed that of the urban ones. And for this the west deems this nation undemocratic.
Sure Iran supplies what we call terrorists in the west, with weapons. We supply what they call terrorists with weapons. That seems to be a wash if one considers all forms of government (especially those elected by the citizenry) to be equal.
Just to be fair, prior to 1979 when the western puppet regime was in power in Iran the west was providing them with the technolgy to create nuclear weapons. The volatilty of the region hasn't become much less or more since then. Iran's standard of living hasn't changed much with respect to other nations of the world, or region yet we still wanted them to have these weapons. Ask yourself why that was.
What we call premptive actions Iran considers to be terroristic.
From a purely militaristic perspective it would have been irresponsible for any nation to defend itself from an agressor according to what I'm interpreting from you. You say it is irresponsible for Iran to do so. They should feed their people (unlike the millions starving daily in the USA -- AKA richest nation in the world). The should home their people (millions homeless in the states too). They should forget about defending their national identity and allow a new master to rule the people. That is what you're saying isn't it? So why did France resist? Why did Britain resist? Why was Canada brought into a war an ocean away? Why did America resist Japanese movements?
Iran is under threat. They have been under threat. They are currently facing warlike actions directed against them.
I'd rather we all got along, but I know that there is not point in even wasting dream time with such a notion. Baring some miraculous event I think it is ideally fair that we are all able to defend ourselves.
26 Komentari
Sortiraj po: