Guess what country this newspaper is talking about here:
- The President “has suffered a potentially fatal blow to his authority”
- In “an unprecedented rebuke,” 150 members of the legislature signed a letter bitterly attacking his policies. The signatories included many of “the president’s former fundamentalist allies, now apparently seeking to distance themselves as his prestige wanes.”
- The mounting criticism is fueling speculation that the President is politically doomed. Observers have even suggested he might be impeached and removed from office.
France? The US? Israel? Newly democratic Iraq? Somewhere else?
No, according to the Guardian, it’s Iran.
Substantially the same article was run by the AP last week. A carefull reading (supported by a more carefull analysis of the situation) reveals the criticism is not with the substance of his policies, rather his overt provocation of Western nations. In the middle east, recent history indicates that moderates (and pro Westerners), who may very well be the majority, are not afraid to speak out. But they are content to allow fascist thugs to run things, unwilling to shed blood for freedom, democracy, and civilization. They allow the most bizzare scenarios ex. “political wings” of terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas. Don’t hold your breath for a democratic revolution.
But what if this is a sign of hope? The Ayatollahs are muzzling Hitler Jr. for one reason only. Because GW showed the world that the US has the cohones to chop off the head of a snake. Images of bombed out Bagdad and “accidentally” decapitated criminals probably aren’t too appealing to Iranian leaders who have had some pretty nasty habits of supporting terrorism. The possible mobilization against Iranian targets you cite in a previous post probably rattled some cages. Maybe Iraq was worth it all in the end?
American liberals do a great job of walking softly. But don’t ignore the magic of a big stick.
Or how about this exchange:
QUESTION: What would you say right now in this interview to the [country omitted] president about the meddling in Iraq?
ANSWER: I’d say, first of all, to him, “You’ve made terrible choices for your people. You’ve isolated your nation. You’ve taken a nation of proud and honorable people, and you’ve made your country the pariah of the world. You’ve threatened countries with nuclear weapons. You’ve said you want a nuclear weapon. You’ve defied international accord. And you’re slowly but surely isolating yourself.”
Same answer, given without a hint of self-awareness.
The problem here is that a weak an unpopular government may be more likely to start a war to prop up its own power. The invasion by Hussein was a gift to the mullahs who were starting to feel resistance within the country as the revolution approached its Thermidorean phase.
Trash talk from Bush only helps the reactionaries. The main reason everyone thinks Iran must be building nukes is that they would be fools not to after the axis of evil speech. That trash talk led the mullahs to crush the democratization movement.
The real political change was the same as happened in the US. Ahemenanjad lost their equivalent of the mid terms. Even the supreme leader is less secure than before. Either or both could be pushed out so they have to tone down the crazy stuff.
It has nothing to do with the failure in the Whitehouse. He only started the trash talk again after both sets of midterms.
What the article said – Ahmadinejad’s economic policies are extremely unpopular and have led to raging inflation and high unemployment. To distract people from the poor economy, he’s been trying to create conflict with the rest of the world over Iran’s nuclear program so he can position himself as the protector of Iran’s interests against outsiders. It hasn’t worked; his party lost local elections last month. It’s even backfired; the UN imposed sanctions on Iran which will weaken both the economy and the nuclear program. His political allies in the Parliament (hardliners) and Ayatollah Khamenei have decided to pin the blame on him and throw him to the wolves. Not surprisingly, state-controlled press has joined the attack.
What anon read – Bush scared the Iranians with his sabre rattling during his speech last week. In fact, they got so scared that they went back in time and voted against Ahmadinejad’s party in last month’s elections. The UN sanctions that the article and Iranians talk about are completely ignored, I guess because the UN is, by definition, useless and the only thing these people understand is a big stick anyway. And now good things will happen despite the fact that all of these Iranian actions are aimed at solidifying the power of the hardliners.
sorry for feeding the troll