IRAN COULD HELP turn the tables on the jihadists

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
IRAN COULD HELP turn the tables on the jihadists

ONCE AN AGREEMENT IS REACHED ON TEHRAN'S NUCLEAR PLANS, ITS STRATEGIC AID IN PACIFYING THE MIDDLE EAST IS URGENTLY NEEDED

BANGKOK: -- Several more days remain in negotiations between Iran and the world's five major powers over the fate of that country's nuclear programme, but many observers are claiming the deal is already secured, and they have shifted focus to its potential impact on regional security and the oil market. The price of crude oil is expected to drop if economic sanctions on Iran can be eased.

As much as agreement on Iran's nuclear future would both improve its state of affairs and calm fears in the West, several key issues are outstanding that curtail optimism for peace in the Middle East. Ominously, these factors are beyond the control of the West or the Iranians.

In Tehran, a pact allowing Iran to proceed with peaceful nuclear plans might lessen the vehemence with which the US - famously dubbed "the Great Satan" by its mullahs - is regarded. Yet the situation is likely to get worse before it gets better thanks to the continuing chaos in the region, where Iran has ended up as one of the most stable of nations.

A nuclear deal would make it possible for Tehran to participate in discussions with the Western powers about the region's future and specifically the regimes and militia groups it supports. The government of President Hassan Rouhani would be empowered with fresh political capital, possibly enough to give it the clout denied previous administrations by the country's religious clerics.

Iranian voters have demonstrated a tendency to elect progressive-minded leaders, but these politicians have always laboured under the yoke of the venerated mullahs who maintain a fundamentalist, reactionary view of the world.

Now, though, Iran's help would be invaluable in combating the extremist Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). It's a common cause

around which Tehran and the West could unite. Iran wants neighbouring Iraq rid of the violent ISIL and it knows the US-led coalition cannot defeat the ISIL by air strikes alone.

Joint combat operations involving Iran remain unlikely as long as the West refuses to call Iran an ally, but the coalition's chances in battle would surely improve if there were strategic coordination with Tehran, and that now appears possible in the near future as the fighting in Iraq intensifies.

The struggle against the Islamic militants is a different game in Syria, however. Iran remains unwavering in its support for the government of Bashar al-Assad, and the US displays the same stubbornness in its intention to oust him. Neither side is currently prepared to yield on this subject, but we hope that they soon see the sense in forging a compromise. Resolution in Syria cannot be achieved without Iranian involvement. Iran's weight in that part of the world is just too substantial to ignore.

Also in need of awakening to this reality are Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, as well as governments across North Africa. They will continue to fret over Iran's "expansionist" foreign policy and its sponsorship of militant groups of its own choosing, but they must see that the end is near for Riyadh's "chequebook diplomacy" approach to peacekeeping in the Muslim world. By now, hopefully, Saudi Arabia is recognising that money can buy you some friends, but not everyone.

Quite apart from soothing worries about an atomic showdown, a nuclear agreement between the West and Iran would open channels of communication, provide a chance to reshape strategy, and possibly even bring us closer to peace in the Middle East.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/IRAN-COULD-HELP-turn-the-tables-on-the-jihadists-30264154.html


-- The Nation 2015-07-10

[Seastallion]

It would be great if you put your Iranian boots on the ground, but we don't want to lift the arms embargo.....Just go and fight ISIS with sticks and stones, OK?

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[ABCer]

Any "help" from one group of Islamists against another group of Islamists has been tried many times with fiasko end result.

Any "help" from USSR, Russia, China, Iran etc. will come at a price usually too high to justify end result. Iran is not our friend. Never was, never will be.

When the up-front price is arms to Iran, economic aid to Iran and signing a bad deal on atomic research with Iran - the winner is Iran.

Western World's Leader today is USA. Today's Leader of USA is Obama. Obama badly wants his laurel crown. We are encouraged to go forward.

But nobody can tell us where will this "forward" end. I wouldn't go...

IMHO World has a bad Leader, USA have a bad Leader and the "Forward" battle cry never explains the direction in 360 degree choice.

Edited July 10, 2015 by ABCer

[malathione]

And we should just ignore the fact that Iran is on the list of state sponsors of terrorism? We should ignore their support for Hamas, Hezbollah and their direct role in assassinations and bombings around the world? If Russian and Chinese help comes at a price, so does Iranian.

[Cats4ever]

Any "help" from one group of Islamists against another group of Islamists has been tried many times with fiasko end result.

Any "help" from USSR, Russia, China, Iran etc. will come at a price usually too high to justify end result. Iran is not our friend. Never was, never will be.

When the up-front price is arms to Iran, economic aid to Iran and signing a bad deal on atomic research with Iran - the winner is Iran.

Western World's Leader today is USA. Today's Leader of USA is Obama. Obama badly wants his laurel crown. We are encouraged to go forward.

But nobody can tell us where will this "forward" end. I wouldn't go...

IMHO World has a bad Leader, USA have a bad Leader and the "Forward" battle cry never explains the direction in 360 degree choice.

Iran was very much a friend in the days of the Shah. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the proposed agreement, nor do I fully understand the risks of Shia Iran tacking ISIS. Needless to say, our "friends", the Saudis and Jordan seem to be a little reluctant to do anything substantial to their co-religionists.

A more balanced explanation would be welcome.

[rethaier]

It would be great if you put your Iranian boots on the ground, but we don't want to lift the arms embargo.....Just go and fight ISIS with sticks and stones, OK?

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

They've got more than sticks and stones.

[ABCer]

Iran was very much a friend in the days of the Shah. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the proposed agreement, nor do I fully understand the risks of Shia Iran tacking ISIS. Needless to say, our "friends", the Saudis and Jordan seem to be a little reluctant to do anything substantial to their co-religionists.

A more balanced explanation would be welcome.

Shahanshah of Iran Reza Pahlavi was a staunch ally and friend of USA.

They have sold him out very cheaply.

Meanwhile French were nurturing the then Great Ayatollah Khomeini in Paris.

As I mentioned in my previous post above - every action has a price.

Americans paid the price then - remember their Embassy?

They are paying the price still now. And there is no end of this process in sight.

BTW - Saudi's, Kuwaitis, Jordanians never were and never will be friends of USA. First of all and above all they are loyal to Koran.

The one and only true friend USA have had in Middle East was Israel. But they did manage to sell them out at some moments. Strictly IMHO.

Edited July 10, 2015 by ABCer

[sammygood]

so let iran built a nuclear plant and they will subdue the rest of the islamic nations?

[ABCer]

Hahaha!

Welcome to my World baby... I like the crapping dog of yours.

Iran does have nuclear plants! Up and running.

They also have the 'research' facilities - read as reprocessing of the used U-rods.

Which means they can and are capable of extracting Plutonium. The staff needed for A-bomb.

Except that they SWEAR to Almighty God they will never make a nuke bomb.

They are hoping to throw Israelis into the sea only by their Great Might and with blessing of Allah.

Just out of National Pride they do not want the International inspections.

Now you may understand the meaning of my Hahaha!

Oh, yes! One more thing. With amount of oil Iran has it badly needs atomic power reactors just to clean up the environment! You dig?

[Steely Dan]

Iran are simply an Islamic state with more resources. There is no moral difference between the two. It is one thing to try to facilitate the two fighting each other to a standstill, quite another to empower one in the hope they can somehow be house trained by our actions.

[Steely Dan]

Here is how the Iranians were behaving Friday, to entertain any ideas of detente with them is utter madness.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/chanting-death-to-israel-iran-al-quds-day-marches-draw-millions/

[Friendly Stranger]

"IRAN COULD HELP turn the tables on the jihadists"

Yeah, bulls have tits too. Lesser of the 2 evils??

I have a good idea:

Let's equip the freedom fighters in Syria to fight Asad.

Ohh, that didn't work..

[Mosha]

Saudis wom't like it, wrong type of nuslims.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory posts removed.

[konying]

1. I am pretty certain there will be no deal . And if by chance something will be signed, Iran would break it immediately .

2. Yes it could help fight this ones and should it win , it will become a new one.

[RuamRudy]

Here is how the Iranians were behaving Friday, to entertain any ideas of detente with them is utter madness.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/chanting-death-to-israel-iran-al-quds-day-marches-draw-millions/

Do you know any Iranians? Have you ever met any? If so, you would probably realise that, firstly, they are not a homogenous group of hate spewing Islamists, but a mixed and varied society, much like every other society in the world. Secondly, you would probably realise that Iranians, by culture, are incredibly polite, respectful, generous and humble people. I feel very fortunate to count quite a few Iranians as close friends.

So to counter your heavily biased Israeli article, here is one from an impartial news source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1549573.stm

[RuamRudy]

Iran was very much a friend in the days of the Shah. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the proposed agreement, nor do I fully understand the risks of Shia Iran tacking ISIS. Needless to say, our "friends", the Saudis and Jordan seem to be a little reluctant to do anything substantial to their co-religionists.

A more balanced explanation would be welcome.

Shahanshah of Iran Reza Pahlavi was a staunch ally and friend of USA.

They have sold him out very cheaply.

Meanwhile French were nurturing the then Great Ayatollah Khomeini in Paris.

As I mentioned in my previous post above - every action has a price.

Americans paid the price then - remember their Embassy?

They are paying the price still now. And there is no end of this process in sight.

BTW - Saudi's, Kuwaitis, Jordanians never were and never will be friends of USA. First of all and above all they are loyal to Koran.

The one and only true friend USA have had in Middle East was Israel. But they did manage to sell them out at some moments. Strictly IMHO.

The Shah was a brutal dictator puppet put in place by the US after the joint UK/US operation to ferment a coup against the democtatically elected leader, so that we in the west could continue to steal the Iranian oil that the upstart Mosaddegh had the temerity to think belonged to the people of Iran. Sow and you shall reap.

[Ulysses G.]

1. I am pretty certain there will be no deal . And if by chance something will be signed, Iran would break it immediately .

I hope that you are correct, but I am very skeptical. Obama and Kerry are too desperate for it and not to help humanity, for their own aggrandizement.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[ABCer]

1. I am pretty certain there will be no deal . And if by chance something will be signed, Iran would break it immediately .

2. Yes it could help fight this ones and should it win , it will become a new one.

I am with you only to a point:

1) Deal or no deal - Iran will eventually build a Nuke - it has capacity, credit and whatever else it takes to make this very simple piece of shit. If N.Korea could do it...

2) The real danger in them building WMD is - they are crazy enough to actually use it. And it will not be ISIS they will use it on.

3) The way I see the order of things to come - one day, when the danger becomes clear, present and imminent - Israelis will have to react to sabotage the danger. No if's, no but's.

4) How they will react I do not know. The outcry at their reaction I can hear even now. Maybe USA will be 'crying' with the others, I do not know. But this scenario is bound to take place.

As for me - I 'absolve' Israelis for their actions - they have no choice.

BTW, Obama, Clinton, Kerry, Hollande, Merkel, Putin, UN, NATO and other figures on the chessboard have no say in the developing events - by virtue of their politics. I repeat: - it is survival for Israelis.

Edited July 11, 2015 by ABCer

[RuamRudy]

1. I am pretty certain there will be no deal . And if by chance something will be signed, Iran would break it immediately .

2. Yes it could help fight this ones and should it win , it will become a new one.

I am with you only to a point:

1) Deal or no deal - Iran will eventually build a Nuke - it has capacity, credit and whatever else it takes to make this very simple piece of shit. If N.Korea could do it...

2) The real danger in them building WMD is - they are crazy enough to actually use it. And it will not be ISIS they will use it on.

3) The way I see the order of things to come - one day, when the danger becomes clear, present and imminent - Israelis will have to react to sabotage the danger. No if's, no but's.

4) How they will react I do not know. The outcry at their reaction I can hear even now. Maybe USA will be 'crying' with the others, I do not know. But this scenario is bound to take place.

As for me - I 'absolve' Israelis for their actions - they have no choice.

BTW, Obama, Clinton, Kerry, Hollande, Merkel, Putin, UN, NATO and other figures on the chessboard have no say in the developing events - by virtue of their politics. I repeat: - it is survival for Israelis.

The situation is very precarious, but to do nothing is not the answer. Of course, this would suit the knesset because they are addicted to US dollars, and more than a few of them are well versed in pocketing said dollars. Plus, they enjoy being the only nuclear power in the area.

Many ordinary Iranians actually believe that Ahmadinejad was an Israeli agent, put there to continue to create emnity and the sense of siege that the Israeli people needed to feel in order to continue to support their apartheid regime. Whether that is true or not (and the history of Western interference in the area certainly makes it plausible), it is plain that ordinary Iranians, like ordinary Israelis, don't want war and hatred and bitterness. They want peace and stability and a regular meal for their families.

The governments of Israel and Iran are equally as contemptible in doing their utmost to sabotage that.

[otherstuff1957]

This is, the old strategic concept that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". A philosophy that lead to the US funding and training the mujaheddin who became the Taliban, arming Suddam Hussein during the Iraq/Iran war and training anti-Assad Syrian revolutionaries who went on to found ISIS.

It hasn't worked very well in the past, so I see no reason why it would work well in the future!

[Chicog]

What a lot of people don't realise is that a lot of this state-orchestrated hatred towards the US and Israel is a great way to distract the people from problems at home.

Those with a deeper understanding of what goes on in Iran know that there is a massive movement to liberate the country from the mad mullahs.

The Guardian council have been imprisoning reformists for years.

[Ulysses G.]

Those with a deeper understanding of what goes on in Iran know that there is a massive movement to liberate the country from the mad mullahs.

When the Iranian people were trying to overthrow their rulers in 2009, Obama lifted not one finger in support of the Green Revolution. Obama looked on as the ruling elite of Iran crushed the revolution and eliminated the Iranian revolutionaries.

[Chicog]

Those with a deeper understanding of what goes on in Iran know that there is a massive movement to liberate the country from the mad mullahs.

When the Iranian people were trying to overthrow their rulers in 2009, Obama lifted not one finger in support of the Green Revolution. Obama looked on as the ruling elite of Iran crushed the revolution and eliminated the Iranian revolutionaries.

Would have been a bit hypocritical standing up for democracy in Iran and not its neighbours, no?

[ABCer]

Iran was very much a friend in the days of the Shah. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the proposed agreement, nor do I fully understand the risks of Shia Iran tacking ISIS. Needless to say, our "friends", the Saudis and Jordan seem to be a little reluctant to do anything substantial to their co-religionists.

A more balanced explanation would be welcome.

Shahanshah of Iran Reza Pahlavi was a staunch ally and friend of USA.

They have sold him out very cheaply.

Meanwhile French were nurturing the then Great Ayatollah Khomeini in Paris.

As I mentioned in my previous post above - every action has a price.

Americans paid the price then - remember their Embassy?

They are paying the price still now. And there is no end of this process in sight.

BTW - Saudi's, Kuwaitis, Jordanians never were and never will be friends of USA. First of all and above all they are loyal to Koran.

The one and only true friend USA have had in Middle East was Israel. But they did manage to sell them out at some moments. Strictly IMHO.

The Shah was a brutal dictator puppet put in place by the US after the joint UK/US operation to ferment a coup against the democtatically elected leader, so that we in the west could continue to steal the Iranian oil that the upstart Mosaddegh had the temerity to think belonged to the people of Iran. Sow and you shall reap.

Yes, yes! I remember it all.

His secret service/political police (I think called Savak?) was blamed for about 900 deaths yearly! Brutal regime!

As soon as Khomeini came from Paris and their Islamic Revolution took place Iranians started losing about 900 dead each day!

With an essential detail - among the dead were "bloody Americans".

[RuamRudy]

Iran was very much a friend in the days of the Shah. I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of the proposed agreement, nor do I fully understand the risks of Shia Iran tacking ISIS. Needless to say, our "friends", the Saudis and Jordan seem to be a little reluctant to do anything substantial to their co-religionists.

A more balanced explanation would be welcome.

Shahanshah of Iran Reza Pahlavi was a staunch ally and friend of USA.

They have sold him out very cheaply.

Meanwhile French were nurturing the then Great Ayatollah Khomeini in Paris.

As I mentioned in my previous post above - every action has a price.

Americans paid the price then - remember their Embassy?

They are paying the price still now. And there is no end of this process in sight.

BTW - Saudi's, Kuwaitis, Jordanians never were and never will be friends of USA. First of all and above all they are loyal to Koran.

The one and only true friend USA have had in Middle East was Israel. But they did manage to sell them out at some moments. Strictly IMHO.

The Shah was a brutal dictator puppet put in place by the US after the joint UK/US operation to ferment a coup against the democtatically elected leader, so that we in the west could continue to steal the Iranian oil that the upstart Mosaddegh had the temerity to think belonged to the people of Iran. Sow and you shall reap.

Yes, yes! I remember it all.

His secret service/political police (I think called Savak?) was blamed for about 900 deaths yearly! Brutal regime!

As soon as Khomeini came from Paris and their Islamic Revolution took place Iranians started losing about 900 dead each day!

With an essential detail - among the dead were "bloody Americans".

The crucial words "as soon as..."

Has there been an armed revolution in history where the victors did not take immediate steps to stabilise their position by eliminating the opposition? Then add to the mix the threat of further nefarious western interference, which created the mess in the first place, and you have a paranoid mix of armed crazies.

I am not sure you will find anyone on this thread praising any of the Iranian governments since the coup which deposed Mosaddegh so I don't understand why you try to play the 'your dictator is worse than my dictator' card. What is clear is that the seeds of the 79 revolution were sewn by the UK and US through their naked greed and colonial arrogance, and the Iranian people have been suffering ever since.