Anyone but Ahmadinejad

No offence though but most of you guys got it wrong due to lack of imagination. You need to look at the regime, the way revolutionaries are dreaming it. Here let me draw the picture that they have in mind:

During Bush era, they needed someone though and full of rhetorics like Bush, someone with capable enough to show the world that Islamic revolution would destroy everything possibly that they can, if they hassled by any country which they would. They don't care about how many people in world would die in the middle of their fight for power, and that was the message they wanted world to hear. Why is that?! Because they want their regime and revolution to survive so they do everything to keep it going.

Now with Obama's administration strategy towards Iran, Islamic regime doesn't need a mouthpiece anymore; they want someone a bit moderate with strong revolutionary ties to bring Iran closer to US. Keep in mind that person should have strong revolutionary ties and should have strong commitment to Khomeini (Islamic Iran's revolution leader)'s beliefs because other revolutionaries will look up to him if he asks them <<to put off the fight with US due to strategy change>>


Although Khamenie has the last word in Iran but he wouldn't risk going to this path all by himself or with Ahmadinejad with strong opposition inside and outside of regime against him, there has to be someone else to take the blame and that person should have aforementioned features.

Fariborz Shamshiri
http://www.rottengods.com

No offence though but most of you guys got it wrong due to lack of imagination. You need to look at the regime, the way revolutionaries are dreaming it. Here let me draw the picture that they have in mind:

During Bush era, they needed someone though and full of rhetorics like Bush, someone with capable enough to show the world that Islamic revolution would destroy everything possibly that they can, if they hassled by any country which they would. They don???t care about how many people in world would die in the middle of their fight for power, and that was the message they wanted world to hear. Why is that?! Because they want their regime and revolution to survive so they do everything to keep it going.

Now with Obama???s administration strategy towards Iran, Islamic regime doesn???t need a mouthpiece anymore; they want someone a bit moderate with strong revolutionary ties to bring Iran closer to US. Keep in mind that person should have strong revolutionary ties and should have strong commitment to Khomeini (Islamic Iran???s revolution leader)???s beliefs because other revolutionaries will look up to him if he asks them ???to put off the fight with US due to strategy change???

Although Khamenie has the last word in Iran but he wouldn???t risk going to this path all by himself or with Ahmadinejad with strong opposition inside and outside of regime against him, there has to be someone else to take the blame and that person should have aforementioned features.

Fariborz Shamshiri
http://www.rottengods.com

I think the claims of that anonumous person are not true. Especially becasue he left no way to justify his claims. Khatami have already said several times that he would not enrol if Mousavi comes. I think people believe these claims because they can't believe a person can intentionally and voluntarily come down from power.

Imagine this ---
Iranian oil workers go on strike to demand decent wages and working conditions. What would happen to Ahmadinejad's presidential campaign - not to mention Iran's mullah regime if this were to happen.

Zakaria does not consider the plight of Iran's working men and women. Ahmadinejad fancies himself a "populist", a spokesman for the common man of Iran, yet if you go to Google, you'll find reports of Iranian union activists getting arrested. Is Ahmadinejad a man of the people for real????

Ahmadinejad and the GOP have one thing in common - their hatred for labor unions and the rights of working people to engage in collective bargaining. Democratically elected unions are one tool of democracy that we are not using - Imagine an organization in Iran where men and women meet, organize, and vote as equals.....

Remember Solidarity. Independent labor unions were responsible for the downfall of the Evil Empire - not Ronald Reagan's speech at the Berlin Wall. We should use the same tool again. We first of all need to pass the EFCA in America. Then we need to find ways to help labor unions in the Middle East organize. We could start by trying to get the Iraqi government to recognize the Iraqi oil workers' union in Iraq.

For too long we've let the GOP with their blind hatred for workers' rights govern our foreign policy. I know that USW is working with labor unions in other countries. We need to encourage USW and other labor unions to continue their efforts. Unions are a valuable ally in bringing about democratic changes in Iran and everywhere else in the Middle East.

This article underscores the wisdom of Obama's current policies of restraint. Ahmadinejad's only big trump card is nuclear power. If we had McCain or Cheney as commander-in-chief, we'd be lobbing missiles right and left - and Amadinejad would be a shoo-in. Truth told. Iran is a young society. Many of the young are fed up with the mullahs. A society, regime, or religion that alienates its young cannot survive. If we really want to hasten a regime change, we need to break free of the tyranny of oil (which is a cancer to the planet any way.) Replacing oil with renewable energy is the only truly effective way to defeat religious fundamentalism and terrorism.