PDA

View Full Version : The top ten things you didn't know about Iran



torob
10-02-2009, 11:42 PM
The top ten things you didn't know about Iran
The assumptions most Americans hold about Iran and its policies are wrong


By Juan Cole


Oct. 1, 2009 | Thursday is a fateful day for the world, as the U.S., other members of the United Nations Security Council, and Germany meet in Geneva with Iran in a bid to resolve outstanding issues. Although Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had earlier attempted to put the nuclear issue off the bargaining table, this rhetorical flourish was a mere opening gambit and nuclear issues will certainly dominate the talks. As Henry Kissinger pointed out, these talks are just beginning and there are highly unlikely to be any breakthroughs for a very long time. Diplomacy is a marathon, not a sprint.

But on this occasion, I thought I'd take the opportunity to list some things that people tend to think they know about Iran, but for which the evidence is shaky.

Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the U.S.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war modern history (unlike the U.S. 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?

Reality: 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.

Reality: 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 U.S. 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 U.S. signals intelligence from Iran. While Germany, Israel and recently the U.K. 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.

Reality: 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.

Reality: 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?

Reality: 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 U.S. 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.

Reality: 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.

black13
10-02-2009, 11:53 PM
Good article. Alot of people fail to even bother researching into the situation in Iran and just think its an evil nation. Most of it is because of the media blowing things out of proportion.

Still the president and most of the government of Iran is a disaster. No denying that but at least the majority of the population are heavily opposed to them.

J NRG
10-03-2009, 02:01 AM
.

CUG
10-03-2009, 02:58 AM
Belief: Iranians hate the west
Truth: Every fucking Iranian I know can't fucking stand Ahmedinejad, would like to see him drawn and quartered in public.

FraserB
10-03-2009, 03:23 AM
Originally posted by CUG
Belief: Iranians hate the west
Truth: Every fucking Iranian I know can't fucking stand Ahmedinejad, would like to see him drawn and quartered in public.

Wait. You know Muslims?:eek:

I though you didnt like them and spent the days rooting out closeted Muslims on Beyond:dunno:

ZenOps
10-03-2009, 07:20 AM
Originally posted by CUG
Belief: Iranians hate the west
Truth: Every fucking Iranian I know can't fucking stand Ahmedinejad, would like to see him drawn and quartered in public.

Well, thats probably because all the ones that left Iran, left Iran for a reason. The ones that stayed - are still probably neutral on Ajad, which means he stays in power even if he has issues.

revelations
10-03-2009, 08:47 AM
^ Neutral on him? What is your news source? BSCNN?




For some good insight into the last 30 years of Iranian politics, read a book called "Treacherous Alliances" by Trita Parsi.



Another fact:

Iran is home to about 20-25,000 Persian Jews who live in peace with the rest of the population.

kertejud2
10-03-2009, 09:06 AM
Persian women are hot, its such a shame they're stuck in a place where they want them covered up. Its a crime against humanity I tell you!

Neil4Speed
10-03-2009, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by kertejud2
Persian women are hot, its such a shame they're stuck in a place where they want them covered up. Its a crime against humanity I tell you!

Yes, that would have been an appropriate number 11 on that list.

Gainsbarre
10-03-2009, 10:57 AM
:) :clap: great article.

It certainly seems to me (from speaking to Iranians and from first hand narratives that I've read) that more Iranians would like to move abroad if they could.

Unfortunately I suspect that in a country with very high unemployment, a economy in shambles that has no financial system (and so on) that few can find the means to move elsewhere. It seems like the only Iranians here are the ones who could afford to move abroad as >90% of the Iranians I've met are from the wealthiest part of the country, North Tehran. I've met a few from elsewhere (e.g. Shiraz), but they're certainly a sizable minority.

Speaking of Persian Jews, here's another little known fact...during WWII Iranian diplomats in Paris took it upon themselves to Issue Iranian passports to Jews escaping the holocaust.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411411609&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Why didn't these Iranian-state approved documentaries garner as much Western media attention as the conference held a year earlier?

01RedDX
10-03-2009, 11:24 AM
.

01RedDX
10-03-2009, 11:41 AM
.

blink1
10-03-2009, 01:08 PM
Wow. Booking my trip now!

PremiumRSX
10-03-2009, 01:49 PM
Good read.

torob
10-03-2009, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by ZenOps


Well, thats probably because all the ones that left Iran, left Iran for a reason. The ones that stayed - are still probably neutral on Ajad, which means he stays in power even if he has issues.

Not true at all.. it doesn't take much to understand that many Iranians hate the regime with passion... just look at the green movement.

Now it takes balls to go out and protest like that, so there are a good # of people who have families they don't want to put in danger that are still against the regime.
In other terms, a large % of Iranians dislike the regime, but they can only do so much.

As far as leaving, it is very difficult as its expensive / people usually don't have the income, and Iran gov't tries to keep you there as best it can.

Plus at 17 there is conscription / i think its a year or two --- so you can leave then.


Originally posted by kertejud2
Persian women are hot, its such a shame they're stuck in a place where they want them covered up. Its a crime against humanity I tell you!

Like Neil4Speed said - i should add that to the article. Iran is not like Arab countries where the whole body is covered and just the eyes, if that is what you mean. They are only required to wear the head scarf which is pushed by the young population who almost barely wear it now.

They do have to wear a "manto" which is like a type of jacket, i cant remember the word for it.. but they come up with so many designs that it isnt really a religious thing but a fashion thing.



Originally posted by Gainsbarre
:) :clap: great article.

It certainly seems to me (from speaking to Iranians and from first hand narratives that I've read) that more Iranians would like to move abroad if they could.





Originally posted by 01RedDX


Another fact: that population was at least 4X higher before the Islamic revolution. They are restricted in where they can live, what they can do for a living, etc. "Live in peace" my ass.

Most Iranians living abroad are not Muslim. They are Baha'i, Azeris, Jews, and other persecuted minorities. It's not fun for non-Muslims in Iran.

+1

Sugarphreak
10-03-2009, 04:40 PM
....

CUG
10-03-2009, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by FraserB


Wait. You know Muslims?:eek:

I though you didnt like them and spent the days rooting out closeted Muslims on Beyond:dunno:

Your narrow mind, coupled with your inability to absorb any type of information on these matters that isn't "pro-islam" "pro-liberal", "pro-gay", and so on made you think this. Not only are you incapable of keeping any kind of online dialog with me, you're unqualified.

This is me acknowledging your existence, be grateful.

Antonito
10-03-2009, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by CUG

"pro-islam" "pro-liberal", "pro-gay",

One of these things is not like the others

CUG
10-03-2009, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by Antonito


One of these things is not like the others Clearly. :rofl:

J NRG
10-09-2009, 03:07 AM
.

TimG
10-09-2009, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by torob
Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the U.S.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war modern history (unlike the U.S. 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.



Iran may not have LAUNCHED a war, but they have participated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_iraq_war



The war began when Iraq invaded Iran on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes and fears of Shia insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority influenced by the Iranian Revolution. Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of revolutionary chaos in Iran and attacked without formal warning, they made only limited progress into Iran and within several months were repelled by the Iranians who regained virtually all lost territory by June, 1982. For the next six years, Iran was on the offensive.[16] Despite calls for a ceasefire by the United Nations Security Council, hostilities continued until 20 August, 1988. The last prisoners of war were exchanged in 2003.[16][17]

torob
10-10-2009, 04:24 AM
Originally posted by TimG



Iran may not have LAUNCHED a war, but they have participated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_iraq_war



iirc the reason for that was there was no OFFICIAL word by Iraq that they would cease fire... and the commanders based their decisions on history as to how Iraq went against its own spoken word... so unless it was official by UN then Iran went on offensive

I dont remember exactly but there was several cease fires that were fishy and therefore ignored - until the last one was a for sure cease fire

Iraq used chemical weapons, whats to say they wouldn't attack back...

Im not saying Iran being on offensive was right or anything, just from what i read / heard