|
Page 2 of 2
 In short, it has demonized Iranians as much as could be done. Its writers have mobilized Western women already, especially feminists, thanks to boorish masculine ideology on the part of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a few other prominent figures. They, also, made us look positively hungry for a fight with Israel and rabidly hateful of all Jews despite that our own Jewish citizens are quite free from attack and prefer to live here in harmony rather than in Israel. Imagine that!
In any case, I am sure that many people, other than whatever they gained through deliberate propaganda, don't know much about Iranians. They probably imagine Iranian women sitting in their homes, covering themselves like Saudi Arab women (favorite friends of America) while beaten and humiliated by men. Maybe they don't even know that we are not Arabs. Indeed, I am sure that the majority of Americans don't know that or that not all of us unswervingly support the Moslem faith.
All the same, the nasty mainstream media have made sure to lambaste Ahmadinejad and our way of life, not because news writers care for Iranian women and the manner in which we chose to exist, but because they have to make a very nasty monster of somebody who is easy enough to use to affect the lethargic minds of certain Western people. Doing so, of course, helps get the public supportive of "all options [being] on the table," just as the threat of weapons of mass destruction had done for Iraq in the past. What a way to keep the war drums beating ever more loudly!
In addition, we will not be attacked, if it does come to pass, in any sort of slow build up towards war. As such, there are two main scenarios, it would seem, for an invasion of Iran.
One is a conventional battle starting somehow and going on for years. In this scenario, Iran would fight back, Israel would maybe receive missiles, Lebanon and probably Syria would likely attack Israel, many American soldiers would be captured by Iranian and the immediate global energy crisis will be disastrous to say the least. In brief, it could lead to something akin to the beginnings of a WW III crisis, and the whole world would be in a terrible mess.
On account, the alternative, a sort of "Shock and Awe" solution, seems perhaps more feasible to take place if our country is "brought to heel." So it would, hypothetically, involve a secret rapid air strike, targeting major sites in Iran, practically all major areas in my country, with the upshot being their rapid and total obliteration.
Moreover, this course is the only way to paralyze Iran from forcefully fighting back. Even so, it, like any other sort of incursion, would lead to great strife throughout the Middle East -- one involving several nations. At the same time, it would generate repercussions around the world relative to oil deliveries, further contention amongst other nations and some major decisions in alignments amongst various countries like Russia, China, US, Venezuela, Great Britain and others.
Now, do you think Bom-Bom McCain would be upset were this sort of offensive to occur *? Do you think that most of the American public would care either way? Do they even now care about the Iraqi people -- people already in deep, barely manageable pain?
In an analogous vein, do American feminists care about Iraqi women and girls being forced into prostitution as a direct result of invasion in the name of an American type of democracy? Is there real concern whatsoever? If so, why have they not risen up en masse over this issue rather than discuss ad infinitum the general repression of Moslem women?
All considered, Iranian women say: "No thanks, we don't need your democracy. We are witnessing it already in Iraq. We can see the situation of Iraqi women. We prefer to support our disagreeable President with his silly obnoxious views on women's place in life."
Largely educated, these Iranian women, also, realize that subjugation of women is a global dilemma, part of a bigger problem -- that of universal human oppression, which often is supported by administrations of Western "civilized" countries, as well as silently supported by their peoples, who do not speak up. So if some individual were truly worried about suppression of women, that person should try to solve the bigger problem, the root problem, which surfaces in many societies all across the globe, rather than look to Middle Eastern women as the be all and end all of tyrannical domination.
At the same time, many Americans have not been able to accept that they have been fooled, lied to and misinformed about the reason that their country engaged in warfare in Iraq. Analogously, they could right now be starting to fall in the same old trap: The trap is one of castigating a leader, such as Saddam or mine, a country, a religion and a way of life so as to make them all appear evil, illiterate, wild, barbaric, ugly and even threatening.
This stated, I'll add that I am so sorry that this unpleasant Ahmadinejad and his fanatic religious friends made it easy for the American administration to affect American minds so that our country and its people are viewed as terrible. Why, though, can't the masses see this as a method to prepare the ground for nasty actions against us? I'll add, just as ignorant Saddam made it easy for an excuse to be fabricated to invade Iraq, so doesn't my country's President offer the same -- except that mine refuses to be caught off guard.
In the end, I apologize to any readers if any of these opinions seem insulting. They are not meant to be so. At the same time, I do know that there resides, in the US and elsewhere in the world, a dedicated minority of peace seekers and human rights advocates -- people who are truly humane and ethical.
It is fortunate that they exist as these are the ones on whom I count to make the world right, including in the prevention of war, more than any others, especially any disliked governmental leaders who come and go. Furthermore, I know they they are the people who understand well that compassionate, moral and outreaching people, assuredly, are present everywhere across the globe -- even in Iran!
On account, they are the first to be truthful about the state of affairs in and value the people of my country. They, also, remind me of Nelson Mandela's words, "As I have said, the first thing is to be honest with yourself. You can never have an impact on society if you have not changed yourself... Great peacemakers are all people of integrity, of honesty, but humility." Indeed, this thought and way to be provides hope for us all!
* What does this say about his capacity to make good versus poor judgements when a potential leader of a powerful country imagines that it is comical to sing a crude ditty condoning slaughter? What sort of sound assessments would such a person be capable to apply in his role of Presidential leader? What sort of values and principles does he exemplify when he shows that he thinks that it is an amusing clever joke, rather than a serious problem, to casually murder people, including innocent children and elderly civilians, which would assuredly happen if bombs are dropped? All the same, John McCain, obviously, delights in such an outrageous tragic vision: YouTube - Bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg) and YouTube - McCain laughs, Sings Bomb Iran (www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I).
Vahab is a person interested in environmental and humanitarian affairs. He has lived most of his life in Iran.
|
This_Category |
|
Category:: Political Views |
Recommend this article...
 Quote this article on your site | Views: 2058
Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4
Tags: Vahab Mahmoud Ahmadinejad US military Iran War
|
Commentary 
