just stumbled on this from tacitus and hadn't really realized this was going on.
http://www.activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1631&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=9bb635d5d36c0dacfe97fb6469ccbb28

Things are more like they are now than ever before.

wow, I was just the other day at a conference where all the 'experts' assured us there would be no uprisings in Iran.
Though one guy said: the whole point of revolutions is, they are unpredictable.

I hope you will update us if you stumble over more info

http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/newswire/news2004/0304/newswire031404-iran.htm
little more info

they have the internet on computers now?

I can think of few countries where destablizaion would be more dangeous than Iran.

Chills down my spine thinking about the consequences.

6/8 Dm Fmaj7 C9 Em G13

quote:

---

Originally posted by digitalprimate:
I can think of few countries where destablizaion would be more dangeous than Iran.

Chills down my spine thinking about the consequences.

_ 6/8 Dm Fmaj7 C9 Em G13 _

---

its exactly that kind of thinking that got us into so much trouble in the first place.
We refuse to aid moderate democractic refomers, while supporting the 'stable' 'friendly' regimes - no matter how digusting, corrupt or vicious they are, and then wonder why people sign up with fundamentalists.
If the West hadn't turned a blind eye to the Shah's abuses in the 1970's, most likely there wouldn't have been a Revolution.

they have the internet on computers now?

Well, Chatsubo, I agree in general with what you've just said. However, Iran is currently a very unique situation: if we appear to support the moderates too much or too openly, regardless of whether or not they solicit or acknowledge that support, we risk bringing down the full ire of the conservatives on them, crushing the fragile indigenous reform movement (although at this point it looks pretty dead anyway).

There are several reasons I think Iran in particular would be a scary place to have destablized. For one, very little holds the conservatives back from once again fully supporting terrorist groups like they did in the 1980s. For another, not much is holding Iran back from fomenting or encouraging a shi'a uprising in Iraq. Geographically and demographically, a destablized Iran would be a nightmare for the entire region.

Now, this doesn't mean that I think we should support it's current government, just that we need to tread lightly and and carefully.

And, let's not forget, dey got da nukes.

6/8 Dm Fmaj7 C9 Em G13

digitalprimate, chatsubo, you're both right.

Given U.S. history with Iran (regardless of our record anywhere else) any attempt to influence the course of events there brings with it serious risks. But taking a hands-off stance also opens us to the charge of ignoring a home-grown democratic movement there.

So what about Europe? Sure, they have even more of a history of imperialism than the U.S. but with Iran, it's at least not so recent. If anyone can provide links to more on the uprising, or Europe's efforts to support it, I'd appreciate it.

Bellham
~Arguing principle from convenience is no principle at all.~

Also, call me paranoid (all together now: "You're Paranoid!"), but I'm more than a little concerned about the US already being involved in any insurrection. Even if we aren't, we just happen to have a large number of troops right next door...sure would be easier than starting from scratch...

Finally, I'm a little suspicious of the source for this news.

Oh, hell, I'm just suspicious in general.

6/8 Dm Fmaj7 C9 Em G13

Well, many Iranians (and this election census included some 46 million voters, so there are plenty of them) were very unhappy with the way the Guards council handled this year's elections. And deaths in protests are frequent, due to the prevalence of weapons in the area and the willingness of the guards to use them. I only see the sad state of Iranian politics, once again.

This insurgence, control city, wait for other uprisings is a big constant in Persian revolutions. From the constitutional revolt in 1905 to the absolutist attempt in 1909, or the British sponsored coup in 1925, or even Khomeini's revolution, they all start the same. A town or city is controlled by rebels. The officialists forces fail at subduing it, and the revolt spreads. No matter what sign is the revolt, there is this fixation with defending towns and controlling them.

I suppose it will happen again this time, as the EU has frozen any diplomatic attempt till the summer after the debacle of the elections. Just after the apparent success of dismantling the nuclear program.

José