What a nice time for all those terrorists to be under one roof...1000lb JDAM bomb should do the trick...
posted on 02/07/2004 2:04:28 AM PST
by Big Bad Bob
(First it was Afghanistan, then Iraq...now for Iran...Syria...North Korea...Zimbabwe)
To: Big Bad Bob
I was thinking Special Ops.
posted on 02/07/2004 3:15:42 AM PST
(Podesta about Bush: "He's got four years to try to undo all the stuff we've done." (TIME-1/22/01))
Iran: more to it than meets the eye
By Mohammed A. R. Galadari
7 February 2004
IS THE political situation in Iran the result of the disqualification by the Guardian Council of a number of candidates, where the conservatives and reformists are in confrontation? Or is the situation more profound than the superficial differences, and the crossroads for the Islamic Republic after 25 years of age?
What makes the above questions meaningful is that the history of nations, which witnessed grand revolutions, starts with the so-called legitimacy of the revolution, the new current opposing the previous one in all its forms and shapes. At this point, all the pre-revolution age becomes subject to evaluation and judgment. For that reason the ordinary judiciary system is suspended and a revolution-run judicature comes into existence. However, this has not happened in Iran only, but in almost all major revolutions: France has witnessed the most notorious revolutionary trials that fall beyond anybody's imagination. It is difficult to imagine that such trials could be staged in a country that presented the modern civil code to most of the world's constitutions.
With the passage of time, internal accountability commences: what have we done? What benefits have we gained? What aspects deserve advocacy and what need to be discarded? It is a process of self-evaluation of the experiment. This is what is seemingly taking place in Iran. It is a part Iran should play without fear.
Yes, all the players on the political arena in Iran should conduct this self-evaluation of the past 25 years. The pros and cons should be assessed. After that the pros should be reinforced and the cons be eliminated or remedied. This process is called the constitutional versus revolutionary legitimacy. It is where the rhythm of the political system is fine-tuned in harmony with the constitution. In other words, the constitution should not reflect the interests of a particular group. It should take into account the 'legitimate' dreams and ambitions buzzing in all the people's minds.
What is currently said about the two opposing currents within the Iranian government, namely the conservatives and reformists, does not necessarily mean that there are no other political currents on the arena. However, they should set aside their differences and bear the country's supreme interests in mind. Otherwise, a third current or movement, though lurking unseen, would emerge in opposition to the two conflicting movements. At that point, the political arena would witness more disorder, which cannot, rather will not, be tolerated.
The next phase is the economic development and the evolution of a uniform political identity having homogeneous internal and external policies respecting the international community's will as well as regional cooperation on the basis of equality, partnership rather than put into practice the pre-tailored patterns. It is seemingly taking place. However, attempts to provoke instability would not only hinder reforms and developments, but would also cause a relapse. http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/comment/2004/February/comment_February7.xml§ion=comment
posted on 02/07/2004 3:22:27 AM PST
by F14 Pilot
("Terrorists declared war on U.S. and War is what they Got!")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson