| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| A Different Face of Iran |
| 2006-09-03 |
| By Steven Knipp As a journalist, I've spent considerable time over the years in places where America was not always popular. In the bad old days, that meant Russia, China and Vietnam; more recently I've reported from such human-rights black holes as Uzbekistan and North Korea. Then there were the destinations with elements of danger: Israel, the southern Philippines, Northern Ireland. None of those ever gave me pause. But I wouldn't be truthful if I didn't admit being slightly uneasy about going to Iran -- now in the United States' cross hairs because of its developing nuclear technology -- when a U.N. contact invited me to join a group of international reporters on a trip in May. The United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran haven't had diplomatic relations in 26 years, since students in Tehran seized 66 American hostages inside the U.S. Embassy and held some of them for as long as 14 months. Neither nation has an embassy in the other's capital, and the U.S. State Department has a travel warning on Iran. Meanwhile, the U.N. Security Council is pressuring Iran to stop its uranium enrichment, and the Bush administration is talking sanctions. |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #5 If it requires nukes to force regime change in Iran, it is unlikely that Teheran would be touched. Rather, Qom and the large nuke sites would be attacked, along with bases around the Strait of Hormuz. The mere threat of sponsored Kurdish, Azeri and Arab independence would force regime change, because the Arab Shiite sectors alone hold most of Iran's oil reserves. Iranian regime-changers refer to the Ayatollahs as: "Arabparasts" (Arab parasites). With Qom a pile of rubble, Persian nationalist forces would coalesce and move against Basij-Wannabe-arabs. Pundits are saying that the President will finally define the enemy, in his Sept. 19 UN speech. Then anything is possible. I have said it before here: September could be one of America's best months ever; or worst. |
| Posted by: Snease Shaiting3550 2006-09-03 20:02 |
| #4 The article seeks to show what wonderful people the Iranians are. I'm sure it is true. Most of the people simply want to live life and be left alone. But this type of article is an effort by the Lilliputians to tie another string on the West. "Please don't hurt the innocent Iranians." Another excuse to do nothing. The West must reassert the foundation of the Treaty of Westphalia which stated that actions occuring in the territory of a nation were the responsibility of that nation. The 10% of Iranians that are propagating terrorism should render the other 90% irrelavant. The 10% seeking nuclear weapons do render the other 90% irrelevant. The Israelis missed a great opportunity to demonstrate this principle on Lebanon. |
| Posted by: SR-71 2006-09-03 19:41 |
| #3 So if it were not for the ogre of the Great Satan, Amahandjob, like Chavez, would be out on the street in no time. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2006-09-03 17:55 |
| #2 Cool and that, but unles Iranian Steet™ does not install mad mullahs on lamp posts soon, all the admiration would count to zippo. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2006-09-03 14:58 |
| #1 I guess it is 'Opinion'. But doesn't it make you feel all warm and fuzzy? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2006-09-03 13:53 |