[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great

[stefania]

Peaceful Regime Change

September 27, 2004
U.S.News & World Report

Michael Barone
http://www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2004&m=09&d=27&a=6



John Kerry's latest zigzag on Iraq leaves a sharp difference between him and George W. Bush on that issue. At New York University on September 20, Kerry said, "We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure."

There is an obvious tension between this and Kerry's statement August 9 that, knowing what he knows today, he would have voted again to authorize military action in Iraq and his statement last December 16 that "those who doubt that we are safer with [Saddam Hussein's] capture don't have the judgment to be president." Last week he criticized Bush's actions in tones as scathing as those he used when he was competing with Howard Dean in Iowa and New Hampshire.

What would he do differently in the future? Three of his four proposals are pretty much what is being done now--training Iraqi security forces, rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure, holding elections in January. The other, bringing in more allies, is unrealistic: The same day Kerry spoke, Jacques Chirac said, in a language Kerry understands, "La politique française a l'egard de l'Irak n'a pas change et ne changera pas" (French policy with regard to Iraq has not changed and will not change). But the reason Kerry wants to make Iraq "the world's responsibility" is to "get the job done and bring our troops home," starting next summer and ending "within the next four years." The bottom line: withdrawal.

Kerry last spring said his goal was a "stable" Iraqi government. Bush at the United Nations September 21 restated his goal of a "democratic Iraq" and asserted that "the proper response to difficulty is not to retreat, it is to prevail." Kerry hopes that the continuing violence in Iraq will move voters to his side. Bush hopes that voters'current feelings--the new NBC/ Wall Street Journal poll shows a 55 to 40 percent majority supporting the military action to remove Saddam Hussein--will keep more voters with him.

But Iraq is not the only nation that will pose problems for whoever is elected in November. In January 2002, Bush identified Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as an "axis of evil" and pledged that "the United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons." In Iraq, a regime capable of developing weapons of mass destruction and willing to use them has been removed. But within the next four years it seems likely that the mullahs of Iran and Kim Jong Il in North Korea will have nuclear weapons; North Korea probably already has them.

No bargain. On Iran, Bush seems to have chosen the diplomatic approach favored by the State Department over the approach, similar to Ronald Reagan's in Eastern Europe, of encouraging overt and covert efforts to overthrow the mullahs. But if, as seems likely, the diplomatic efforts of Britain, France, and Germany fail to get Iran to agree to forswear nuclear weapons, Bush may take the second approach. Kerry seems unlikely to do so. Last December he called for a "nonconfrontational" policy toward Iran. John Edwards, in an August interview with the Washington Post, called for a "grand bargain" to provide fuel for Iran's nuclear power plants in return for Iran's promise to turn over nuclear material that could be used to make bombs. But the efforts of Britain, France, and Germany to broker some such deal have not been fruitful. This sounds very much like Bill Clinton's 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea, which North Korea cheated on.

Kerry seems to favor another such agreement with Kim Jong Il. He has criticized Bush for refusing to negotiate directly with North Korea. Bush has insisted on bringing neighboring South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan into the talks, on the theory that they have greater leverage to gain concessions.

Iran and North Korea are difficult issues. Negotiations seem unlikely to succeed, and regime change by military action seems unfeasible. But there is a third possibility: peaceful regime change. We saw it happen, and we did things to encourage it, in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. We know that the mullahs and Kim Jong Il are widely unpopular. At the debate this Thursday, Bush and Kerry will surely be asked about Iraq. Maybe someone will ask them what they would do to encourage peaceful regime change in Iran and North Korea.
_________________
Referendum AFTER Regime Change

"I'm ready to die for you to be able to say your own opinions, even if i strongly disagree with you" (Voltaire)

[shahee2]

Peaceful regime change is reform. There can be no force. There must be military confrontation with Iran in order to bring back its rightful leader, his Holy Majesty. Only then will Iran be rightfully ruled.

[redemption]

What are you talking about Shahee? First you say peaceful change is reform, then you say there should be no force, then you say there must be military confrontation? What are you talking about.

Second of all - to bring back it's rightful leader?

I personally like Reza and his mother, but the leader of Iran are the Iranian people and they will decide the future of Iran through free referendum of and by the Iranian people.

Obviously the Mullahs will not allow peaceful reform, whatever.. Reform is not for Iran. Iran needs complete overhaul of Mullahs regime by the Iranian people. This is called revolution not reform. Reform is bogus concept that will not occur in Iran. Because - any serious reform is a deathwish to the Mullahs - so they simply won't allow any real freedoms.

The Mullahs will be overthrown by the Iranian people - and I don't believe military confrontation from US is necessary.
_________________
IRANIANS UNITE
PERSIA LIVES ON!!
FREE IRAN NOW!

[stefania]

[shahee2]

I don't agree. The rightful leader of Iran is his Holy Majesty the Shah and the only purpose of referandum is to bring about a legitimate transition to monarchy, be it constitutional or absolute.

In that sense the Iranian people only have one choise, the Shah. Who else in our glorious past has modernized the country and built such a beautiful people.

The Iranian people choose radical Islamism in 1979. They cannot be allowed to choose their government again when we know that it is only through the divine wisdom of the Shah that we can attain any real democracy or normalacy. Therefore, peaceful regime change is impossible because the Shah would never come back into power by the will of the people alone.

Simply said, the Iranian people do not like Pahlavi. However, they need to realize that he is their rightful leader and accept him. Like a parent punishing her children in order to nurture them in the end. The Shah is our father and mother and Iranians deserved to be punished for what they did in 1979. We need the Shah and he needs us. Nuff' said.

[redemption]

[shahee2]

Do not criticize my love for H.H.M. Reza Pahlavi and empress Farah. They are beautiful people who were raped and thrown out of their country by a mob of crazy Iranians and their Arab Islam. Only this divine family has rightful rule over our people, with or without their consent. Never forget that!

[9karevatan]

U HAVE ONE VOTE AND THAT IS ONLY IF U ARE AN IRANIAN CITIZAN

OTHERWISE U GET NOTHING

THERE WILL BE OVER 50 MILLION FAMILIES ELIGIBLE


ITS WHATEVER THEY SAY NOT U

AND IF U TRY TO DO THAT THEN U WILL BE EXCLUDED LIKE MOJAHEDDIN...
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MOJAHEDDIN AND U IS THAT THEY HAVE THE GUNS AND GUTS TO DO IT


STAY AWAY FROM THIS TALK IF U WANT IRAN TO EVEN HAVE A CHANCE OF MONARCHY




TELL EVERYONE ABOUT 10 MEHR MAYDOON SHAHYAD!!!!!
_________________
iran iranam iraaanam
ke az to daram in jaanam
janam fadayat
mikhanam
payande baadi IRANam!!!!!!!

[shahee2]

Then we will impose the Shah by force...

[9karevatan]

ANYTHING DONE BY FORCE WILL BE DESTOYED...THE PPL OF IRAN HAVE LEARNED THAT OVER TIME AND WONT LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN


THINK OF ALL THE PROBLEMS THAT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN IF ITS BY FORCE

ALSO I DONT THINK THAT REZA PAHLAVI IS ABLE TO FORCE ANYONE

LETS SEE U EMAIL HIM ABOUT THAT AND SHOW US WHAT HE SAYS
_________________
iran iranam iraaanam
ke az to daram in jaanam
janam fadayat
mikhanam
payande baadi IRANam!!!!!!!

[redemption]

[shahee2]

Redemption,

Say what you want. At least I know the legitimate name of my country and can read its people's language. I am not an IRI spy and to call me one is blasphemy. I love the H.H.M. Reza Pahlavi and I wish with all my heart that he his returned to his rightful state. I believe he will bring us prosperity beyond our wildest dreams. Its not wrong to believe that we should get him into power as quickly as possible using any means necessary.

[redemption]

I also think Reza is a good man and part of a beautiful family. What I'm saying is this: that for reasons of legitmacy and best interest of Iran - all that happens must be based on real free referendum so that it has most legitmacy and is best for the future of Iran - and I can call Iran, Persia - from time to time if I so choose.

Of course ,if that's okay with you Shahee -

And any means necessary is extremist - there are means that we should not take. Come on Shahee - lets get real.. any means necessary? Here's a good idea - Nuke Iran, kill 70 million people and then send Reza in to rule. Is that what you're saying? So any mean necessary is not good - we need BEST MEANS POSSIBLE!!!!
_________________
IRANIANS UNITE
PERSIA LIVES ON!!
FREE IRAN NOW!

[shahee2]

Let me tell you why Referendum won't work. I was just in Iran. The people there don't want a monarchy to return. For the most part they don't even listen to H.H.M. Reza Pahlavi anymore. Although they do remember how wonderful our country was before the arab Islamic revolution. With referundum we won't have the Shah back and we'll risk a government which cannot serve and modernize its people like H.H.M. Reza Pahlavi.

No we cannot bomb the country. But the US or Israel should attack, assassinate all the mullahs, helicopter in the Shah and surround him with guards. The Iranians will then embrace him and the country will return to normalacy.

[Spenta]

Beware of IRI people posing as so called Shahees to spread fear and terror by making violent claims on behalf of moanrchists. This is the latest ploy to discredit monarchists and the opposition movement, by making it seem that they are a bunch of blood thirsty dictators looking to create Iraq style violence and chaos in Iran.