I’ve read articles touching on this, would have to hunt them up . . . So far as anyone can tell from here, there is at least a very substantial minority, perhaps a quarter or more of the total population, who really, deeply believe in the Islamic Republic as now constituted, and would fight/kill/die to preserve it. And that minority is not going to change its minds or go away any time soon. If it comes down to civil war, it will be a very bloody and prolonged civil war, with each side having plenty of zealous grassroots support and volunteers. Think the Spanish Civil War – that bloody at least. With more advanced weapons in play. And if it comes down to foreign invasion – that will turn into a civil war as here described before too long.
Actually, I think some Jews were spotted in Jerusalem last year. Ominous sign.
I’m not advocating an invasion of Iran here, but I think if you do a little math you might see that as a striking lack of support for the government.
You don’t understand. Support for the government is much broader than that – I’m merely describing its zealous hard core. The ones who believe not only in their country’s regime, but in the Islamic-traditionalist society it represents and maintains. Think the American religious right – they’re a minority, but too big and too fierce a minority to ignore, and are only a subset of conservatism generally. Now, if we had an authoritarian state that represented everything they stand for, which also enjoyed far broader support of the my-country-right-or-wrong nature, think how difficult that regime would be to dislodge. And now crank all that to eleven and place it in an Islamic setting, where church-state separation has little appeal even as a concept.
I understand that you said around 75 percent of the people say they wouldn’t fight, kill or die to preserve the currnet theocratic regime. I’m not making any claims about rose petals, but if that’s intended to illustrate the support the mullahs would have for its government if Iran were invaded, it does not exactly blow me away. That’s assuming we can treat that kind of question as a reliable indicator of opinion.
And I’d be careful about invading a country on the assumption its citizens won’t defend it. I know you aren’t exactly saying Americans would be greeted with rose petals, but it sure seems to me that you are treading awfully close to that mode of thinking. They’re not gonna throw rose petals, and they’re also not gonna throw down their arms for us.
An invasion of Iran would be an unmitigated disaster.
Iranians were more than willing to fight and die for the Islamic Republic when Saddam invaded and that was a government that was far, far more brutal than the current one.
If they were willing to die by the tens of thousands for a government that had female virgin prisons forcibly raped and turned teenage boys into human bombs then they’d be more than happy to do the same for a government being invaded by the infidel lackeys of the Jews.
They’d certainly do the same if the US invaded now, but the US is no more likely to invade Iran than it is to invade North Korea and anyone who thinks such an invasion is even a strong possibility knows nothing about the situation.
It’s not a serious possibility with this administration. With the next, who knows?
Better to be vigilant.
How soon would you like to buy my Tiger Repelling Stone?
It’s a steal at only $10,000, but for you, $5,000.
Will that be cash or check?
Iraq: Area 169,000 square miles; population 30.3 million.
Iran: Area 636,000 sm; population 78.8 million. And every little bit as volatile.
Have we learned nothing? What makes anybody think we could even win such a war in the first place, let alone occupy the country successfully?!
[releases tiger in FinnAgain’s direction]
Hmmm . . .
Call me when you’ve worked out the bugs. After you’re released from the ICU.
The bugs are worked out, that’s the beauty. It’s a fully functional tiger repelling rock.
Act now, and for the low, low price of another $5,000, I’ll throw in an American Invasion of Iran Repelling Rock, absolutely free!
Money and power.
Well, I hope we’ve learned from Iraq that some Americans can make a lot of money off this sort of thing, but most of us just get screwed.
Thanks. I’m sure your rock is all you say it is, but I’d rather trust forthright debate to keep us out of the next war.
(If only you’d had an American Invasion of Iraq Repelling Rock you could have saved us all a lot of headaches, you know. Why’d you withhold the technology until now?)
Ah, it must be May…we’re poised to invade Iran again, I see. Good thing the eagle eyed Kucinich is on the job (snigger) to ensure we don’t invade them this time either. Thus far he’s been able to avert the imminent war for nearly a decade…wtg Dennis! Keep on keeping on mano…keep da faith!
Iraq…Afghanistan…Haliburton!! And stuff!
-XT
The Invasion Of Iran: brought to you by Anydanow Professional Prognosticators since 2004.
Of course, your baseless fear mongering about how we just might invade Iran (despite the fact that it is pretty much militarily impossible for us) serves a valid, valid point. After all, that forthright fear mongering will totally keep us out of ‘the next war’, that’s like, totally happening! Gonna happen! Whatever. Any day now. Bang, zoom, surprise!
War.
“Fear-mongering?” That’s a laugh. It is fear I am trying to combat. The unreasoning fear of Iran. And you seem to be the chief purveyor in these parts.
Finn isn’t selling fear. To paraphrase Tropic Thunder, he’s an irony farmer, mothah fuckah!! 
-XT
Yeah… the irrational, counter-factual, ignorant claim that not only are we conceivably going to invade Iran anywhere approaching the near future, but it is by your rhetoric that we are best preserved from such a danger. Textbook fear mongering ‘Fear the outcome, fear it… unless you do as I say.’
That is, you are trading in ignorance, irrationality and primarily fear in order to sell your rhetoric. It’s telling that you can’t make your case without trading on that vacuous fear about an imminent invasion that can be averted if we just follow your guidance.
We might attack Iran! Chaos! War! Disaster! War! Death!!! We must stop this from happening!!! Oh, erm, selling your position with fear is bad, too.
Against better judgement I’ll lower myself to your personal comment just to show how you trade in fear and fallacy: what you’re pretending is being a “purveyor of fear” is for instance, time after time, when I show that Iran has directly attacked US military forces with no military reprisals from the US (proving that they have no rational fear of us), you willfully ignore the actual content, context, logic, and facts and pretend that it’s about “oooh, Iran, scary!!!”, or try to handwave away Iran’s control of Hezbollah and support for Al Quaeda by pointing out that Iran orchestrated or supported terrorist groups targeting the US in 10 year cycles while you deliberately ignore that there was no US military retaliation against them. You then revert to fear mongering, and pretend that if we acknowledge Iran’s history against America, that we’re somehow on the road to war.
‘We must downplay or ignore history, or else we’re on the road to war. War!!!’
It couldn’t be clearer fear mongering if you set up a cart with a sign that read “fear of invading Iran, $.05”
It is a tactic of desperation, of willful blindness, of deliberate ignorance. Faced with the fact that Iran has attacked us directly and aided terrorist groups up to, at least, Al Quada and faced with the inescapable fact that the US still has not done as much as toss a single cruise missile at Iran your only response is to furiously handwave away facts that are damaging to the climate of fear your argument relies on as its lifeblood, as you tell us once again how eternal vigilance is the price we must pay to avoid invading Iran anydaynow[sup]tm[/sup].