"You help Iran becomes democratic, Iran will be the biggest promoter of peace and security in the region." just who is the 'you' in this sentence? The US? So the country that overthrew Iran's democratically elected govt in the 1950's should now convince Iranians that democracy is a-ok? How can i take anyone this mis-informed seriously. You sound like the average AMerican housewife a couple of months before the US invasion of Iraq...very, naive.
- By: Duck of Death on January 16, 2006

I really don't understand why a years-in-the-future nuclear Iran is so threatening, while a Pakistan that already has nuclear weapons is not. Are the chickenhawks so eager to bomb or invade Iran ready to go after Pakistan, too? What the hell, they're both mountainous, both heavily populated -- why not? This is madness. As the original post observes, the idiots running America's foreign and economic policies have been completely out-manuevered. It's astonishing how much they've pissed away. Anybody who trusts them to run a war with Iran is a bigger idiot than they are. That's a little hard to imagine, but where would the Republican Party be without the Fucking Moron bloc?
- By: sglover on January 16, 2006

So while we wait for this glorious people's uprising/nation transformation....Iran gets a nuclear weapon. Or two or three. I think me might be waiting a long, long while. All Khatami proved is that he was powerless to fundamentally change Iran. Instead the voters became apathetic because of his powerlessness allowing the current 'president' to be elected. Your belief that we do not have enough military power is erroneous. Unlike Iraq, Iran actually has nuclear facilities - which can be identified, are expensive, and difficult to replace. There are targets. We have a air force that is hardly used in Iraq (around here the local afb guys complain about their 2 month tours). There is no reason to 'invade' Iran. The idea would be to get their plants like Israeli got Iraq's. And there are only a few months left in the window before the main complex receives some new, advanced Russian SAMs...
- By: James on January 16, 2006

It's nice to express admiration for democracy, but what do polls show that most Iranians really want? After all, this creepy guy was in fact democratically elected, no?
- By: Neil' on January 16, 2006

A couple comments -The US isnt responsible for everything bad in the world. Yes we backed the Shaw for too long, but then again we backed a lot of nations fighting the Soviets that had legitimate if fascist regimes. Some of them like South Korea and Turkey are now important democracies. Had we stood by and let the Soviets have their way so we could keep our hands clean, who can say what would have happened. Nothing is black and white. -To address the main idea here: I think it is something that must be done but there are major risks. Here is the single biggest problem: if this regime obtains nuclear weapons before the population can chuck them out, we will find ourselves in a horrible dilemna. If the regime has nukes, stability becomes a vital US interest. This is because there is nothing more dangerous i can think of then a dying fundamentalist regime with major terrorist ties and possession of nuclear weapons. Think about it, if the mob is at the gates, knowing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has Hesbollah and Al Qaeda on his speed dial and his thugs in control of a nuclear arsenal, how exactly do we handle that? What might the Israelis panic and do? For me, that is perhaps the number one reason we cant let Iran under its current conditions obtain nukes. We will be forced to turn our backs on reformists, because instability in a nuclear power is simply too dangerous to the world, particularly knowing the beliefs and ruthlessness of the current regime.
- By: Mark Bueher on January 16, 2006

Bombing Iran is highly unlikely to work. This was the conclusion of a war game staged by the Atlantic last year. Participants included recent members of the Bush administration, such as David Kay, a Neocon who led the futile search for WMDs in Iraq. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200412/fallows
- By: Derek Scruggs on January 16, 2006

Sorry, but Israel and/or the US will be bombing Iran shortly if they don't cooperate.
- By: mahmoud on January 16, 2006

Mahdi: This question might be a bit off track. But Why is Iran too poor to process its own oil? It seems to me if people were able to figure out how to do this in the early 1900's it would seem a would be nuclear power could figure out how to do it? Of course one could also retort how come the us or canada can't figure out how to process oil shale or how come a lot of other things.
- By: john on January 16, 2006

I watched the new president of Iran on C-SPAN. He is a relatively young former university professor. It seems to me that he simply wants freedom for Iran and justice in the Middle East. AS long as Israel abuses Palestinians, he will oppose them. He says he wants nuclear power for electricity, but how can one object to this ancient civilization from having that and even nuclear weapons if Israel, Pakistan and India have them. What is really scary is that there are Reoublicans actually threatening to use Nuclear Weapons in the war against whomever they don't like. They call these people "evil doers or terrorists".
- By: Dixidog on January 16, 2006

Frank, you are an idiot.
- By: Clint Davis on January 16, 2006

Hi Hoder To even worry today about Iranian nuclear danger (a decade away) is part of the neo-con way Iran signed additional protocols to the NPT We inspect ( the US gov't kills me with their secretive nuclear detection abilities which could assuage so many fears ) and they can not build I don't say play kissy face with Mr "They Didn't Blink Once" but let him wait for his Imam how does that hurt me?
- By: JS Narin on January 16, 2006

Shut up you fucking towel heads
- By: frank on January 16, 2006

It's not in the US' power to do that at the moment, with Castro zapping US satellite transmissions while Bush zaps the country's international credibility. Both the US or Iranian governments have got to change, and unfortunately the people who can vote either one out seem to tired to care anymore.
- By: Angry Sam on January 15, 2006

Hoder, there is a military solution to anything. Do you honestly believe that the ICBM's are still pointed at Moscow?
- By: Mike on January 15, 2006

I agree that grassroots revolution and democratic reform are the "best" alternative, but they can take decades - more time than Iran's nutbar theologians are willing to give us, I fear.
- By: Chris Wren on January 15, 2006

Wow, such deep insight from a typical "Cafe Kelassik" kid. Unlike you I was born outside of Iran. I come to Iran and see you and yours as what is wrong with Iran. You guys sit at Kharazzi's and pontificate about the injustices of Iran, when the very money you use to pay for your "Cafe' Gelaasseh" comes from those injustices. You don't like to know what daddy does to pay for your starbucks excursions in "Tehranto" and or how your cousin get's to drive his third 206 because he wrecked the first 2 racing in Elahieh. Give me a break, what is wrong with Iran is people like you. Hypocrites who benefit and remain attached to the very system they badmouth. Forget about the blog, keep being a "bacheh maroof" on Orkut and "wander" aimlessly in your pseudoalternative fashion in the free world, and scream injustice. . .meanwhile thank daddy for wiring money from Dubai, to keep the electricity on. . .thank God for money laundering in the UAE huh? :)
- By: NazaninP on January 15, 2006

Dear Kachal! Shut your mouth off and stick with your Dell laptop! Even your wife could not resist you although she was so roshanfekr!
- By: Bijan on January 14, 2006

Well it does not simply works as you question. If one per cent have one opinion on one thing it does not mean that the other 99 per cent have reached a unit conclusion about their country’s politics. For instance, Mr. Derakhshan has stated: “It's only possible by helping every Iranian individual understand that they can change this regime if they want to”, this is in effect regarded by the majority of Iranians as an insult. Those who support this regime, who consist a big scale of the population, arguably would say that this regime does not need changing but only needs reforms. Some would say these reforms should be made in aspects like the economy or the judiciary or the politics… and this could be achieved by the current regime. We must not forget that Ahmadinejad’s victory in the election was one instance when Iranians felt he (Ahmadinejad and the system) could improve the current (economic) situation, although it is vital to note that the working class’ (those who virtually brought him to power) perception of the economy might not be consistent to those of an educated person or to an economist. Those who do not support this regime or favour change would not totally agree with his statements as they would regard his statements as an insult as it gives the impression that the Iranian people are incompetent of making changes for better within their country and need to be spoon-fed by Western countries. Also many believe that changing this regime would throw back the country many years behind and what alternative do they have? Also as I have mentioned before many of those in opposition believe that the West is merely after its own interests. Looking at other things …, when the West and Israel insult us and make up stuff about Iranians and Muslims to make them look bad we could not say anything because it’s the freedom of speech and press. But when on person, expresses his views on an historical fact such as the holocaust which has been supported by many historians in the past he becomes a “racist fascist”? Moreover he did not say anything bad at all when he suggested if the holocaust really occurred why would the criminal compensate the victims from their own land rather than someone else’s. The outrage of the Western world to these statements actually shows how vulnerable and decorative their so called “democracy” is… So I would imagine Iranians would rely more on themselves than any one else to work for them. Khatami failed?!! Does this guy even remember what Khatami set out to do? When he first started to work he mentioned that the reforms he is going to undertake will be limited to the frame-work of the constitution. Yet his achievements and reforms went on beyond anyone had expected. He brought trust among the International community and during his time political, economical and cultural ties with countries especially European countries increased. Moreover he made many governmental organisations such as the Intelligence service transparent. Privatisation flourished at his time and more Iranians, especially those who feared or resent it for various reasons ventured to return and invest in their country. Reform and democracy are like a glass of salty sea water, the more you drink the thirstier you become. Khatami was the one who offered this to the people of Iran, but as they became thirstier they forgot who actually brought them this. It was Khatami that enabled or created a new generation of Iranians like Mr. Derakhshan comment and analyze the Persian domestic and foreign affaires. All these were why I gave my-self the right to say that this letter does not reflect the majority of what Iranians think or believe.
- By: Mahdi on January 14, 2006

Mahdi you said... They simply are after their own interests, something very natural. Therefore instead of selling our nations' pride I want to ask you to grow up and do something for your country yourself. This bullshit here does not even reflect 1 per cent of our peoples' attitude. Posted by Mahdi at January 12, 2006 02:41 PM Thr first sentence is so true.. beyond what the blogger is doing what would you like? what is the 99% of your people's attitude.. I want to know and I am sure so do many others.. Please respond.. Idio
- By: Idio on January 14, 2006

Do you think they care what YOU have to say? Again your over-inflated ego is getting the better of you. Also, you should check your letters for spelling and grammer mistakes if you intend them to be read by heads of state. You're not president of Iran yet and no Iranian I know recognises your name or knows who the hell you are. Your popularity is a virtual reality.
- By: rebelrebel on January 14, 2006

Hosein: Could you answer the Chris question? I agree only with half of your idea-- Iran does not go to democracy by getting invovle in election, please undrestand... Iran should push by force(Not military) and give them deadline to change their beavior- If they dont buy Oil, and no diplomatic relation, and many ways that can help to push Iran regim to go away from their way,, might we can be hopeful-- Otherwise, by election is wrong way,,, if gonna happen, must happen since last 8 years-- Just remeber we are in 21th centry-- we do not have time to use try and error solustion i.e. elections
- By: fazel on January 13, 2006

Hello from France, trying to find interesting recent Iranian blogs right now, and this looks like one :) About saying that :"It's not possible by military attack or coup. It's only possible by helping every Iranian individual understand that they can change this regime if they want to. Not through another violent revolution, but simply through small holes that for whatever reason exit: elections!" I really hope there won't be a war but the moves are really getting scary right now. Also I've allways had this idea that the west should help as much reforming groups to have things changing from the inside. It's tough for me to have a clear picture of the "level of Democracy" in Iran right now. I had this idea that real changes can only happen through breaking points or revolutions, but somehow the Perestroika in the USSR proved the contrary with a change from the inside without a huge mess. Anyway all the best
- By: Alain75 on January 13, 2006

all this makes sense if one delludes oneself into thinking that in fact what these people want is the good of the people of iran. It's all about greed, for money, and for power. and unfortunately most people on the outside, such as the chris, give the impression that in the end it's all some sort of a game.
- By: shahriar on January 13, 2006

You fucking idiot do you think any one but Iranians could help themselves. Why are you selling our nation's pride to people who dont even care. It's unpatriotic people like you who have hindered the process of positive development in Iran. Moreover these "dear" people who you are licking their balls are the ones who greatly damaged Iran over the past decades, so what do yo expect from them? Wasnt it there conspiricies in the constituionalist movement, plots against nationalisation of oil, arming enemies like the old Iraqi regime, and fatal embargos on our people that resulted in the present state? They simply are after their own interests, something very natural. Therefore instead of selling our nations' pride I want to ask you to grow up and do something for your country yourself. This bullshit here does not even reflect 1 per cent of our peoples' attitude.
- By: Mahdi on January 12, 2006

To Chris: Actually, America played their cards poorly. We don't have the troops to go to war with Iran. That's the mistake we made with Iraq: the wrong war at the wrong time. Unfortunatley, Iran knows this *grits teeth* To Hoder: Do you really think this'll happen? I seriously doubt Bush or any Western world leader reads hoder.com, lol. I think this is something Iranians must work on to prevent us from going to war with them. Even if Iran won, it would still suck for Iran methinks.
- By: Thomas J. Webb on January 12, 2006

Well it's the same "problem" the west always has. Helping dictators to obtain power and once they've obtained power they turn against the west. My theory is that this exactly what the west wants, specially the EU because with this method they stop developement of countries like Iran and this serves their national interest: A weak Iran that can't process it's own oil and therefore must sell raw oil of which multinationals like Shell can make money off instead of Iran itself
- By: Just some kid on January 12, 2006

Hoder, I have still trouble to determine if you are completely dumb or if you defend your kind (i.e "insider"). How could you call for people to participate in election that are flawed by the simple fact that candidates are selected by the unlected mollahs. How can you talk about democracy without questioning the constitution and the velayat faqi. I don't know what you have done these last years in the west but you obviously did not learn a single thing about the democratic process. Instead of traveling around go back to college and educate yourself please or stop writing to the world leader. It is embarassing.
- By: Ali M on January 12, 2006

I'd be interested to hear your reasoning why exactly the military option would not be a possibility to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear armament? It looks like their strategy might become threatening well before any of your proposals could even start to get off the ground. I am certainly not a war monger, but no option should be excluded. Force can be effective, if wisely applied. Granted, the current US administration's track record is miserable in this respect.
- By: Chris on January 11, 2006