Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Iran's Revolution - why don't we support it?
... "Moreover, this incipient revolution is no longer about the election. Obama totally misses the point. The election allowed the political space and provided the spark for the eruption of anti-regime fervor that has been simmering for years and awaiting its moment. But people aren't dying in the street because they want a recount of hanging chads in suburban Isfahan. They want to bring down the tyrannical, misogynist, corrupt theocracy that has imposed itself with the very baton-wielding goons that today attack the demonstrators. ... ...
Imagine the repercussions. It would mark a decisive blow to Islamist radicalism, of which Iran today is not just standard-bearer and model, but financier and arms supplier. It would do to Islamism what the collapse of the Soviet Union did to communism -- leave it forever spent and discr

Answer Question

Asked by waldorfmom at 6:26 PM on Jun. 19, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 19 (6,931 Credits)
Answers (37)
  • *... and discredited." ... When the same thing was happening in Poland, Reagan was not frightened of speaking out:
    The tragic events now occurring in Poland, almost 2 years to the day after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, have been precipitated by public and secret pressure from the Soviet Union. …
    The target of this repression is the Solidarity Movement, but in attacking Solidarity its enemies attack an entire people. … By persecuting Solidarity the Polish Government wages war against its own people.
    I urge the Polish Government and its allies to consider the consequences of their actions. How can they possibly justify using naked force to crush a people who ask for nothing more than the right to lead their own lives in freedom and dignity? Brute force may intimidate, but it cannot form the basis of an enduring society, ..." (cont'd)

    Answer by waldorfmom at 6:37 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • People do realize that. We would spark an international incident if we imposed our will right now. I don't think Obama is missing the point on it. I have some faith that he will be advised on how to handle it effectively.

    Answer by Carpy at 6:39 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • More from Reagan's speech to the nation when Poland's people were protesting and being crushed by their repressive gov't:

    "... I want emphatically to state tonight that if the outrages in Poland do not cease, we cannot and will not conduct ``business as usual'' with the perpetrators and those who aid and abet them. Make no mistake, their crime will cost them dearly in their future dealings with America and free peoples everywhere. I do not make this statement lightly or without serious reflection. ... "

    Read his whole speech to see someone with character taking a stand. ... At that time, Americans took to the streets to protest and show their support for the Polish freedom-fighters,

    Answer by waldorfmom at 6:41 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • We are already spread kind of thin we can't save the whole world.

    Answer by MACY7108 at 6:48 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • Poland is only one country. Do some research what was happening in the end of 1989 in Baltic States. People did get killed.That was the beginning of the USSR collapse.

    USA should stay out of Iran's elections. It is a right thing to do. We don't know that much about the Musavi. Some political analyst say he is more pro- nuclear stuff then the one in power.


    Answer by Anonymous at 6:51 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • That is the whole point - spark an international incident ! It is already sparked, and it is burning along a path toward freedom OR toward the torture and killing of any protesters if the international community fails to support them ...

    Oh, I forgot, in the "international community", only similar totalitarian regimes ever speak up, all the democracies have been cowed into fearful silence by terrorist attacks.

    And "impose our will" ?? Denouncing criminal repression is imposing our will? I consider it simply standing for American values. Sending in enough troops to protect the protesters would be imposing our will. Obama giving a speech firmly condemning the Mullahs' outrageous attacks does not in any way impose our will ...

    All that is needed for evil to triumph in the world is for the good men to do nothing.

    Answer by waldorfmom at 6:53 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • Sorry, the comparison of Reagan's speech with the craven pap of Obama's rhetoric really gets me steamed.

    Answer by waldorfmom at 6:54 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • Good point, anonymous :51 ... that WAS the beginning of the USSR collapse. I wonder if the US had hung back silent back then whether the people fighting for their freedom would have had the hope to carry on.

    And thank you MACY7108, we ARE spread thin ... but Obama denouncing the crimes in Iran's streets is not going to spread us any thinner. In Reagan's speech (only one of many he made about Poland's struggle for freedom), we can see many decisions which did not involve troops.
    ... just sayin'

    Answer by waldorfmom at 6:59 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • Watching the news and looks like it is about to become a bloodbath.

    Answer by Carpy at 7:16 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

  • It wouldn't hurt a thing for the Obama administration to speak out in condemnation of what is going on. It is called Moral Support.

    As Moms we all know that Moral Support can go far. Gosh, I got a little moral support from my best friend today. I am facing something unpleasant and that support means the world to me.

    I support the overthrow of tyranny.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 7:18 PM on Jun. 19, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.