Iranians Love Americans

[naterprius]

I got my March 2005 issue of Smithsonian and was fascinated by this article:

http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsoni...mar05/iran.html

Here's the whole article:

http://www.smithsonianmag.si.edu/smithsoni...05/pdf/iran.pdf

I wonder how long it will take Bush to piss them off...

Nate

[jayman]

Nate:

Yeah it makes me wonder that if America is such a "bad" place why do so many people yearn to reach her shores?

I also think it's suspicious that when you look at the "brain drain" of many countries, such as Canada, where do most of those bright energetic folks want to emigrate to?

http://www.theurc.com/braindrain.cfm

[MarinJohn]

It is a good thing Nate posted this topic in Fred's House of Pancakes! I found the article highly interesting as the subject matter so parallels many aspects of the situation in the US today.

I know a few Iranian families in the San Francisco Bay Area who fled Iran under the Shah, leaving their status, wealth and extended families forever in hopes of bringing their children (now adults, some in the US Armed Services) up in a less repressive atmosphere. Where these family heads were once among the moneyed elite they now work at menial jobs with the satisfaction that their children are at least free to choose their own lives. For these family heads to return to Iran, even now, 30 years later they would face certain imprisonment, torture and death. They communicate with relatives via phone and through the internet and report their relatives reflect many of the same sentiments of this article. Those left behind had high hopes when the Shah fled, but seem to regret the turn their country has taken under the rule of the mullahs.

Interesting how some of the same themes expressed about the Canadian government, current Iranian government and US government are so close, ie. government mismanagement, how hard it is to make a living, get the necessities of life taken care of and by projection how the people feel stifled by their respective political parties/representatives. One thing I learned when the Soviet Union was still under communism via citizen diplomacy and exchange, is that universally people just want to be left alone to lead normal lives as they choose, to love their children, how they want basic freedoms and believe the only way to achieve these simple desires is through peace.

So far the US has benefited greatly from 'brain drain' of people leaving other lands, but that may change as the US government is perceived as becoming more under the influence of the religious right-wingers and becomes more repressive to 'normal' ways of thinking.

Part if Iran's problem is oil and who (nations? corporations?) gets to control that dwindling resource, and thus how this discussion fits into Prius Chat at all. Another serious problem in Iran and the rest of the world is electric power and specifically the nuclear power question. What was once touted as clean and too cheap to measure has shown through reality and experience to have a very dark side, ie. saddling future generations infinitum with the toxic waste, and a byproduct which is needed for nuclear weapons programs. These byproducts are extremely destabilizing politically. Some think so much so that perhaps nuclear is not the way to go and that perhaps we should look in other directions for our energy like wind, water, solar and/or as yet to be discovered ways of electricity generation. Taking a lesson from the past many also think what ever future form of power we have should also be decentralized thereby not making a target of those forms of electrical power generation. Most also agree that coal and oil are too dirty and finite for a permanent answer.

Getting back to the article in more detail, many US corporations had offices in Iran before the revolution and as the US workers fled Iran and returned home their overwhelming thoughts/stories were that the Iranian people and culture were ancient, advanced and endearing, even as corporate profits disproportionably lined the pockets of the ruling elite and were removed from the country thereby leading to destabilization as the government coffers were not filled enough to modernize the country. This eventually led to resentment of the masses (sound familiar?) who organized and were then manipulated by secret US government agencies (sound familiar?) causing the ruling elite to dismiss and/or stifle political opposition (sound familiar?) as unpatriotic. It was openly questioned in 1980 why President Carter was unable to end the hostage standoff, but yet on the date of Reagan's inauguration those hostages were suddenly and coincidentally let free. Ruling party (corporations) back in power?

The parallels of the US to Iran are unnerving and continuing with the feelings of ordinary people who really only want democracy unpolluted by religious influences (Iran today) which have proven since time immoral not to mix well. The framers of our constitution recognized this and stated in writing that there must be separation of church and State or as stated in the article if I may paraphrase "Religion should stay out of politics-politics is dirty and only corrupts people".

[jayman]

MarinJohn:

An excellent and well thought out post.

I fear that we (By we I mean the United States of America) are entering the sunset of our crowning achievements. We appear to have become lazy and rest on our laurels, expecting wealth to just land in our lap, not really understanding that constant innovation and change is necessary to grow.

There is always hope that people will figure this out in time and change our direction. It's truly ironic that first generation immigrants who fled brutal regimes are here to warn us of this, but we pay no attention.

[Sufferin' Prius Envy]

Iranians Love Americans . . .

. . . but not as much as Ward Churchill and Michael Moore love the hard-line Iranian clerics.

[Sufferin' Prius Envy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn\";p=\"67094)</div>

It was openly questioned in 1980 why President Carter was unable to end the hostage standoff, but yet on the date of Reagan's inauguration those hostages were suddenly and coincidentally let free.[/b]

I find it quite telling that President Jimmy Carter - a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy - was “honored” by having his name attached to a submarine. Whereas President Ronald Reagan - and actor during WWII - was honored with an aircraft carrier in his name. A submarine is perceived as non-threatening because it is not seen . . . just like President Carter during the Iranian Hostage Conflict. An aircraft carrier on the other hand CAN BE in-your-face threatening if you are not an ally.

I can tell you first hand that on Inauguration Day the Iranians saw two big carrier task forces closer in than ever before. THAT is what scared the #!)$&)^ (*hostages) out of them.
Coincidence my ass!!!

I hear the Navy was also considering a submarine for President Clinton. They reconsidered when they figured a sub would not quite accurately portray him properly. They couldn’t figure out how to put a Peyronie's disease bend in the hull and not cause it to perpetually steer far to port (left). There were also additional considerations: How to erect a large pair of lips for the entry into its port. A party cruise ship would have been a fitting tribute, but the Navy doesn’t have any. :P

[jayman]

Patrick:

Swish!

You the man!

BTW: think CU will ever fire Ward? If he wants to go around telling people the 9/11 victims basically "deserved it," well I guess he's free to exercise his First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Doesn't change the fact he's an a** and a p****.

But to take advantage of the Affirmative Action statement on the job application by stating he was a Native American when it appears he is *not*, that's an entirely different matter.

Don't even get me started on Michael Moore. I love how he suggested that Canadians don't have to lock their doors at night. H*** the homicide rate in Winnipeg is getting scary. A lot of folks up here wish we had something similar to the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights.

[jayman]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy\";p=\"67135)</div>

They couldn’t figure out how to put a Peyronie's disease bend in the hull[/b]

Oi! You kill me!

[Sufferin' Prius Envy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"67121)</div>

I fear that we (By we I mean the United States of America) are entering the sunset of our crowning achievements.[/b]

“ . . .(By we I mean the United States of America) . . .”

- jayman
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba

Confused are we? :?

[Robert Taylor]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"67136)</div>

Patrick:

Swish!

You the man!

BTW: think CU will ever fire Ward? If he wants to go around telling people the 9/11 victims basically \"deserved it,\" well I guess he's free to exercise his First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Doesn't change the fact he's an a** and a p****.

But to take advantage of the Affirmative Action statement on the job application by stating he was a Native American when it appears he is *not*, that's an entirely different matter.  

Don't even get me started on Michael Moore. I love how he suggested that Canadians don't have to lock their doors at night. H*** the homicide rate in Winnipeg is getting scary. A lot of folks up here wish we had something similar to the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights.
[/b]

Indeed, it is the armed status of the American people that prevents our being made slaves of.

The majority of UK "burglaries" are "hot", meaning that they are subjected to deliberate home invasion. This only happens 13% of the time in America where criminals fear the possible encounter with the very likely armed resident.

The violent crime rate in the UK is significantly higher than the USA rate, and climbing. USA crime rates continue to fall as the numbers of guns in the hands of the people hit a new high every month.

There are more guns in the hands of Americans than there are Americans, or even people in America.