Saturday, October 15, 2011

Rafsanjani on "Sigheh," or "temporary marriage" & "The Bomb," with Mike ...



Excellent interview with Ayatollah Rafsanjani in 1997. Still asking the SAME questions on the nuclear program. Ridiculous.

One of my favorite questions:

MW: "You want the nuclear bomb?"

HR: [casually scratching his eye] "No. What the Americans did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki has had everyone hate trying to get the atomic bomb."

Say what you will about Rafsanjani but he's a master politician.

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Shaping the Narrative about U.S. Allegations of an Iranian Assassination Plot

I am very pleased with the back and forth provided through this interview. For once, the interviewer is fair and calm and the discussion is worth watching. The points Ms. Leverett makes are quite apt:

Shaping the Narrative about U.S. Allegations of an Iranian Assassination Plot

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Should We "Double Down" on Iran? | Stephen M. Walt

Should We "Double Down" on Iran? | Stephen M. Walt

Stephen Walt recently wrote a brilliant article on Iran for Foreign Policy (see above), outlining the failures of US policy towards Iran and "insulated beltway thinking" regarding those policies. His piece is wonderfully written and I agree with probably all of what he says regarding the shortcomings and illogical nature of people like Kenneth Pollack and Ray Takyeh.

Walt discusses the absolute absurdity of the "dual track approach" -- which had also been accurately criticized in essentially the same terms by Mehdi Mohammadi for Kayhan in an article I translated into English, here.

Long story short, aside from the fact that the advice Pollack and Takyeh give is just idiotic, hypocritical, and illogical, these men have an absolutely horrifying track record and have innocent blood on their hands. We should not be listening to people who have been proven wrong in the past and have admitted they were wrong... would you re-hire a doctor who almost killed you in surgery and admitted he didn't know what he was doing afterwards?