Two Middle Eastern mothers are sitting in a cafe chatting over a plate of tabouli and a pint of goat's milk. The older of the mothers pulls a bag out of her purse and starts flipping through photos. And they start reminiscing.
'This is my oldest son Mohammed. He would be 24 years old now.'
'Yes, I remember him as a baby' says the other mother cheerfully.
'He's a martyr now though' mum confides.
'Oh, so sad dear,' says the other.
'And this is my second son Kalid. He would be 21.'
'Oh, I remember him,' says the other happily, 'he had such curly hair when he was born.'
'He's a martyr, too,' says mum quietly.
'Oh, gracious me ...' says the other.
'And this is my third son. My baby. My beautiful Ahmed. He would be 18,' she whispers.
'Yes' says the friend enthusiastically, 'I remember when he first started school.'
'He's a martyr also,' says mum, with tears in her eyes.
After a pause and a deep sigh, the second Muslim mother looks wistfully at the photographs and says...
'They blow up so fast, don't they?'
----From an email
Showing posts with label Middle east mess. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Middle east mess. Show all posts
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Monday, July 06, 2009
Why We Need to Be Careful with Iran
So what the heck is going on in Iran? Just as it seems like the protests over their recent elections have died down, a group of Islamic clerics has announced that it considers the results "invalid." This is a significant development because it signifies a major rift among the wacky Muslim clerics that run the country. In particular, it is a direct challenge to the ruling Ayatollah.
Meanwhile, supporters of existing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are suggesting that some of the leaders of the recent protests should be executed for their act of defiance. This is particularly ironic, since the existing rulers of Iran came to power 30 years ago after overthrowing the Shah, whose brutal regime was well known for torturing and executing its political opponents (more on the Shah in a moment).
Predictably, Republicans have been critical of President Obama's mostly silent response to the events in Iran. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz recently wrote a piece for the Washington Post that pretty much tore Obama a new one.
Excuse me? Has Wolfowitz been in Michael Jackson's medicine cabinet or something? He is the absolute last to be lecturing anyone about foreign policy towards the Middle East. Wolfowitz was one of the principle architects of the invasion of Iraq, quite possibly the biggest foreign policy blunder of the United States in the last 50 years. And this moron has the audacity to weigh in with his opinion about Iran? Talk about chutzpah.
Obama has been right to show restraint towards developments in Iran. The last thing the U.S. needs to do is provide the existing Iranian government with ammunition to say that the protesters are being directed by us.
But more importantly, for the United States to talk about the importance of democracy in Iran is the absolute height of hypocrisy. After all, it was the United States and Britain that in 1953 helped overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and instead replace it with a dictatorship under the Shah. And the reason for the coup? Well, the Iranian government had the nerve to suggest that it was time for them to start profiting from all the oil that was being exported. The Shah, on the other hand, promised to be more friendly towards the west. Oh, and all this took place under President Eisenhower's administration--a Republican president.
Thanks to the support of the CIA, the Shah and his brutal dictatorship remained in power for 26 years.
The Iranian people never forgot this, and it was their long simmering resentment over our involvement in their nation's affairs that eventually led to the 1979 revolution. It also explains why the Iranians continue to hate us so damn much.
So if the Republicans wants to criticize Obama about not being supportive enough of democracy in Iran, perhaps they should first take a look in the mirror.
Meanwhile, supporters of existing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are suggesting that some of the leaders of the recent protests should be executed for their act of defiance. This is particularly ironic, since the existing rulers of Iran came to power 30 years ago after overthrowing the Shah, whose brutal regime was well known for torturing and executing its political opponents (more on the Shah in a moment).
Predictably, Republicans have been critical of President Obama's mostly silent response to the events in Iran. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz recently wrote a piece for the Washington Post that pretty much tore Obama a new one.
Excuse me? Has Wolfowitz been in Michael Jackson's medicine cabinet or something? He is the absolute last to be lecturing anyone about foreign policy towards the Middle East. Wolfowitz was one of the principle architects of the invasion of Iraq, quite possibly the biggest foreign policy blunder of the United States in the last 50 years. And this moron has the audacity to weigh in with his opinion about Iran? Talk about chutzpah.
Obama has been right to show restraint towards developments in Iran. The last thing the U.S. needs to do is provide the existing Iranian government with ammunition to say that the protesters are being directed by us.
But more importantly, for the United States to talk about the importance of democracy in Iran is the absolute height of hypocrisy. After all, it was the United States and Britain that in 1953 helped overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and instead replace it with a dictatorship under the Shah. And the reason for the coup? Well, the Iranian government had the nerve to suggest that it was time for them to start profiting from all the oil that was being exported. The Shah, on the other hand, promised to be more friendly towards the west. Oh, and all this took place under President Eisenhower's administration--a Republican president.
Thanks to the support of the CIA, the Shah and his brutal dictatorship remained in power for 26 years.
The Iranian people never forgot this, and it was their long simmering resentment over our involvement in their nation's affairs that eventually led to the 1979 revolution. It also explains why the Iranians continue to hate us so damn much.
So if the Republicans wants to criticize Obama about not being supportive enough of democracy in Iran, perhaps they should first take a look in the mirror.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Good Thing They Replaced That Oppressive Shah
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Candidates with Funny Names
Pandemonium has erupted in Iran following that nation's presidential election. The final results were very tight, and both candidates are claiming victory. Incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmasomethingoranother has a slight edge in the numbers but his challenger, Mir-Hossein Mousav, whose middle name is--GASP--darn close to being Hussein, is claiming extensive voter fraud. The end result is that protests and even riots have broken out in the streets. Things have gotten so bad, in fact, that you'd think Iran just switched to DTV.
The final outcome, as always, depends on a recount in Florida.
The final outcome, as always, depends on a recount in Florida.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Monday, December 01, 2008
D'OH!
In an interview with ABC News' Charlie Gibson, President Bush says that his biggest regret was the intelligence failure over Iraq. He went on to say that while it was unfortunate, there were a lot of people who agreed with the flawed intelligence.
What Bush conveniently forgot to mention, however, that there were also a lot of people in the intelligence communities of both America and Britain that doubted that same information. And rather than listening to them, the Bush administration chose to either ignore them or brand them as unpatriotic. Also, no word on whether Bush "regrets" trying to falsely connect Saddam to the 9/11 attacks.
But hey, that's okay. It's not like any of that caused the deaths of almost 5,000 American service members, the lifelong maimings of thousands more, the deaths tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, the destabilization of the entire Middle East, the rise of Iran, and the waste of over a trillion dollars (and counting).
Yeah, it's probably all just a coincidence.
What Bush conveniently forgot to mention, however, that there were also a lot of people in the intelligence communities of both America and Britain that doubted that same information. And rather than listening to them, the Bush administration chose to either ignore them or brand them as unpatriotic. Also, no word on whether Bush "regrets" trying to falsely connect Saddam to the 9/11 attacks.
But hey, that's okay. It's not like any of that caused the deaths of almost 5,000 American service members, the lifelong maimings of thousands more, the deaths tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, the destabilization of the entire Middle East, the rise of Iran, and the waste of over a trillion dollars (and counting).
Yeah, it's probably all just a coincidence.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
One Toke Over The White House
President Bush has been in the Middle East the past week, and he's urging the region's leaders to advance the cause of democracy.
What the hell? Hasn't he learned his lesson yet?
The last time our fearless leader went on a "spread democracy" kick in the Mideast, Hamas won the Parliamentary elections in the Gaza strip and Hezbollah had big wins in Lebanon. Both those groups are well known terrorist organizations. In fact, John McCain recently accused Obama of being soft on terrorism simply because a Hamas leader spoke favorably of him.
But here's the best part: Right after Bush finished reprimanding them, he asked the Saudi government to increase the nation's oil production. After he finished laughing, King Abdullah essentially told Bush to go piss up a rope.
I don't know what kind of weed Bush is smoking, but I'd love to get my hands on some of it.
What the hell? Hasn't he learned his lesson yet?
The last time our fearless leader went on a "spread democracy" kick in the Mideast, Hamas won the Parliamentary elections in the Gaza strip and Hezbollah had big wins in Lebanon. Both those groups are well known terrorist organizations. In fact, John McCain recently accused Obama of being soft on terrorism simply because a Hamas leader spoke favorably of him.
But here's the best part: Right after Bush finished reprimanding them, he asked the Saudi government to increase the nation's oil production. After he finished laughing, King Abdullah essentially told Bush to go piss up a rope.
I don't know what kind of weed Bush is smoking, but I'd love to get my hands on some of it.
Friday, May 16, 2008
John McCain: Flip-Flopper
John McCain has been caught with his pants down, and it wasn't a pretty sight.
A couple of weeks ago some official of Hamas suggested that the group would like to see Obama as President. McCain seized on this, suggested that this was proof that the Democrat was soft on terrorists. Bush also took the liberty to comment on the matter, saying that Democrats want to "negotiate with terrorists" while Republicans want to fight terrorists.
So Obviously that means that McCain would never negotiate with a group like Hamas, right?
Wrong. A couple of years ago, right after Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections, McCain was asked what that meant for American diplomacy in the Middle East. His response:
A couple of weeks ago some official of Hamas suggested that the group would like to see Obama as President. McCain seized on this, suggested that this was proof that the Democrat was soft on terrorists. Bush also took the liberty to comment on the matter, saying that Democrats want to "negotiate with terrorists" while Republicans want to fight terrorists.
So Obviously that means that McCain would never negotiate with a group like Hamas, right?
Wrong. A couple of years ago, right after Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections, McCain was asked what that meant for American diplomacy in the Middle East. His response:
"They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy."Someone please tell McCain he can pull his pants up now.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
No Need For Panic
Former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan warns that military action against Iran by the U.S. would be "a real disaster" for the middle east.
Annan needs to relax. If there's one thing the Bush administration is good at, it's disasters.
Annan needs to relax. If there's one thing the Bush administration is good at, it's disasters.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Careful What You Wish For
Well, we've been pushing Pakistani President Musharraf to become less of a dictator and to institute more political freedom. Under pressure from us, he gave up his position as leader of the country's military. Then last week Musharraf allowed parliamentary elections. Unfortunately for him, his political party was soundly defeated. Now his days as President may be numbered. It's unclear who will be taking over, and more importantly, where that leaves the United States.
">
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Why No One Has Ever Accused
Bush Of Being Good In Geography
According to the annual threat assessment released by National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell this week, a resurgent Al Qaeda is increasingly becoming a greater threat to the United States and other nations. According to the report, the terror group is making use of camps in Pakistan where it can train new operatives to launch attacks against Afghanistan, "the Middle East, Africa, Europe and the United States."
Well, good thing the war in Iraq--located three countries over from Pakistan--has made us safer.
Well, good thing the war in Iraq--located three countries over from Pakistan--has made us safer.
Monday, February 04, 2008
Who Really Wears The Pants In Iran
The Bush White House loves to demonize Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but the truth of the matter is that the Iranian President really doesn't have that much power. The people that really run Iran are the religious Mullahs. Chief among them is Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is the true ruler of Iran.
Ahmadinejad was recently a little slow in distributing gas supplies to remote villages. The Ayatollah stepped in, put his foot in Ahmadinejad's skinny little ass, and ordered that the delivery of the needed gas be expedited. When word of the Ayatollah's actions reached Parliament, many members cheered.
Some observers take this as sign that Ahmadinejad's days as President may be numbered.
Ahmadinejad was recently a little slow in distributing gas supplies to remote villages. The Ayatollah stepped in, put his foot in Ahmadinejad's skinny little ass, and ordered that the delivery of the needed gas be expedited. When word of the Ayatollah's actions reached Parliament, many members cheered.
Some observers take this as sign that Ahmadinejad's days as President may be numbered.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Where's Lou Dobbs When You Really Need Him?
A was along the border between Egypt and the Gaza Strip was breached earlier this week. As a result, poverty stricken Palestinians from Gaza have begun pouring across the border and stealing valuable, highly sought after, prestigious lawn care jobs from legal Egyptian citizens.
Damn illegal aliens are everywhere.
Damn illegal aliens are everywhere.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)