North Korea & Iran, two states in need of "regime change"
- Thread starter fuji
- Start date
They are not so stupid.I'm waiting for the EU to lead on this.....
OTB
Only Americans are so dumb as to think that they can impose their will on the rest of the world.
The rest of the world knows that Regime change has to come from within, otherwise, you're just wasting your money.
So quite what does this mean JTK? Let the bad guys run amok until they decide to attack London or Paris or Vancouver? Velvet or Tulip Revolutions only occur when the regime does not have overwhelming power - do you believe that applies to either North Korea or Iran?They are not so stupid.
Only Americans are so dumb as to think that they can impose their will on the rest of the world.
The rest of the world knows that Regime change has to come from within, otherwise, you're just wasting your money.
You have to be masively in denial, if you believe that american "regime change" is practical or even possible. Look at Iraq, where the main result of the "regime change" has been a disastrous (for the US) increase in the influence of Iran in Iraq and indeed the entire region. And look at Afghanistan, where the endgame is shaping up to be a de facto recognition of the Taliban as an important is not controlling part of the government.So quite what does this mean JTK? Let the bad guys run amok until they decide to attack London or Paris or Vancouver? Velvet or Tulip Revolutions only occur when the regime does not have overwhelming power - do you believe that applies to either North Korea or Iran?
Want to try another regime change?
PS: I did not even mention the horrendous human cost in deaths and the disastrous effect on the american economy.
Exactly.You have to be masively in denial, if you believe that american "regime change" is practical or even possible. Look at Iraq, where the main result of the "regime change" has been a disastrous (for the US) increase in the influence of Iran in Iraq and indeed the entire region. And look at Afghanistan, where the endgame is shaping up to be a de facto recognition of the Taliban as an important is not controlling part of the government.
Want to try another regime change?
PS: I did not even mention the horrendous human cost in deaths and the disastrous effect on the american economy.
Karzai? The guy is so corrupt, even the Afghans (who expect their leaders to be corrupt) can't fucking stand him. A complete and utter disaster.
There was a great article in the Globe and Mail about Karzai's brother being a corrupt son of a bitch, drug dealer, etc. How far do you think Karzai is from being in on the swindle?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-in-canadas-major-aid-project/article1816770/
Let the North Koreans and the Iranians rise up and depose their own corrupt governments.So quite what does this mean JTK? Let the bad guys run amok until they decide to attack London or Paris or Vancouver? Velvet or Tulip Revolutions only occur when the regime does not have overwhelming power - do you believe that applies to either North Korea or Iran?
The Iranians came close last time, maybe next time they will succeed.
Youth is more powerful than anything the US government can throw against Iran. Young people in Iran are more in tune with the world and what's going on around them than ever. (You can thank the Internet for that.) Young people in Iran want to be part of the world, not in isolation from it like their leaders want. The despots running Iran survive on crisis. No crisis and they will wither away and die. For years, the Americans have been feeding the monster by GIVING it one crisis after the other. The best solution is to deprive the despots of oxygen (no more gift crises). Only then will the despots controlling Iran wither away and die.
Let the Iranians pull aside the curtain, not the US or the West.
The best thing we can do is to show the young people of Iran that they have nothing to fear from the west. We need to stand by our prinicples and not give into the sabre rattlers who would love nothing more than to start a third war in the Middle East. (And given how well the other 2 wars are going, I don't think a third war is advisable right now.)
Norht Korea has one of the more represivce regimes, if you don't support the govt you don't eat it is that simple, the avertage diet is about 800 calories a day, the only people who et at all consistantly are the politicians and the army. The general population is not really aware of anything outside of their farms or factories.
The ideal of an impoverished lower class rising up and overthrowing a corrupt goveernment is interesting , and unfortunately for Les Miserables it just does not happen, the lower classes are generally to worried about where their next meal is comming from to think about a revolution, and Norht Korean does not have a middle class.
Iran is a different situation there is a middle class that has been exposed to western values, GOOGLE and IPODS will win more revolutions than all the armed forces on the planet combined, it almost worked last time, maybe next time .There is also a second issue with Iran , it is Persian in background, not Muslim, that is a recent development, and given half a chance would probally reemove the imams from power.
The ideal of an impoverished lower class rising up and overthrowing a corrupt goveernment is interesting , and unfortunately for Les Miserables it just does not happen, the lower classes are generally to worried about where their next meal is comming from to think about a revolution, and Norht Korean does not have a middle class.
Iran is a different situation there is a middle class that has been exposed to western values, GOOGLE and IPODS will win more revolutions than all the armed forces on the planet combined, it almost worked last time, maybe next time .There is also a second issue with Iran , it is Persian in background, not Muslim, that is a recent development, and given half a chance would probally reemove the imams from power.
The US already tried regime change in 1953, through a CIA sponsored coup. Only back then it was because the democratically elected leader was a bit too socially progressive and nationalized the oil industry. Since then its been its been a disaster for the common Iranian.
They did get close last year, but the hardliners are still in control. And every time the US or Israel threatens them, it just gives the hardliners more fodder for repressive gov't for 'security'.
They did get close last year, but the hardliners are still in control. And every time the US or Israel threatens them, it just gives the hardliners more fodder for repressive gov't for 'security'.
Yes, I would agree that there has to be internal desire for change. However, certainly Western states can attempt to provide assistance in the push for change.Let the North Koreans and the Iranians rise up and depose their own corrupt governments.
The Iranians came close last time, maybe next time they will succeed.
Further there may well be situations where the use of military force is called for.
The US had unrealistic expectations in Iraq, which were unmet. Regime change in Iran and North Korea would require more realistic expectations from the get-go.Look at Iraq, where the main result of the "regime change" has been a disastrous (for the US) increase in the influence of Iran in Iraq and indeed the entire region.
A realistic goal is to end their nuclear ambitions via regime change. It doesn't really matter WHAT regime replaces them--so long as their nuclear facilities are dismantled, the research seized, and the nuclear scientists arrested.
In the case of North Korea unifying the country under Seoul has a very real chance of succeeding because the two countries have common culture and Northerners would not see a government in Seoul as foreign. It'd be more like German re-unification. Let the Southerners manage the whole thing and they'll probably do a reasonable job of it.
Iran is a tougher nut to crack as there is no obvious administration to replace the current government there--but so long as the nut is cracked, it doesn't really matter much what becomes of it--let the country go to hell, so long as it isn't exporting missiles and other arms, and so long as it isn't capable of developing nuclear weapons.
If you go in thinking Iran would become a democracy--good luck. However if you don't care WHAT it becomes, so long as it isn't heavily armed, that's achievable.
Lets see here, about 100,000 dead in Iraq, who knows in Afghanistan, and now you recommend that we go in and do the same to North Korea and Iran? And on top of that, you suggest that you're ok with however many dead and how destroyed the country is? North Korea is too poor, doesn't have the fuel or tech to manage a battle with anyone. Iran hasn't started a war with anyone for 150 years and as a signatory to the NPT, is under constant inspections of their nuclear industry, and even the most recent inspections say they aren't trying to build weapons. But you think we should go in and kill thousands just in case?Regime change in Iran and North Korea would require more realistic expectations from the get-go.
It doesn't really matter WHAT regime replaces them--so long as their nuclear facilities are dismantled, the research seized, and the nuclear scientists arrested.
Iran--let the country go to hell, so long as it isn't exporting missiles and other arms, and so long as it isn't capable of developing nuclear weapons.
If you go in thinking Iran would become a democracy--good luck. However if you don't care WHAT it becomes, so long as it isn't heavily armed, that's achievable.
You are reaching new lows.
Just wondering what charges you would have the scientists arrested for?The US had unrealistic expectations in Iraq, which were unmet. Regime change in Iran and North Korea would require more realistic expectations from the get-go.
A realistic goal is to end their nuclear ambitions via regime change. It doesn't really matter WHAT regime replaces them--so long as their nuclear facilities are dismantled, the research seized, and the nuclear scientists arrested.
In the case of North Korea unifying the country under Seoul has a very real chance of succeeding because the two countries have common culture and Northerners would not see a government in Seoul as foreign. It'd be more like German re-unification. Let the Southerners manage the whole thing and they'll probably do a reasonable job of it.
Iran is a tougher nut to crack as there is no obvious administration to replace the current government there--but so long as the nut is cracked, it doesn't really matter much what becomes of it--let the country go to hell, so long as it isn't exporting missiles and other arms, and so long as it isn't capable of developing nuclear weapons.
If you go in thinking Iran would become a democracy--good luck. However if you don't care WHAT it becomes, so long as it isn't heavily armed, that's achievable.
They also tried regime change in Korea in a bloody war 1950-52. This drew them into a war with China. It is time for the USA to say the regime in Iran is up to the Iranians. The regime in N. Korea is up to the Koreans. It is nobody's business but theirs.The US already tried regime change in 1953, through a CIA sponsored coup. Only back then it was because the democratically elected leader was a bit too socially progressive and nationalized the oil industry. Since then its been its been a disaster for the common Iranian.
They did get close last year, but the hardliners are still in control. And every time the US or Israel threatens them, it just gives the hardliners more fodder for repressive gov't for 'security'.
It is total hypocracy for nuclear armed nations such as the USA and Isreal to attempt to limit the nuclear ambitions of other states. Let Isreal get rid of nukes. Then we can discuss Iran.
Yes. If they are not stopped the death toll will be tens of millions if not hundreds of millions.Lets see here, about 100,000 dead in Iraq, who knows in Afghanistan, and now you recommend that we go in and do the same to North Korea and Iran?
Developing weapons of mass destruction. They could be detained on a security certificate--so long as they're not able to just move on and set up shop somewhere else: their work developing nuclear weapons for the bad guys has to stop.Just wondering what charges you would have the scientists arrested for?
Except that it appears they are not developing weapons of mass destruction in Iran, according to the IAEA and the US. However, perhaps the same charges should be applied to Israeli scientists, at least Iran is a NPT signatory while Israel is one of three countries in the world that is not. Iran also didn't try to sell nuclear weapons to apartheid South Africa, now that's a crime.Developing weapons of mass destruction. They could be detained on a security certificate--so long as they're not able to just move on and set up shop somewhere else: their work developing nuclear weapons for the bad guys has to stop.
Nuclear weapons should have been banned altogether years ago.
