On December 5, 2008, President Bush attended the Saban Forum to discuss American policy in
President Bush Outlines Where We Have Been, Where We Are Today, And Where The Region Can Go In The Years Ahead White House photo by Chris Greenberg Fact Sheet: Progress in the Middle East: Freedom, Prosperity, and Hope 5, 2008, at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. Bush addresses his remarks at The Saban Forum 2008 for Middle East Policy, Friday, Dec. The alternative cannot and will not be of the same ilk.Īfter living under four decades of oppression, the Iranian people have said “enough is enough.” The time has come to consign the Islamic Republic of Iran to the ash heap of history and for the Iranian people to choose their own destiny in a new system of the people, by the people, and for the people.Īrash “Ari” Aramesh is a national security analyst and Founder and Managing Member of Aramesh Law PLLC.ĭaniel Khalessi was the first Iranian-American President of the Stanford Law Review.President George W. But in Iran, it is the extremists who are at the helm. That may very well be the case in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and elsewhere, where a “secular” dictator’s demise unleashed a wave of religious extremism. The West has always been wary of instability in the Middle East-there are legitimate concerns that once an illegitimate regime collapses, the chaos that follows unleashes the worst elements: radical Islamists. This is proof that the first Iranian Revolution was an abject failure and that a second Iranian Revolution is necessary to reverse it, bring an end to theocratic tyranny, and put Iran on the path toward secularism and freedom. The Shah-on his worst day-was far better than the Islamic Republic of Iran on any day over the last forty-three years.
#Middle eastern people crack
For all his government’s faults and shortcomings, instead of clinging onto power and fighting until the last drop of blood, the last Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, left the country when it became evident that the only path to retain power was to crack down with brute and unforgiving force. That is why it mercilessly kills its youth, brutalizes women, and quenches the slightest sight of dissent.Ĭompare the regime’s hierarchy of interests to that of Iran’s previous government when it was faced with mass demonstrations. The regime in Tehran is an occupying force because it only cares about its own survival and future, not the interests of the Iranian nation. While many foreign policy analysts assume that every state acts in its own interests, these “experts” fail to distinguish between the regime and the state-let alone the nation. The core marker of an occupying force is that it blatantly and shamelessly does not care about the needs of the people it purports to govern and claims to represent. The Iranian people and members of the Iranian diaspora abroad, therefore, are calling for an end to the system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. These demonstrations are against an unjust system of laws and government, a system that has dehumanized the Iranian people, as well as those in Iran’s sphere of influence from Beirut to Kabul, since 1979. But the demonstrations are not just about Iran’s dress code, sham elections, broken economy, water crises, government incompetence, human rights violations, harboring of terrorists, or the murder of Iran’s youth.
The Islamic Republic’s mandatory hijab law fundamentally degrades human personality and is therefore fundamentally unjust. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.” Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. said: “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. What the regime fails to comprehend, however, is the difference between just and unjust laws.
0 kommentar(er)
