Discussion of Iranian support for Palestinian resistance groups

[aryobarzan]

1) It is an exercise of Iran's sovereignty. Do not think that if Iran were to cease its opposition to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine that the US would suddenly lift all sanctions. Unless Iran becomes a vassal state of the US, the sanctions will remain. Sanctions are the price Iran pays for its sovereignty, not for its support of the resistance.

2) Israel seeks to maintain qualitative superiority over the region and would attempt to actively sabotage any Iranian effort to acquire nuclear weapons, regardless of Iran's stance on Palestine. Iran is a natural regional power under any government and this would naturally lead to conflict with the settler entity.

3) Supporting the oppressed is Iran's moral obligation. Just because others abdicate their duty to do this does not mean Iran should also.

4) Arming the resistance forces allows Iran to bolster threats to the settler entity close to its border. This has many beneficial results for Iran. Firstly, it means the settler entity has to divert huge amount of resources to monitor and counter those threats. Secondly, it boosts Iran's deterrence against Israel launching a hot war against Iran because it is another factor they have to account for in their cost-benefit analysis of such an action against Iran. Thirdly, it allows Iran to act against the settler entity from outside of its borders (via the resistance groups).

Even under the Shah Iran had positive relations with Israel on the intra-governmental level, this was not reflected by the opinions of the masses, who even then opposed such ties, much like the large majority of Arab populations oppose their governments' relations with Israel.

Supporting Palestinian cause has been the biggest foreign policy mistake of Iran after revolution.Without such support Iran with her immense resources would havebeen amongst the top 10 nations of the world.
To be sovereign you do not need to support Palestine..yes it is not moral but who appointed Iran to be the moral champion of the world...are we holier than the pope!!...or as they say in Farsi "are we the bowl hotter than the soup!"
Sorry that I sound so insensitive but some things have to said when a nation loses so much and has nothing to show for it.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Supporting Palestinian cause has been the biggest foreign policy mistake of Iran after revolution.Without such support Iran with her immense resources would havebeen amongst the top 10 nations of the world.
To be sovereign you do not need to support Palestine..yes it is not moral but who appointed Iran to be the moral champion of the world...are we holier than the pope!!...or as they say in Farsi "are we the bowl hotter than the soup!"
Sorry that I sound so insensitive but some things have to said when a nation loses so much and has nothing to show for it.

The zionist regime seeks to dismantle Iran irregardless of Iranian support for the Palestinian cause, because the regime in Tel Aviv has no tolerance for large, potent nation-states in the neighborhood. They conceive of this as a necessary condition for zionist hegemony, a goal instrinsic to the regime's ideological and practical foundations.

Moreover your assertion is premised upon the following considerations:

1) Iran would not be subjected to the same sanctions regime for resisting American imperialism and claiming back her sovereignty in the face of the latter. So basically, Iran would have to bow to Washington's orders for sanctions to be removed. Which would correspond to the agenda of reformists and moderates, factions whose policies you harshly criticize (and rightly so).

2) Iran's economic issues are mostly stemming from the sanctions. Personally I do not share this view. For one sanctions have been a blessing in disguise in various ways, for instance insofar as they encouraged the development of domestic industries and agriculture. And secondly, because in my view most of the current economic challenges can be efficiently fixed through adequate policy measures by the Iranian government.

 

[Beny Karachun]

As an expat Iranian I like to ask a simple question:

What does Iran get back for supporting Palestinians.

We know Iran has lost roughly $ 800 billion dollars in potential income because of this policy of support so may be some one should ask " what are we getting back in return"

A whole lot of nothing coupled together with less money to take care of Iran's economic crisis, water shortages and civil unrest.

But hey, at least you hurt Israel! Oh wait... Our economy only grows, among the fastest in the world...

The zionist regime seeks to dismantle Iran irregardless of Iranian support for the Palestinian cause, because the regime in Tel Aviv has no tolerance for large, potent nation-states in the neighborhood. They conceive of this as a necessary condition for zionist hegemony, a goal instrinsic to this regime's ideological and practical foundations.

Lol, we only seek to dismantle who wants to dismantle us. Only when the Islamic revolution came you guys turned mad and started seeking to destroy us instead of developing your nation, and now due to your poor strategic choices you are sanctioned to death, stuck with useless cavemen allies and getting bombed on a weekly basis by our forces without any capability to respond.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Lol, we only seek to dismantle who wants to dismantle us. Only when the Islamic revolution came you guys turned mad and started seeking to destroy us instead of developing your nation, and now due to your poor strategic choices you are sanctioned to death, stuck with useless cavemen allies and getting bombed on a weekly basis by our forces without any capability to respond.

Yeah sure, a starved out, completely battered Iraq in 2003 was in a position to represent the remotest threat to the zionist entity. Yet the zionist lobby pushed for the invasion of that country and its neo-con associates carried it out.

Also anyone listening to Bernard Lewis' speech at the Moshe Dayan Center in the 1970's, reading the Oded Yinon policy paper published in the early 1980's and analyzing these in light of actual zio-American policy post-9/11 will see that this is an objective pursued by Tel Aviv irregardless of the policies carried out by regional governments. The insistence on balkanizing nation-states rather than simply toppling governments tells there's more to it than that.

 

[aryobarzan]

The zionist regime seeks to dismantle Iran irregardless of Iranian support for the Palestinian cause, because the regime in Tel Aviv has no tolerance for large, potent nation-states in the neighborhood. They conceive of this as a necessary condition for zionist hegemony, a goal instrinsic to the regime's ideological and practical foundations.

Israel will always be a fierce competitor of Iran and that is fine...We should welcome their competition in every filed but not their outright hostility...Leave the moral issues and land issues they have with Palestine to the Arabs ...The last time I checked we were still Persians.
Iran's foreign policy at the present time is based on two very expensive interconnected goals and one reasonable one:

1. Removal of Israel from Middle east
2. Removal of US from West Asia
3. Good relationship with neighbours

The first two will sap Iran's energy and economy and prevent Iran from "natural" growth for generations to come. China and now India have passed and are passing us waving "goodby to you suckers! " .Within next decade even Saudis will be passing us. It is time to review our foreign policy and have one that benefit Iran..

 

[SalarHaqq]

Israel will always be a fierce competitor of Iran and that is fine...We should welcome their competition in every filed but not their outright hostility...Leave the moral issues and land issues they have with Palestine to the Arabs ...The last time I checked we were still Persians.

It's not merely a competition. It's defense against an existential menace.

As for the relationship with neighboring peoples, if you believe in the notion of trans-historic enmity - I personally don't, then please have a look beyond Arabs at the Book of Esther in the Old Testament, as well as the Purim festival in which the alleged killing of 75.000 Iranians (a huge number for that time) is celebrated to this very day on an annual basis.

Iran's foreign policy at the present time is based on two very expensive interconnected goals and one reasonable one:

1. Removal of Israel from Middle east
2. Removal of US from West Asia
3. Good relationship with neighbours

The first two will sap Iran's energy and economy and prevent Iran from "natural" growth for generations to come. China and now India have passed and are passing us waving "goodby to you suckers! " .Within next decade even Saudis will be passing us. It is time to review our foreign policy and have one that benefit Iran..

US conditions for normalization of relations with Iran were spelled out by Mike Pompeo in his infamous twelve-point list. They amount to negation of Iranian sovereignty.

Moreover the US regime including its "dovish" faction and the Democrats, is not interested in normalizing ties with Iran. Their objective, much like that of the zionists, is to break Iran into several "ethno"-linguistic entities. If it wasn't, they wouldn't be pushing this "ethnicist" agenda to such a degree, having the exiled opposition including Reza Pahlavi promote "ethno"-federalization and cooperation with separatists at every turn. They would simply try to go for so-called "regime change" but that's only part of what they're aiming for.

They dangled the same prospect of cooperation and economic prosperity in front of Libya. Qadhafi was rather naive to believe them. What did they do next, and where does Libya stand today?

 

[Beny Karachun]

Yeah sure, a starved out, completely battered Iraq in 2003 was in a position to represent the remotest threat to the zionist entity. Yet the zionist lobby pushed for the invasion of that country and its neo-con associates carried it out.

Also anyone listening to Bernard Lewis' speech at the Moshe Dayan Center in the 1970's, reading the Oded Yinon policy paper published in the early 1980's and analyzing these in light of actual zio-American policy post-9/11 will see that this is an objective pursued by Tel Aviv irregardless of the policies carried out by regional governments. The insistence on balkanizing nation-states rather than simply toppling governments tells there's more to it than that.

Saddam and Iraq deserved everything, had nothing to do with being a threat to Israel (which it wasn't).

I don't know why I need to explain that to an Iranian, member of people that had hundreds of thousands of dead in a war with Iraq, including tens of thousands of civilians killed by chemical weapons.

I would say you should hate Iraq and Iraqis way more than you should hate Israel considering our past.

If Iraq had launched chemical weapons at us we would leave nothing of their cities and make sure the Iraqi nationality would lose meaning.

Israel will use every trick in the book to defeat its enemies, Iran is stupid to choose to be our enemy. The best case scenario for Iran is an armed conflict between Israel and Iran which would harm both nations and the worst scenario is Iranian government toppled or Iran getting nuked.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Saddam and Iraq deserved everything, had nothing to do with being a threat to Israel (which it wasn't).

It had a lot to do with the Isra"el" lobby in America pushing for war.

Saddam's enmity towards Iran doesn't mean we should be welcoming towards a regime which represents a superior threat, and whose Iraq-policy shows us what its strategy consists of.

 

[Beny Karachun]

As for the relationship with neighboring peoples, if you believe in the notion of trans-historic enmity - I personally don't, then please have a look beyond Arabs at the Book of Esther in the Old Testament, as well as the Purim festival in which the alleged killing of 75.000 Iranians (a huge number for that time) is celebrated to this very day on an annual basis.

That's a lie, Purim is the celebration of the Jews being saved from a massacre by Haman, the right hand of the Persian king Nebuchadnezzar.

Haman wanted to kill all the Jews, and ordered the Persians to kill the Jews on the 13th of the month of Adar (Jewish calender).

Nebuchadnezzar learnt that his wife, Queen Esther, was Jewish, and she told him Haman wants to kill all of her people, and the king remembered how Mordechai, Esther's uncle, saved him from assassins years ago, Nebuchadnezzar ordered to kill Haman and his family.

Mordechai and Esther received a royal edict allowing the Jews to fight those who wanted to kill them.

So to summarize, Jews defended themselves from the people who wanted to kill them, with the approval of the Persian king at that time, and the 75,000 figure is from all across the Persian empire, and includes both Jews and Persians that died in battle.

You are quoting a Nazi politician called Julius Streicher that used to constantly vilanize Jews, without knowing even a fourth of the story.

It had a lot to do with the Isra"el" lobby in America pushing for war.

Saddam's enmity towards Iran doesn't mean we should be welcoming towards a regime which represents a superior threat, and whose Iraq-policy shows us what its strategy consists of.

You made them your enemy, not the opposite.

 

[aryobarzan]

I disagree with Benny on many issues but he is right that the instigator of the conflict between Israel and Iran were in fact the revolutionary Iranians that returned from Lebanon war with Israel in the late 1970s and during Iranian revolution 43 years ago..They brought with them the hatred of Israel to Iran which at the time had no beef in Arab Israel conflict...
I am old enough and I was in Tehran the last day of shah rule..at around 8 am that day you could see armed revolutionaries wearing famous Palestinian head gear (forgot the name)..some speaking Arabic ordering people around and funny thing acting as traffic cops for the choas of the traffic that had started since all uniformed cops had left their posts.

So these revolutionaries had their DNA made in Lebanon..and have since used Iran and her resources for a war that was not Irans's war to begin with..43 years later Iran is stuck with this useless conflict.

 

[Beny Karachun]

I disagree with Benny on many issues but he is right that the instigator of the conflict between Israel and Iran were in fact the revolutionary Iranians that returned from Lebanon war with Israel in the late 1970s and during Iranian revolution 43 years ago..They brought with them the hatred of Israel to Iran which at the time had no beef in Arab Israel conflict...
I am old enough and I was in Tehran the last day of shah rule..at around 8 am that day you could see armed revolutionaries wearing famous Palestinian head gear (forgot the name)..some speaking Arabic ordering people around and funny thing acting as traffic cops for the choas of the traffic that had started since all uniformed cops had left their posts.

So these revolutionaries had their DNA made in Lebanon..and have since used Iran and her resources for a war that was not Irans's war to begin with..43 years later Iran is stuck with this useless conflict.

This gives me a new perspective honestly.

According to what you say, it didn't start as Iran utilizing the Palestinians against Israel, but PLO (an armed Palestinian organisation driven off to Lebanon) affiliated revolutionaries utilitizing Iran against Israel?

 

[aryobarzan]

This gives me a new perspective honestly.

According to what you say, it didn't start as Iran utilizing the Palestinians against Israel, but PLO (an armed Palestinian organisation driven off to Lebanon) affiliated revolutionaries utilitizing Iran against Israel?

It was at the time of revolution a two way relationship..Palestinian s helping Iranian revolutionaries to overcome shah military and Iranian revolutionaries helping PLO from newly acquired access to Iranian wealth...it quickly turned in to a one way relationship of Iran helping Palestinians in return for no benefit to Iran..which was my original question.
Lol

 

[SalarHaqq]

That's a lie, Purim is the celebration of the Jews being saved from a massacre by Haman, the right hand of the Persian king Nebuchadnezzar.

Haman wanted to kill all the Jews, and ordered the Persians to kill the Jews on the 13th of the month of Adar (Jewish calender).

Nebuchadnezzar learnt that his wife, Queen Esther, was Jewish, and she told him Haman wants to kill all of her people, and the king remembered how Mordechai, Esther's uncle, saved him from assassins years ago, Nebuchadnezzar ordered to kill Haman and his family.

Mordechai and Esther received a royal edict allowing the Jews to fight those who wanted to kill them.

So to summarize, Jews defended themselves from the people who wanted to kill them, with the approval of the Persian king at that time, and the 75,000 figure is from all across the Persian empire, and includes both Jews and Persians that died in battle.

Nebuchadnezzar was a Babylonian, not an Iranian king.

And here is Esther 9:16:

Clearly, the figure 75.000 figure relates to Iranians killed, not to casualties on both sides. @aryobarzan

One Persian tribe is said to have been wiped out in its entirety.

In conclusion, I say let's leave it to the nationalist Iranian user I addressed to decide for himself whether he believes Jewish sources when they explain the killing of this many Iranians as an act of immediate self-defence aimed at averting a plot against Jews. After all, Arab sources too will have sought to justify the very actions which said user's grudge is grounded upon. Why should reasons offered by Jewish sources for killing Iranians be any more credible than reasons offered by Arab ones?

You are quoting a Nazi politician called Julius Streicher that used to constantly vilanize Jews, without knowing even a fourth of the story.

I don't even know what Streicher claimed on the topic.

What I stated is factual: according to the Book of Esther 75.000 Iranians were killed during an event celebrated in the framework of Purim. I made nothing up.

You made them your enemy, not the opposite.

This is a strawman. Readers referring to my previous posts will get the point I conveyed.

 

[SalarHaqq]

I disagree with Benny on many issues but he is right that the instigator of the conflict between Israel and Iran were in fact the revolutionary Iranians that returned from Lebanon war with Israel in the late 1970s and during Iranian revolution 43 years ago..They brought with them the hatred of Israel to Iran which at the time had no beef in Arab Israel conflict...
I am old enough and I was in Tehran the last day of shah rule..at around 8 am that day you could see armed revolutionaries wearing famous Palestinian head gear (forgot the name)..some speaking Arabic ordering people around and funny thing acting as traffic cops for the choas of the traffic that had started since all uniformed cops had left their posts.

So these revolutionaries had their DNA made in Lebanon..and have since used Iran and her resources for a war that was not Irans's war to begin with..43 years later Iran is stuck with this useless conflict.

Well, the above is leaving out Purim (see above on how the killing of 75.000 Persians is celebrated to this day) but also the fact that American imperialists were not the only ones to undermine Iranian sovereignty under the ousted Pahlavi regime: so were the zionists.

Namely through networks of influence such as Zeytun (led by HabibOllah Elqanian). We could also cite zionist oligarch Hojabr Yazdani who on state television boasted that his diamond ring is worth more than the entire real estate of an Iranian city, when millions were living in abject poverty. Such was the power wielded by zionist elites and their Haifan Baha'i associates prior to the Islamic Revolution.

Now you might say, they were Iranian citizens so where's the problem? The problem is that influential zionist leaders were loyal to Isra"el", a foreign regime. This manifested itself among other things in Mossad's influence (not to say control) over the key security apparatus of the country i.e. SAVAK. And Isra"el"'s encroachment upon Iranian state institutions was resting to a large extent on said zionist oligarchs acting as middlemen.

Iranian revolutionaries had good reasons to oppose a regime which just like the USA had deprived Iran of sovereignty. In effect, they rid Iran of zionist domination.

I started a thread on the subject when I first joined this forum. It can be accessed at the link below:

How the Islamic Revolution put an end to zionist rule in Iran

This thread is dedicated to all the blessed shuhaada, jaanbaaz and aazaadegaan of Islamic Iran who, by virtue of their faith, abnegation, dedication and unconditional loyalty (all values which the zionist cabal is relentlessly targetting in more or less subtle manners, using a multitude of...

defence.pk

 

[War Eagle]

Leave the moral issues and land issues they have with Palestine to the Arabs ...The last time I checked we were still Persians.

The first two will sap Iran's energy and economy and prevent Iran from "natural" growth for generations to come.

The vast majority of Iran's oil and by extension government revenue comes from an Arab province... Ahwaz. I imagine Ahwaz Arabs prefer their oil revenue be spent on other Arabs as opposed to helping the Persians occupying them.