How should the United States deal with protests in Iran?
With protests worsening in Iran over the weekend, many are wondering if the United States should step in already and help.
President Obama has only made comments about protests instead of taking any action. According to the BBC, he said:
I am deeply troubled by the violence that I’ve been seeing on television. I think that the democratic process, free speech, the ability for folks to peacefully dissent, all those are universal values and need to be respected.
Obama has also explained why he does not want to take action in an interview with CBS’ The Early Show last week according to an Associated Press article:
The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States. We shouldn’t be playing into that.
But those statements were made before police began attacking protesters with tear gas and shooting live bullets in the air over the weekend. The death toll also rose sharply. A total of 13 protesters were killed on Saturday according to Iranian State Media reports on Sunday bringing the death toll to 20 since the protests began, according to a Times Online article.
There’s even been a video posted on YouTube of a woman getting shot during the protests.
Despite the growing violence, Iranian leadership doesn’t want any help.
According to Fox News, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned the United States and Britain yesterday to stop meddling in Iran’s internal affairs. He said:
Definitely by hasty remarks you will not be placed in the circle of friendship with the Iranian nation. Therefore I advise you to correct your interfering stances
They (Western countries) want to portray as small the great and powerful position that has been created for the Iranian nation inside and outside after the recent election, by which of course they made a mistake and they showed they still do not know the Iranian nation.Definitely recent events will add to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s greatness and might.
Should the United States disregard the comments made by Iranian leadership and interfere anyway for the sake of protestors? How much worse do the protests need to get for the United States to have a duty to interfere? What could be a consequence of interfering? And if we should interfere, how should we do it?
If the other guy had won we would still be dealing with riots and angry people…. It just would have been the other side doing it. Even in the great USA somebody has to loose.
I understand the guy who won was supported by the military and the poor, and the guy who lost had the support of the rich mostly rich college students. The rich I suppose have the time and money to riot for weeks at a time..chatting online and snapping pictures— whereas the poor would have had to give up, go back to work, they cant afford camera phones and internet access so nobody would have even heard about them anyway.
Karen A,
I read this commentary that concerns some of the things you refered to in your post. I don’t know exactly who is right on this issue but this fellow makes some interesting points.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/22/dabashi.iran.myths/index.html
Grand standing by the Republican party is not going to help the situation. The United States is overtly and covertly defending liberty in this foreign land. It is obvious that the Republicans are just attempting to put a stick in the eye of the President. Good foreign policy is being exercised by the United States at this moment. When seeing to a foreign situation the President has to be aware that agents could be exposed if he speaks to quickly. It is safe to say the United States is seeking to assist the Iranian people in their quest for liberty. Remember these people were and are affected by the Cold War thus we have a duty to limit loss of life while securing liberty for these repressed people. Tyrannical repression is not limited to these United States it exists elsewhere in the World. We as Americans are to claim liberty for oppressed masses everywhere.
We need to leave Iran alone…for now. This thing probably has a ways to go and there is no point in showing our hand just now. If the killing of innocent civilians continues to escalate then I think the world needs to respond, peacifully if at all possible, but respond.
I think Iranians feel that this is their fight for now. But if they start asking for help, the world needs to be ready to offer it.
We should really be thankful this is America and we can say stupid stuff about the President and not be beaten on the streets or locked up without trial. And that is debateable depending on your religion, ethnic background and economic status but that is another post.
Calling them part of the “Axis of Evil” and bombing their neighbors hasn’t really worked. The mission isn’t “accomplished” and when we told them you are “either for us or against us” they went with against. Not to mention that everytime we try to “set up” a new regime it bits us in the end.
It’s Americans who do not understand our own history with Democracy that really make me mad. Our country has only been officially democratic for a minute if you put it into perspective. And we won’t even begin talking about how we still don’t have it right yet.
Let’s let Iran deal with Iran and we will deal with whatever they come up with. And folks can keep making ignorant comments about our President without fear of death.
“There’s even been a video posted on YouTube of a woman getting shot during the protests.”
Really? Glad the crackpot “journalists” at the Post Disgrace were so quick to that little detail.
For the rest of us in the informed world, her name was Neda Agha Soltan, she was a 27 year old philosophy student, but we knew that yesterday.
Since the Post Disgrace wont provide a link to the video in question, I will
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0db_1245519048
“For the rest of us in the informed world, her name was Neda Agha Soltan, she was a 27 year old philosophy student”…SVPPB…
Her name in Farsi translates to “the Voice” in English.
—————————————————————————
Anybody else wonder just what Bill Clinton was smoking when he said this yesterday:
“What’s going on in Iran, really?” Clinton asked. “They have some ethnic differences there and some religious differences, but basically, this is about a government trying to deny the modern world.
“And the idea is they just don’t think they can keep control, if everybody gets to say what they really believe, and go where they really want, and be who they want to be,” Clinton said, adding with a chuckle: “And they’re right, right there.”
—————————————————————————
HUH?
I believe we should not interfere with Iran’s internal conflicts. For those who are for going into Iran, would you be saying the same if it was Russia or China? How is one situation different from the other? The US is not consistent in it’s actions. For instance, why are we not promoting democracy in Saudi Arabia to take the Saudi monarchy from power? Why are not Palestinians allowed to vote for the Prime Minister of Israel if we are for democracy? Iran shows what it is like if a religious leader runs the country. I agree with our forefathers that there should be a separation of Church and State.
The best way to promote democracy is to show others the benefits of democracy by showing that we respect others and don’t interfere in other countries’ sovereign affairs and conducting free trade to the benefit of the US, regardless of if we disagree with their way of life.
Watch as the other side of the opinions than mine will not directly address my questions or will say that one situation is different from another.
“How should the United States deal with protests in Iran?”
As observers.
U.S. taxpayers already bankroll the UN to deal with such issues. Meanwhile foreign invaders infiltrate our own country by the millions. Why add another dysfunctional failure to the federal resume?
The United States is just jealous that civilans are being killed and it’s not via an installed puppet dictator of the United States.