Regarding all the stuff going on with Ahmadinejad lately, it’s worth pointing out the following: Ahmadinejad doesn’t have ultimate power in Iran. He’s not a dictator. See here:
He may be the public face and figurehead of Iran, but he is not the final authority. The President of Iran is just a flunky: the real power, including supreme command of the military, lies with the Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamanei. The President of Iran is elected by popular vote — but can we really believe that the “Council of Experts” would give any say in government to the Iranian people? Ahmadinejad runs the day-to-day affairs of the government but in all real issues of policy he has to answer to the Supreme Leader.
and here:
Political analysts [in Tehran] say they are surprised at the degree to which the West focuses on their president, saying that it reflects a general misunderstanding of their system.
Unlike in the United States, in Iran the president is not the head of state nor the commander in chief. That status is held by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, whose role combines civil and religious authority. At the moment, this president’s power comes from two sources, they say: the unqualified support of the supreme leader, and the international condemnation he manages to generate when he speaks up.
“The United States pays too much attention to Ahmadinejad,†said an Iranian political scientist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. “He is not that consequential.â€
Yes, he doesn’t have ultimate power in Iran, but his views (theological & ideological — often blurred in Iran) are *highly* representative of those who do; And that’s the important point.
Note the escatological bent to his UN speech.
He, like Ayatollah ali Khamenei, believes we are in the very, very end-times, and that they have a leading role in ushering in these events on the global stage.
Imagine a Dick Cheney blended with Pat Robertson. Be afraid.
rob@egoz.org
The problem is that the real powers in Iran keep themselves to themselves pretty much. We don’t know what they really plan or intend, and THAT is the scary part. It’s entirely possible that they either explicitly order or tacitly allow Mahmud (I hate trying to spell his last name) to play up the public histrionics as a distraction or a diversion or to scare other countries into aggressive stances that make Iran look the victim of the evil, godless, decadent West.
Our attitude toward Iran should be cautious defense. Since the revolution in 1979, they’ve really been more of a bogeyman than anything else. Their support of terrorism is a threat, but unfortunately that seems to be business as usual in Middle Eastern dictatorships. And we can’t really condemen them for seeking political and military influence in Iraq: Iraq actually borders Iran and the political future of Iraq directly affects Iran’s rightful interests — they have a more credible right to be involved in Iraq than we do.
Um, hi, ‘scuse much, but, like, um, are you expecting the Administration and the Mainstream Media to present some kind of balanced, fact-based, nuanced, non-hysterical version of the world? Good luck with that.