Mousavi was irrelevant

Submitted by nb (United States), Jul 1, 2009 at 23:37

I see some saying Mousavi was not that different from Amanutjob. I say its irrelevant. Indeed his losing may have been the best thing for the west. If he had won, things likely would not have been all that different. The loss, protests and subsequent brutal repression of the protesters, has likely sparked a spirit of rebellion that, though it may smolder for a while, may burst into a flame that consumes the Iranian theocracy in the not so distant future. It was the protesters, and the fact that they protested at all is the most relevant point here.

Indeed, its a pity the west doesn't use this opportunity to broadcast from every media available, that if Iran today discontinues its pursuit of nuclear weapons, and discontinues supporting terrorism and anti-semitism around the region, then it will be welcomed back into the international community and once again enjoy prosperity - with an emphasis on the prosperity that the young desire. Start talking directly to the young people and stop talking to the mullahs... Tell them what they're missing out on because of their leadership and maybe this generation will change Iran much as the previous one did when it took down the Shah.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".