News What Exactly Is Happening In the Arab/Persian World?

[nismaratwork]

forget NATO. if anyone is to go, let the Brits go in. they were the ones that sold an airline bomber (of their own people) back to Libya in exchange for oil.

There is THAT...


At this point, I think the only thing is hope, and if you're the type, prayer. This is beyond prediction in terms of eventual outcome; all that's certain is people are dying.


Did you hear that woman holding her phone out to the streets?... that is a LOT of gunfire, and most of what I heard was in bursts or controlled automatic (correct me if I'm wrong anyone). I think Libya has passed a point of no returm...

...charred bodies displayed, defections, and the desire to see it all burn rather than cede waht Qadaffi sees as HIS. Like a child, he's going to destroy what he can't have... he might not be able to bomb it, but he can spoil it.

I suppose every generation needs a reminder that we (whoever that is), are not the good guys. The weapons we sold them, with money from oil we bought (we being EU/USA/Eastern EU) are now in the hands of anyone who can grab them. If ever there was a time for shameful reflection, it's now.

 

[Evo]

What's happened in Iran? Has that been squelched?

 

[nismaratwork]

What's happened in Iran? Has that been squelched?

AFAIK their Basij militia is handling it... as long as their security forces are up to the task, Iran is going to feel relatively secure. I think the people of Iran realize that the next airstrikes could be on their turf.

Ghaddafi is not the only psychopath in charge, but he is truly a psychopath... and his son...

this is all so much like Saddam...

 

[mugaliens]

Ghaddafi is not the only psychopath in charge, but he is truly a psychopath... and his son...

this is all so much like Saddam...

No kidding! Didn't http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/21/source-libyan-pilots-defected-to-malta/?hpt=T1"?

 

[mugaliens]

I have not seen any claim that the protesters are well organized.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/21/libya.protest.east/index.html?hpt=T1", they're organized well enough.

 

[rootX]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/21/libya.protest.east/index.html?hpt=T1", they're organized well enough.

From your article:

There appeared to be no single, unifying figure in charge of the revolt. People of all ages and tribal affiliations seemed to be taking part. One man told CNN that when government forces began using live ammunition against the protesters, it turned the whole community against them.

They have a common enemy for now which make things easy but they don't seem to be well organized (def: Functioning within a formal structure, as in the coordination and direction of activities).

Opposition groups formed "popular committees" to maintain some sort of order after pushing out government forces in a spreading revolt against longtime strongman Moammar Gadhafi, who has led the north African country since 1969.

You might argue that above indicates that there is some order. However, it solely depends on the number of opposition groups or "popular committees" and their objectives. Ousting Gaddafi is the first thing but who will direct the country once Gaddafi is overthrown?

 

[CheckMate]

Ousting Gaddafi is the first thing but who will direct the country once Gaddafi is overthrown?

I am pretty sure there is some candidates in Lybia who can lead a country.

Maybe Lybia and Tunisia might join and form 1 country ? Who knows.

The interesting thing to see is how the United States has lost all powers in the regions. The power balance is slowly shifting.

 

[OmCheeto]

What's happened in Iran? Has that been squelched?

Everything's fine. Iranians everywhere are happy. No more riots.

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8912011156"
TEHRAN (FNA)- Reports from across the Iranian capital said despite the several-day-long ploy and intensive media provocations by the West, the Opposition call for riots and unrests in Tehran failed to attract supporters and calm and everyday life prevailed in the Iranian capital as usual.

But then again:

..in Iran where all but state-approved reporters are banned

http://dailynewspulse.com/iran-government-to-set-firmer-restrictions-on-journalists/226221/"

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/02/2011220125132363934.html"
21 Feb 2011
Security forces clashed with anti-government protesters, many of whom marched in silence to avoid violent crackdowns.

...

One said that Tehran seemed to have "been turned into a military fort" and added that he was able to use his mobile phone to contact friends from time to time, "but only when not in danger of being caught."

<A video from Iran Reporter, purportedly from Sunday, shows a man being forced into a security van>

He said that while he saw some instances of people being arrested or beaten with batons that, "It seems that the security forces were given specific orders not to engage with the demonstrators unless they start shouting slogans."

People seemed to prefer demonstrating in silence in order to reduce the level of tension and violence," he wrote, "But there were also slogans ... but people rarely talked - it was dangerous to talk."

Hmmm... looks like Iran's state run media was right. It was all quiet.

Unfortunately, I can find no reference to any foreign journalists in Iran. With the possible exception of all of those who have been arrested.

 

[Gokul43201]

... and what is Pakistan thinking right now...

Haven't you heard?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/raymond-davis-had-taliban-links-pak-media-87066

Islamabad: American official Raymond Davis, arrested for double murder, had "close links" with Taliban and was "instrumental" in recruiting youths for it, the Pakistani media claimed today, close on the heels of reports in the US that he was a CIA agent tracking movements of terror groups like the LeT.
...
The report claimed Davis was "said to be working on a plan to give credence to the American notion that Pakistan's nuclear weapons are not safe."

"For this purpose, he was setting up a group of the Taliban which would do his bidding," it said.

Davis' job was to trace the links of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in different parts of Pakistan but instead investigators found that he had developed "close links" with the Taliban, the report said quoting a source.

 

[WhoWee]

I am pretty sure there is some candidates in Lybia who can lead a country.

Maybe Lybia and Tunisia might join and form 1 country ? Who knows.

The interesting thing to see is how the United States has lost all powers in the regions. The power balance is slowly shifting.

Lost power? (my bold)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/us/politics/04obama.text.html

"Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words – within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores – that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.

Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations – to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.

This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared."

Out of the ashes...?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Gaddafi is soon speaking on state television. Will we have an even greater "umbrella comedy" this time??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weY5Lht2UAI

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Out of the ashes...?

I’m not sure I follow your reasoning...? Are you saying that all that is happening in the Arab World is due to the powers of President Obama, solely??

 

[WhoWee]

I’m not sure I follow your reasoning...? Are you saying that all that is happening in the Arab World is due to the powers of President Obama, solely??

I think words have meaning (did you read his words?) - actions have consequences -and leader's lead. If President Obama remains silent on the sidelines NOW - along with the UN and the rest of the world - a leader will eventually emerge - out of the ashes.

 

[Astronuc]

I’m not sure I follow your reasoning...? Are you saying that all that is happening in the Arab World is due to the powers of President Obama, solely??

WhoWee was citing Obama's comments on the current situation.

Out of the ashes - meaning the US is waiting for the folks in various nations to sort out their situation, and ostensibly the US will work with these folks to improve their situation through good relations and trade.

 

[Astronuc]

I think words have meaning (did you read his words?) - actions have consequences -and leader's lead. If President Obama remains silent on the sidelines NOW - along with the UN and the rest of the world - a leader will eventually emerge - out of the ashes.

Make that plural - leaders will emerge. And hopefully a set of leaders who are committed to democracy rather than corrupt oligarchies or dictatorships.

 

[Gokul43201]

WhoWee was citing Obama's comments on the current situation.

Actually, that was Obama's speech in Cairo, from way back in early 2009. Like DA, I'm not following WhoWee's argument either.

If Obama is silent, a leader will emerge. (Is this a good thing or a bad thing?) And what happens if he is not silent?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

I think words have meaning

But my friend, this is not consequent with your standing on Sarah Palin’s words and her guilt for the shooting in AZ, right? So what is it – words do have a meaning, or they do not?

With this 'logic' in the AZ thread I can just dismiss your view with: "Oh no! Obama is just having fun!"

(did you read his words?)

Yes, I even watched the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BlqLwCKkeY

I think it’s a great speech, and so do several high rank politicians in Israel. What would you like him to say? "We are working hard for 'our friends' to have another 30-40 years of brutal suppression of their citizens." ??

President Obama remains silent on the sidelines NOW

Any advice? What should he say? What should he do?

I also think that words do have a meaning, but to put all the blame on Obama is a little naive. Don’t you think?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

WhoWee was citing Obama's comments on the current situation.

As Gokul said, citing was from Obama’s Speech in Cairo on June 4, 2009.

(I think our friend WhoWee is taking any chance possible throwing dirt on Obama. I’m not religious, but I thank GOD that GWB, or worse Mrs. Palin is not at the rudder right now = "CALL IN THE CAVALRY!" )

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Gaddafi speaking on state television.

EDIT:
Is he drunk??!?

 

[Astronuc]

As Gokul said, citing was from Obama’s Speech in Cairo on June 4, 2009.

(I think our friend WhoWee is taking any chance possible throwing dirt on Obama. I’m not religious, but I thank GOD that GWB, or worse Mrs. Palin is not at the rudder right now = "CALL IN THE CAVALRY!" )

I don't see WhoWee's comment should be taken that way. In fact, I see a connection between Obama's statements then, and what the young folks are doing now. These protests have been building for some time.

There was an interesting statement last week about the fact that the US cannot be seen (overtly) as driving any of the revolutions. The various groups in the various countries must exercise their self-determination.

One arab journalist indicated that he was impressed with the young folk and their initiative while feeling out of synch because his generation didn't see it coming. The young folk have by-passed the media and traditional institutions.

Please be careful about personalizing statements.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

I don't see WhoWee's comment should be taken that way.

Okay, let WhoWee explain exactly what he mean.

 

[Lacy33]

Gaddafi speaking on state television.

EDIT:
Is he drunk??!?

Respectfully, I do not think Muslims drink.
He did look tho so scared as his toenails might fly off!

 

[lisab]

Gaddafi speaking on state television.

EDIT:
Is he drunk??!?

That dude looks like he needs more fiber in his diet.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Respectfully, I do not think Muslims drink.

Of course you’re right Lacy, sorry. But he looks weird... the turban full of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khat" ...?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

That dude looks like he needs more fiber in his diet.

Definitely!

 

[Gokul43201]

Gaddafi speaking on state television.

EDIT:
Is he drunk??!?

Would I be right if I guessed that you haven't watched a Gaddafi speech before? This - though I only watched for 2 painful minutes - looks to me like a typical Gaddafi ramble. Of course, in those two minutes, I couldn't figure out heads-or-tails of what he was going on about (some boy who misunderstood a poem?), but that doesn't really surprise me.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

... though I only watched for 2 painful minutes - looks to me like a typical Gaddafi ramble.

Mamma Mia...

 

[Lacy33]

OK, many, many years ago my mother thought this hunk-o-man was all handsome and Dashing in his fancy clothes ... and she was drunk! Sorry mom... grounded me one too many times.

 

[zomgwtf]

So two Iranian warships are heading up the Suez Canal.

Expected response from America/other nations?

Also what interest does Iran have for sending these warships up the canal?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Back to reality:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWHhkh7th5M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeUekoIzeow

 

[Proton Soup]

Haven't you heard?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/raymond-davis-had-taliban-links-pak-media-87066

oh my, you don't suppose CIA is still involved in terrorist activities, do you?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

So two Iranian warships are heading up the Suez Canal.

Expected response from America/other nations?

Also what interest does Iran have for sending these warships up the canal?

The Alvand

The Kharg

 

[DevilsAvocado]

... and she was drunk!

Thank God!

()

 

[nismaratwork]

People [in Benghazi] rolled their eyes at [Ghaddafi's] speech

This is getting very ugly.

 

[BobG]

It's not a silly question at all, in fact it's central to this issue.

Ghaddafi united a number of tribes with showmanship, terror, and more. This is factionalized, along clan/tribal lines... which is on one hand why Benghazi is now "free". On the other hand, it's why Ghaddafi is happy to BOMB them... they're not "his people" from his view, once they defect from his "coalition".

Yes, Libya is different from the other Middle East countries trying to dump current rulers. Libya is more similar to Afghanistan where tribal affiliations drive politics more than ideology.

Almost anything could happen - from the country breaking up into 2 or more nations to a new dictator selected by a few united tribes replacing Gaddafi. A united democracy or a united theocratic government are among the few outcomes that aren't realistic possibilities.

Gaddafi is done, but Western Libya might wind up being run by one of the tribes allied with Gaddafi. At least it would be run by someone with experience in government since position within Gaddafi's government tends to be given out to tribes allied with Gaddafi. Who knows what will happen in Eastern Libya, but I doubt it will be ruled by anyone previously allied with Gaddafi.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yes, Libya is different from the other Middle East countries trying to dump current rulers. Libya is more similar to Afghanistan where tribal affiliations drive politics more than ideology.

Almost anything could happen - from the country breaking up into 2 or more nations to a new dictator selected by a few united tribes replacing Gaddafi. A united democracy or a united theocratic governments are among the few outcomes that aren't realistic possibilities.

Gaddafi is done, but Western Libya might wind up being run by one of the tribes allied with Gaddafi. At least it would be run by someone with experience in government since position within Gaddafi's government tends to be given out to tribes allied with Gaddafi. Who knows what will happen in Eastern Libya, but I doubt it will be ruled by anyone previously allied with Gaddafi.

I'd have to agree with you, but I'd add... that "shaking out" process is going to do so much damage to infrastructure tribalism divided between East (Benghazi, Tripoli), central (Al-Aziziyah, other bedouin/Ghaddafi strongholds), and places such as Shahat may be the short-term. Benghazi already seems to have functionally ceceded from the current Libya, hence (IMO) the order to BOMB, not just shoot.

 

[BobG]

Gaddafi speaking on state television.

EDIT:
Is he drunk??!?

On American TV, you're listening to an interpreter; not Gaddafi. In this case, you're listening to an interpreter that seems to be having some trouble following Gaddafi's speech. That just amplifies the effect. (But even Arab listeners reported that it was a rambling speech that was difficult to follow.)

 

[nismaratwork]

On American TV, you're listening to an interpreter; not Gaddafi. In this case, you're listening to an interpreter that seems to be having some trouble following Gaddafi's speech. That just amplifies the effect. (But even Arab listeners reported that it was a rambling speech that was difficult to follow.)

I'm very good with the structures of languages, but my recall stinks for paired-word association. Still, I'm familiar enough with spoken Arabic that with the interpreter, that was truly WEIRD.

It's kind of tough also, because he spoke in his usual flowery metaphors, but not necessarily the right ones. Lots of referenes to Hadith, but again... in odd places.

 

[WhoWee]

I don't see WhoWee's comment should be taken that way. In fact, I see a connection between Obama's statements then, and what the young folks are doing now. These protests have been building for some time.

There was an interesting statement last week about the fact that the US cannot be seen (overtly) as driving any of the revolutions. The various groups in the various countries must exercise their self-determination.

One arab journalist indicated that he was impressed with the young folk and their initiative while feeling out of synch because his generation didn't see it coming. The young folk have by-passed the media and traditional institutions.

Please be careful about personalizing statements.

There are many factors at work in the Middle East - clearly. I do give President Obama credit for giving young people a motivational push - is he somehow responsible for everything that is happening - of course not.

As for influence, like it or not, the Cold War relationships are still in place. The US has been clearly aligned with Egypt and Israel. The Russians have influence over Libya and Iran. I believe the Russians have enough - credibility - with the Libyan leader and people to control the situation if they choose.

As for the "out of the ashes" comment - I believe in the natural order of things. The people of the Middle East have always been ruled or threatened by a major power - they have never been a free democracy in the western sense. I see no clear indication that is the goal of the people. I also believe in the predicable outcome of power vacuums - they are filled by the strongest force.

When you read the words of President Obama - he hedged his bet to communicate with the young people (IMO) with the references to Islam - something they understand as a force. If a person or persons don't rise above the conflicts - the dominant force in the region is religion - not democracy.

I give Obama credit for understanding this point - I just disagree with his "packaging" of the US's embrace of all things Muslim.

Also IMO - this posturing has created a situation where President Obama must defend all things Muslim (or at least not acknowledge) when there are problems (Fort Hood, Ground Zero Mosque, Muslim Brotherhood, underwear bomber, etc.).

Something else I touched on earlier is the UN response to the turmoil in the Middle East. This is arguably the greatest opportunity they've ever had to make a difference - but appear to not even have a plan?

What should President of the United States of America Obama do now? Protect our national interests including our allies, the shipping lanes, private property of US citizens, and the oil fields we depend upon for energy. I also hope he's asked Putin (and anyone else that has influence) to do something in Libya to stop the slaughter.

 

[Astronuc]

I listened to an interview with a young woman in Libya. She said that the Libyan people are 'waiting' for Gadhafi to leave, 'not hoping, but waiting'.

He doesn't seem inclined to leave peacefully.

Various Libyan ambassadors are quitting the regime, requesting support from the UN and other nations, and condemning Gadhafi. Even members of the Libyan government want him gone. It seems only certain elements of the military want to retain him.

Audio reports
http://www.npr.org/2011/02/22/133958104/libyas-u-s-ambassador-on-quitting-libyas-future
http://www.npr.org/2011/02/22/133955149/Libya-Update

In eastern Libya -
http://www.npr.org/2011/02/22/133955129/Libya-Border

 

[nismaratwork]

There are many factors at work in the Middle East - clearly. I do give President Obama credit for giving young people a motivational push - is he somehow responsible for everything that is happening - of course not.

As for influence, like it or not, the Cold War relationships are still in place. The US has been clearly aligned with Egypt and Israel. The Russians have influence over Libya and Iran. I believe the Russians have enough - credibility - with the Libyan leader and people to control the situation if they choose.

As for the "out of the ashes" comment - I believe in the natural order of things. The people of the Middle East have always been ruled or threatened by a major power - they have never been a free democracy in the western sense. I see no clear indication that is the goal of the people. I also believe in the predicable outcome of power vacuums - they are filled by the strongest force.

When you read the words of President Obama - he hedged his bet to communicate with the young people (IMO) with the references to Islam - something they understand as a force. If a person or persons don't rise above the conflicts - the dominant force in the region is religion - not democracy.

I give Obama credit for understanding this point - I just disagree with his "packaging" of the US's embrace of all things Muslim.

Also IMO - this posturing has created a situation where President Obama must defend all things Muslim (or at least not acknowledge) when there are problems (Fort Hood, Ground Zero Mosque, Muslim Brotherhood, underwear bomber, etc.).

Something else I touched on earlier is the UN response to the turmoil in the Middle East. This is arguably the greatest opportunity they've ever had to make a difference - but appear to not even have a plan?

What should President of the United States of America Obama do now? Protect our national interests including our allies, the shipping lanes, private property of US citizens, and the oil fields we depend upon for energy. I also hope he's asked Putin (and anyone else that has influence) to do something in Libya to stop the slaughter.

Interesting... my take on it is that this is one of the last vestigaes of European colonialism blowing up.

 

[dlgoff]

...(But even Arab listeners reported that it was a rambling speech that was difficult to follow.)

Well he was saying that drugs were part of the blame. Maybe he should look for better ones.

 

[nismaratwork]

The drug thing... I understand the reasoning, but I was unclear if he meant "drugs as in alcohol", or drugs "such as opium". Given how Libya treats non-cronies who so much as drink, it could be either.

@dlgoff: Maybe a suppository of Ben-Gay, with a core of DMSO and cobra venom. edit: Not sure if cobra venom would work... make that sodium cyanide to be sure, but keep the cobra venom.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

... Also IMO - this posturing has created a situation where President Obama must defend all things Muslim (or at least not acknowledge) when there are problems (Fort Hood, Ground Zero Mosque, Muslim Brotherhood, underwear bomber, etc.).

Really?? So how does the http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41671189/ns/world_news-mideast/n_africa/" fit in this theory of yours?

 

[WhoWee]

Really?? So how does the http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41671189/ns/world_news-mideast/n_africa/" fit in this theory of yours?

Are you serious?

From your link: (my bold)
"U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice told council members that the veto "should not be misunderstood to mean we support settlement activity." She added that the U.S. view is that Israeli settlements lack legitimacy. "

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Are you serious?

Of course I’m serious. All you have to do is show me one Palestinian who thinks the U.S. veto was a good thing (to back up this theory of yours).

Take your time...

 

[WhoWee]

Of course I’m serious. All you have to do is show me one Palestinian who thinks the U.S. veto was a good thing (to back up this theory of yours).

Take your time...

As for my so called "theory" as you've specified is (still) related to my comment that "Also IMO - this posturing has created a situation where President Obama must defend all things Muslim (or at least not acknowledge) when there are problems (Fort Hood, Ground Zero Mosque, Muslim Brotherhood, underwear bomber, etc.). "?

If so - why doesn't this ""U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice told council members that the veto "should not be misunderstood to mean we support settlement activity." She added that the U.S. view is that Israeli settlements lack legitimacy. " " support my statement?

The US Ambassador made these comments - are you suggesting the Palestinians might not understand, appreciate, or believe her or President Obama's clarification of their position?

 

[BobG]

Are you serious?

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice told council members that the veto "should not be misunderstood to mean we support settlement activity." She added that the U.S. view is that Israeli settlements lack legitimacy.

But she said the draft "risks hardening the position of both sides" and reiterated the U.S. position that settlements and other contentious issues should be resolved in direct peace negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians.

Well, at a minimum, Rice's comments are pretty wimpy when put into context. (Without the context, her comments appear as delusional as the comments Hillary Clinton made in Oct of 2002 when voting to authorize military force in Iraq.)

 

[Lacy33]

I really think this is sad. I think he is going to die. I don't understand that culture. I should have studied.
What is the bottom line for this situatuion in the region now?
For all the peoples? Will the whole region go like this? Will Iran too?
Is China worried?

 

[BobG]

I really think this is sad. I think he is going to die. I don't understand that culture. I should have studied.
What is the bottom line for this situatuion in the region now?
For all the peoples? Will the whole region go like this? Will Iran too?
Is China worried?

Each country will go through a revolution differently. But, historically, revolutions lead to a very weak government that winds up being overthrown shortly thereafter. The same repression that stifles any type of organized reform has a side effect of sabotaging the chances of forming a successful government after a revolution. There just isn't the political infrastructure to support a new government.

The US was an exception because the American revolution didn't result in drastic changes to each state's local government. In fact, the autonomy required of a distant colony makes it a lot easier to stage a successful revolution for independence from a distant ruler than to overthrow a local ruler. (And, even in the case of the US, its first national government didn't last all that long before being replaced by the Constitution.)

Iran won't see a complete overthrow of its government. Ahmadinejad is just the front for Iran's religious leaders and Ahmadinejad is expendable. This is his last term as President and the only reason he might last his term is because dismissing him midterm would look like panic.