AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: What's next for Iran: Swastikas and Stukas?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Iran eyes badges for Jews
Law would require non-Muslim insignia

Chris Wattie
National Post

Friday, May 19, 2006


Human rights groups are raising alarms over a new law passed by the Iranian parliament that would require the country's Jews and Christians to wear coloured badges to identify them and other religious minorities as non-Muslims.

"This is reminiscent of the Holocaust," said Rabbi Marvin Hier, the dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. "Iran is moving closer and closer to the ideology of the Nazis."

Iranian expatriates living in Canada yesterday confirmed reports that the Iranian parliament, called the Islamic Majlis, passed a law this week setting a dress code for all Iranians, requiring them to wear almost identical "standard Islamic garments."

The law, which must still be approved by Iran's "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenehi before being put into effect, also establishes special insignia to be worn by non-Muslims.

Iran's roughly 25,000 Jews would have to sew a yellow strip of cloth on the front of their clothes, while Christians would wear red badges and Zoroastrians would be forced to wear blue cloth.

"There's no reason to believe they won't pass this," said Rabbi Hier. "It will certainly pass unless there's some sort of international outcry over this."
un-fricken-believable...
If anything is done about them it will be by the "unilateral Americans",too.
There is alot of backtalk out there that this story is BS...
Its just more sabor rattling. Im surprised the jews in Iran haven't sought refuge in Israel or left elsewhere.
Democrats4Bush2005 Wrote:Its just more sabor rattling. Im surprised the jews in Iran havenn't sought refuge in Israel or left elsewhere.

Most have already.
I say U.S. citizens should be required to wear deely-bobbers.

Moreover, smart people must take "dumb" pills, athletes must wear weights, and people with 20/20 vision should wear partially opaque lenses.

Iran does want a "handicapper general" don't they? Isn't the object to keep the successful down because the impotent and limited Iranian Muslim can't compete without it?

Let's hear it for affirmative action!
I've also heard that this story is a hoax.
Quote:I say U.S. citizens should be required to wear deely-bobbers.

Moreover, smart people must take "dumb" pills, athletes must wear weights, and people with 20/20 vision should wear partially opaque lenses.

Iran does want a "handicapper general" don't they? Isn't the object to keep the successful down because the impotent and limited Iranian Muslim can't compete without it?

Let's hear it for affirmative action!

Wm, you wouldn't happen to remember the title or author of the short story that came from would you?I remember reading a short story several years ago where in the name of equality everyone who was above the norm in any way had to be handicapped.
"Handicapper General" is explained in the bus scene in Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut., in which the more competent and capable all wore cumbersome penalty gear - something like jockeys wear so all the horses bear the same weight.

Vonnegut Wrote:The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

Vonnegut was stupid, though, because such a thing couldn't work except in his PC mind. The people may be constrained to have similar results when associating - but everyone would know that the ones with the most handicaps added to them were better than those with less. The guy with no chains, and no ugly mask would be at the very bottom of the status totem pole.

Same in Iran. Their Hezbollah special forces can sashay down the street in 1932 Italian lock-step, but they know that ten of their best couldn't equal one of our most average special forces. Quality is something that can't be created by wishing about it. Even Demi Moore in GI Jane could outdo their best trooper.
Yes but didn't one of the brightest and strongest start a revolution at the end of the story or am I misremembering that?

------------------------

I agree on Iran. They don't have the quality in their training to produce quality soldiers. One of the big advantages that we have is that we have learned from our past successes and failures on the battlefield and learned how to pass those lessons on to our soldiers first in boot camp (or basic training depending on the branch of service) and later in our more advanced schools. Some European counties have a similar tradition in their military services, but I don't see that in Iran, or other Islamic countries. For that matter I don't see that in most other countries.

Boot camp is an interesting institution where they winnow out those who are incapable, psychologically or physically, and break down and rebuild anyone else into a soldier trained better than most soldiers in any other army. Then we send them to specialized schools to learn more and become even better soldiers but more specialized for their specific task.

My impression of military training in most of these Islamic nations is that they teach their soldiers to fear their superiors and how to use basic weapons and for most of them it stops there. Not a very charitable description, but I suspect not far off from the truth.
Quote: Even Demi Moore in GI Jane could outdo their best trooper.
She was certainly better looking. :lol:
Ditzy but a dish.
Well, has the story clearly been exposed as a massive hoax and lie?

Of course it was a lie, and probably a lie planted by a group like Moussad, the CIA, or the Zionists (whoever they are).

A friend of mine, who almost got killed by Israeli soldiers, was arrested on the charges of calling them "Nazis." Of course, she knew better, and didn't call them that. The judge dismissed the charge in about 60 seconds.

Nevertheless, the ones acting most like Nazis are.....not the Iranians.
It is not so out of place to think this is happening. This was common law in Iran up until the Sha took over. Its not like this is some huge step or something...
Thai,

How does a soldier almost kill ya without firing his weapon?
Possibly the reason the Middle East armies are as poor as they are is because of the unintended consequences of their religion. Their concept of Supreme Being they call Allah, but render to Him no personality or admiration. It is specifically submission which is due Him and not adoration. He is defined as being so far above Mankind that it is impossible to understand Him, or want to be like Him. His laws are commands without explanation - do or die.

Because of this styling of their God, there has never been a cultural bent to understand God's creation or to suppose there are physical laws of the Universe that Mankind could ever come to know. Because there is no place for science, none has ever evolved in their cultures. In the martial world of warfare, a non-technological soldier is so much cannon fodder.

How does an Iranian commanding officer get his soldiers to maintain their weapons and clean them properly, when such labor is the mark of dhimmitude?
Why Arabs Lose Wars


Quote:Conclusion

It would be difficult to exaggerate the cultural gulf separating American and Arab military cultures. In every significant area, American military advisors find students who enthusiastically take in their lessons and then resolutely fail to apply them. The culture they return to — the culture of their own armies in their own countries — defeats the intentions with which they took leave of their American instructors. Arab officers are not concerned about the welfare and safety of their men. The Arab military mind does not encourage initiative on the part of junior officers, or any officers for that matter. Responsibility is avoided and deflected, not sought and assumed. Political paranoia and operational hermeticism, rather than openness and team effort, are the rules of advancement (and survival) in the Arab military establishments. These are not issues of genetics, of course, but matters of historical and political culture.

When they had an influence on certain Arab military establishments, the Soviets strongly reinforced their clients’ own cultural traits. Like that of the Arabs, the Soviets’ military culture was driven by political fears bordering on paranoia. The steps taken to control the sources (real or imagined) of these fears, such as a rigidly centralized command structure, were readily understood by Arab political and military elites. The Arabs, too, felt an affinity for the Soviet officer class’s contempt for ordinary soldiers and its distrust of a well-developed, well-appreciated, well-rewarded NCO corps.

Arab political culture is based on a high degree of social stratification, very much like that of the defunct Soviet Union and very much unlike the upwardly mobile, meritocratic, democratic United States. Arab officers do not see any value in sharing information among themselves, let alone with their men. In this they follow the example of their political leaders, who not only withhold information from their own allies, but routinely deceive them. Training in Arab armies reflects this: rather than prepare as much as possible for the multitude of improvised responsibilities that are thrown up in the chaos of battle, Arab soldiers, and their officers, are bound in the narrow functions assigned them by their hierarchy. That this renders them less effective on the battlefield, let alone that it places their lives at greater risk, is scarcely of concern, whereas, of course, these two issues are dominant in the American military culture and are reflected in American military training.

Change is unlikely to come until it occurs in the larger Arab political culture, although the experience of other societies (including our own) suggests that the military can have a democratizing influence on the larger political culture, as officers bring the lessons of their training first into their professional environment, then into the larger society. It obviously makes a big difference, however, when the surrounding political culture is not only avowedly democratic (as was the Soviet Union’s), but functionally so.

Until Arab politics begin to change at fundamental levels, Arab armies, whatever the courage or proficiency of individual officers and men, are unlikely to acquire the range of qualities which modern fighting forces require for success on the battlefield. For these qualities depend on inculcating respect, trust, and openness among the members of the armed forces at all levels, and this is the marching music of modern warfare that Arab armies, no matter how much they emulate the corresponding steps, do not want to hear.
The thing is,the Arabs were an excellent warrior society when they spread across North Africa and parts of Europe.

Today,we see this culture that our soldiers term ,"Inshallah" or in our vernacular,que sera sera.

Wonder why they didn't have that mentality in 900 AD?
John L, that was a very interesting conclusion about the typical command structure and culture behind most modern Arab armies, in contrast to Western armies and how they are trained and operated.

I live in an Asian, Buddhist country, and much of that article runs true to Thailand. The autocrats rule, and the folks lower on the pecking order obey without complaint. The masses, which include junior officers and NCO's, are never trained to think independently, or to use much critical analysis.

It was in Far East Asia when Billy Graham landed in Tokyo for an evangelistic crusade, and the unfriendly reporters accused Dr. Graham of trying to impose a Western religion on Asia. He wisely replied, but not in total truth, something like this: "Jesus was Asian; Christianity is an eastern religion." Not quite. When Paul answered the call to go to Europe, Christianity became so Westernized that it is now thought not to be collectivist (whatever that means in religion), and is it now assumed that Christianity is capitalist. Not really.

I'm saying that the Arab mentality mentioned in the article about military training is more Asian than Muslim. I also suggest that one thing we don't understand about Arabs is their Asianess, which even the White, Aryan, Persian Iranians have.