Iran: American apology in order

America does owe this leader an apology.

Did anyone doubt that Iran would act like fools after Obamas interview? Only partisans and fools will think this means a hill of beans. It is the moderate muslims we are trying to reach, not Ahkmed Dinnerjacket. It takes strength to understand the difference. It takes children to get worked up over this.

Why SHOULDN'T we apologize for the 1953 deposition of their democratically elected ruler in favor of a west-friendly dictator who gave us favorable oil conditions?

Why shouldn't we apologize for that?

I wait with breathless anticipation for the "moderate muslims" to rise up and throw off the chains of suppression from the ayatollahs, mullahs, and revolutionary guards and cease with this idea of a worldwide caliphate, renounce the will of Allah, and leave the infidels to live in peace. I believe all it will take is the open hand of the messiah and a contrite lefty America.

Common Obamabots, Yes We Can!

No apolgy necessary.Definite don't like the administration
policy on this issue..

America does owe this leader an apology.

Posted by: If we're really changing our tack, that is | January 28, 2009 8:11 AM

Please....Me thinks I smell a wingnut.

Why Bubba Porter.......I'm sure while you wait with bait on your breath, your idea of annihilation of muslims certainly sounds better. Deadenders always feel that way.......one step closer to the rapture.

Posted by: Bubba Porter | January 28, 2009 9:44 AM

And I wait with breathless anticipation for moderate Christians and moderate Jews wo throw off their governments which slaugheter muslims by the hundreds of thousands without blinking an eye. I await the day when they recognize a muslim life is as valuable as a Christian or Jewish life. I long for the day when the death of a Palestinian child is viewed as an equal tragedy to the death of an Israeli soldier. I long for the day that the Christian and Jewish holy warriors drop their crusade of conquest and destruction and search for peace with their Muslim Brothers and sisters. I long for the day when moderate Christians and moderate Jews aren't blinded by their hate and embrace the love for all people they claim is at the heart of their scriptures.

I

1953 was indeed an American crime against the Iranian people. As for supporting Saddam in his war against Iran, that was an American crime against both the Iranian and the Iraqi people.

Ofcourse the Iranian government has commited a number of even worse crimes against the Iranian people since. If the Americans owe the Iranian people two apologies, Ahmadinejad and the Iranian clerics owe the Iranian people a hundred apologies.

The problem with American right-wingers is that they often seem incapable of distinguishing between foreign governments and foreign people. They could never understand that though America doesn't owe the Iranian state an apology (and indeed even though the Iranian state is a horrible imperialist monster with wishes for genocide), it nonetheless owes the Iranian *people* one.

It is easy to understands Bubba Porters one towel head is as good as another feelings. Heck, he would feel much better if he could eliminate all on the left.

Good. We found a bigger clown than Blago and Limbaugh.

There's no automatic need for an apology to Ahmedinejad. All Obama needs to do is keep repeating we're willing to talk with Iran. Demands like this just make Ahmedinejad look bad, and for that -- more power to him. He's the one who'll be hurt for it, not us. We look reasonable and willing to cooperate; he fortifies his image as a prime-grade mamone. Should it become US policy to apologize for any or all the things Iran is demanding, then fine and dandy -- but ONLY if it becomes our policy to back away from them. In the meantime, all we've committed ourselves to is that we'll talk.

Common Obamabots, Yes We Can!

Posted by: Keyser Soze | January 28, 2009 10:09 AM

Does that make the opposite true? Republicans, no we can't!

A statement could be put together that acknowledged the US involvement in the coup that removed Mosedagh but also cited the higher standard of living that most Iranians saw under the Shah. Call it the "whole truth" approach- "Yeah, we removed your democratically elected leader, but look at how much better your country fared in the 60s and 70s than now - so maybe you can thank us."

Most educated Iranians would get the 'apology' and agree with its positions. The ones who'd be most upset by it would be the clerical leadership we're most trying to discredit, which would make it a smart tactical move that didn't cost us a dime.

The result of the 1953 coup was that a brutal dictator replaced a democratic regime for a few years before being replaced in turn by a radical revolution.

The US needs to make clear that it is not in the business of suppressing democracy any more and repudiate the actions of the Dulles brothers.

If an apology for the 1953 coup would reduce the determination of the Iranian mullahs to obtain nuclear weapons, then why not?

Iran owes an apology for the embassy hostage crisis in return, so it is hardly a one way street here.

We still haven't apologized for arming Saddam with chemical weapons to be used against Iran, or shooting down an Airbus full of Iranian civilians, inside Iranian airspace, in 1988 and then trying to blame it on the Iranians themselves by lying about the incident for 4 years.

There's a difference between bowing down and bending over. If Ahmadinejad wants an apology for the '53 coup and the backing of Iraq in the '80s war with Iran, he had better be prepared to offer a formal apology for the violation of our sovereignty in the ‘79 seizure of the American Embassy, Iran’s support for international terrorism since then, and the IEDs imported from Iran into Iraq used to kill American soldiers and marines. Fat chance that we will get such an apology, much less that Iran will genuinely foreswear it support for terrorism.
.
In reality, any apology would be pointless. Ahmadinejad is a sock puppet who isn’t in charge of anything. There is a council of mullahs and ayatollahs that have their hands up Ahmadinejad’s back to make his mouth move. Thus, even if we apologized, there is no likelihood that it would change Iran’s attitude toward the U.S. Once we’ve apologized for all that stuff, they will just come back and ask for more apologies for supporting Israel, our hatred of Muslims, and so on ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

what next? are we going to apologize to algeria also.I mean do you think it was wrong to oust a democracy in favor of the shah and savak savagely oppressing their people. I mean we were getting our oil cheaper. The end justifies the means right? We should apologize right before we send a missle up his...

Imagine Naples or Palermo, magnify it to 70 millions, add nuclear capability and Islamic fundamentalism. Then you'll have an idea of what this man, and his country, are like.
Iran is still exporting what it exported forty years ago: oil, rugs and pistachio nuts.
Pitiful.

I believe the USA should apologize,you cannot expect to reap good relations unless you lessen the wounds of those people.All they ask for is an apology,we can give it and be the better for having done so.

I think they should put a bounty on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and all other islamic jihadists

We DON'T automatically owe Ahmadenijad an apology. It's plenty that Obama just keep repeating that we're willing to sit down and talk. Thus, WE look cooperative, reasonable and eager to reach common ground. If Ahmadenijad then keeps up with his current speech, HE, on the other hand, looks like a grade-A jerk who just wants to avoid peace at any cost. Fine by me that he does just that -- it surprises NO ONE, and Ahmadenijad is the one who's going to end up paying for it. His is the stance of a weak person trying to make up for a lack of spine by making a lot of testosterone-laden noises to "prove" he's better than he really is.
.
If we make it POLICY to apologize for these things, it's certainly not the end of the world -- we've certainly done things in Iran and elsewhere that were not the greatest ideas in the long run, but then I seem to recall that Iran has a few things to apologize for as well. Maybe we could word it: "Gee, we're awfully sorry you're so unwilling to keep your people safe."

fred preuss: I think you are failing to realize that they are more import self-sufficient than pretty much every other nation in that region. Part of the reason our government has so much angst with them now and historically, is because they tend to say no thanks. This is what the democratically elected pre-1953 government was doing, with energy, and the US decided to help England out of a bind and boom, dictatorship in its place.

Which they revolted against, and the storming of the embassy was a part of that. They stormed the embassy of the nation that destroyed their democracy and placed a west-friendly dictator in its stead. Who, for those who are ignorant, was held in place with a KGB style enforcement. FACT.

Some people in the comments here are so one-eyed about the real story. This is a place where we have been WRONG, and are the direct cause of the revolution that brought us here in the first place.

We should be able to apologize for 1953, at the very least, and use it to work towards a greater peace.

I apologize (see how easy it is?) for the duplicate posting. I figured the first one was being censored after 2 hours so I changed "mamone" to "jerk" and re-submitted.
.
I find it very disturbing that I pretty much agree with John W. I must be wrong.

We need to apologize to Germany first.

Posted by: John W. | January 28, 2009 12:44 PM

And if Iran apologized for everything they have done that we feel has wronged us, do you think that would change the US attitude? Do you think if they did that we would foreswear meddling in their internal affairs? Would we forswear our self proclaimed right to intervene to secure oil supplies? Fat chance. They are not the only ones who will sieze any excuse to extend the conflict.

Salaam, that is a fine point. All we hear about are the rants of a jihadist and witness the horrible acts of terrorists against infidels. So where are these billions of moderate muslims speaking out and marching in the streets to stop the violence and put an end to these belligerent, oppressive governments who cheat the people or women out of basic human rights. I for one would love to live in peace and respect and realize the unfairness of Palestinians problem. I also only witness "death to America" chants. So where are the chants "peace, let us respect"? Why do moderate muslim not protest the use human shields and suicide martyrs? How come only Egypt and Jordan live in peace with Israel?

Why is this article written so as to suggest that a demand for an apology is outrageous? The people of Iran have genuine reasons to mistrust the United States. We toppled their democratically elected government! How would WE feel if another country did that to us? We had a huge hand in instigating and prolonging the war with Iraq which killed millions of Iranians (and probably helped their radical government maintain power.) Part of what drives the world crazy about the United States is that we pretend to be idealistic and pure while denying the very real wrongs that we have committed. Sure, the seizing of the US embassy in 1979 was wrong, but it was a genuine populist uprising of people who were absolutely outraged about what the US had done to their country. Shouldn't we pause and wonder a bit about what could make ordinary Iranian people hate us so much? It's not all irrational.

Posted by: Bubba Porter | January 28, 2009 5:50 PM

The moderate Muslims are cowering in their basements hiding from Israeli missiles and white phospherous grenades in Gaza.

Where are the Israeli moderates marching in the streets demanding that their Army stop using illegal weapons against civilians? Where are they marching to demand that their Goverment observe international law and give up all claims of territory taken in 1967, including East Jerusalem? Why aren't the moderate Jews of the world demanding an end to Israels belligerent and illegal actions?

It takes two sides to make peace Bubba. It takes two side to come together. You should demand the same from both sides in this horrid conflict. You should demand the same from yourself as you do from the moderate muslims. When was the last time YOU protested the US government's indiscriminate killing of muslims? When was the last time YOU protested US support for Israel's illegal actions?

I have protested militant Islam. I have stood up against the evil done in the name of that religion. I have also protested against Israeli and US government actions. I have stood in solidarity with the suffering people of Palestine. What have you done, friend? Where have YOU been?

Iran is, and will continue to face an economic crisis of their own. How do you ignore the demands of your own people and unite a country? Just like Bush and the GOP did in 2004. You turn the discussion to something completely unrelated.

Demanding an apology and demanding that the US stop supporting Israel is the unwinnable argument. It's the Iranian equivalent of the "who will protect you better?" question here in the US.

The US needs to recognize that this recession is global, and this can benefit us in the long run in the arena of foreign policy. Just as the Cold War ended on the economic collapse of the Soviet Union, the Mideast and Iran can possibly collapse in the near future. We need to shore up our relationship with Russia, because they continue to deal in $$$ with the Iranians. China could also be a good partner in choking off Iran, but have such a large deficit that our leveraging position is weak with them.

Obama is wise to put a good PR front out to the Middle East in these times, and when the hand is extended and left out there, when these countries begin to beg for assistance, the US will not look bad for ignoring them down the road because of this current move.

...the new American leader must apologize for U.S. "crimes" against Iran, including American support for the 1953 coup in Tehran... ~ M.S.
-----------------------------------

I know that Liberals and despots are generally obsessed with issuing and receiving apologies, repectively, and the like. Just wondering if any other country, other than America, of course, ever commits "crimes" against the other sanctified nations of the world. Then after you have issued your formal apology, for your "crimes", then what? Are you best buds forever and ever? Where does this business of apology and recrimination ever take you. It is probably a very important stage in the diplomatic process that I don't fully appreciate at this point, but sometimes it is just hard to have an appreciation for the product or the process.

As has been said here before, Mr. Obama, they will call u the great Satan and clown u, apology / no apology. If u r fine with all that, then take the governor off the steam engine and proceed without delay. May have to follow this up with that any time any place sit-down meeting. U can't buy this kind of entertainment.

* * * * *
Posted by: Salaam | January 28, 2009 5:12 PM
.
You first asked: “And if Iran apologized for everything they have done that we feel has wronged us, do you think that would change the US attitude?
.
Absolutely. That would likely generate the kind of mutual rapprochement that has been long overdue. We can fairly bet the current President is more interested in peace than war with Iran. No intelligent President (or anyone else) could hope otherwise.
.
You then ask: “Do you think if they did that we would foreswear meddling in their internal affairs?”
.
Sorry to answer a question with a question, but: When has the United States interfered in Iran’s internal affairs since the end of the Iran-Iraq war? It is no good to answer that we have brought international pressure on Iran concerning its support for terrorism or for its nuclear fuel enrichment program. Those are not matters “internal” to Iran, and the U.S. isn’t the only power involved. The entire U.N. is involved.
.
But to answer your question more directly: Yes, I think it would drastically change the U.S.’s attitude toward Iran so that we would not be inclined to “meddle” in its internal affairs. The only reason the U.S. is hostile and confrontational toward Iran is the fact that it has shown the same face toward the U.S. and its allies.
.
You finally ask: “Would we forswear our self proclaimed right to intervene to secure oil supplies?”
.
I am totally unaware of any “self-proclaimed” right to intervene to secure oil supplies, much less that anyone has ever made such a proclamation. It is not the policy of the current administration, and it shouldn’t be the policy of any future administration. Our earlier efforts at regime change (such as in places like Iran, Vietnam and Nicaragua) were fueled by the U.S. Cold War with international efforts to spread communism. We don’t face that threat any more. The more recent intervention in Iraq was the brain-child (read: brain-colloidal dispersion) of the Bush Administration and its neo-con ideologues. It was based on the wrongheaded idea that we should, under the right circumstances, impose democracy from without, by force if need be, rather than allowing it to develop from within. If “securing oil supplies” was the reason for it, the plan certainly backfired. By now, I believe most people in the U.S. understand that our efforts at “regime change” have all been mistakes. And that includes those in power.

ADJ is wrong in so many ways.

But then he probably knows that already.

Barack doesn't have to apologize to him for anything.

The ones who arguably do are either long dead--Dulles--or out of office with the lowest approval ratings possible.

Obama extended an olive branch but ADJ should know it won't be extended forever without reciprocation.

If I recall it was Ahmadenijad that said that he wanted to crush Israel, and the U.S. of America, it sounds to me like he forgot that he said this! It's funny how someone can overlook a statement as this just so they can attack someone to make themselves look like the good guy. We are not that "naive" to see what his intensions are and what he will do to achive them. He is a dangereous person and not to be trusted.

If I remember correctly, Madelyn Albright and other members of the Clinton administration publically apologized-more than eight years ago.
I stand by what I said earlier. Iran is an inferior society, culture and has a religion stupid even among other religions.

"The US needs to make clear that it is not in the business of suppressing democracy"
Therein lies the problem. People outside the USA have a much better grasp of our history in overthrowing governments to instill dictators who favor US well being over that of their citizens. Try 1951 - Cuba, 1953 - Iran, 1954 - Guatemala and Paraguay, 1963 - Iraq, 1970 - Bolivia, 1973 - Chile, 2002 - failed attempt in Venezuela, Haiti more than once, Congo. The list goes on...