From: arash@sunee.waterloo.edu (Arash Jahangir)
Subject: Re: Iraq combats Iranian sorties, violates peace treaty
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 00:06:49 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.173516.3756@fmg.bt.co.uk> ghbr@fmg.bt.co.uk (Hossein Bagherzadeh Rafsanjani) writes:
>In article <1992Apr12.215459.21039@watserv1.waterloo.edu> arash@sunee.waterloo.edu (Arash Jahangir) writes:
>
>[most of the stuff deleted.]
>
>> >>(MOSLEM IRANIAN AND MUSLEM IRAQies BR.
>> >
>
>> That is pure bull shit.  There is no brothership between us except perhaps
>> with the Kurds that are suffering inside Iraq (who are Iranian anyways) and
>> some of the Shia's in South-East Iraq, who seem to be the only civilized people
>> in Iraq.
>
>> >>shut up for ever dirty BASI
>> >>ANd tell Rajavi shut up too.
>
>> You should listen to him.  He is right you know.  You Ba'thies are dirity.
>
>Passion makes one blind and dumb.* 

So true!

> And this applies to all people including
>our dear Arash, who talks so reasonably and calmly in matters not related to
>nationalism.  But here, so uncharacteristically he indulges in xenophobic hate.
			 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thanks for the vote of confidence.  I am afraid I rose to the level of my 
particular audience.

>
>Why "brothership" can only be between "us" and the Kurds "and some of the
>Shia's in South-East Iraq" and not other Iraqis?

I did not say there cannot be any brotherhood between us.  Rather that there
is no such brotherhood between Iranians and many others, very majority of 
Iraqies included.  Brotherhood is like "dast-e chopogh"; it has to have two 
ends (i.e it goes both ways).  I have had quite a few interactions with most of
the Arab countries in Persian Gulf and I have several friends in many of those
countries.  A comparison of my experiences with those of my friends has told me
that indeed the general public in those countries dislike Iranians.  Further,
I know of many Iranians who as a general rule dislike anyone from other Persian
gulf countries.  Some even go so fars hating all Arabs.  Personally I don't 
belong to the latter group, though I can relate to them.

>  In the case of Kurds, is it
>because they are "suffering inside Iraq" or because they are "Iranian anyways"?
>And is it "us" who decide who is Iranian or not, or is it the people

My personal view is that Kurds are Iranians.  As such I feel a certain 
"keenship" with them.  When I hear that they suffer, it doesn't make a
difference to me if they are in Iran, Iraq, or on the moon; I will feel a
certain amount of pain myself.  To me nationality is something that ys for
my self, I cannot choose my nationality either.  Having said that, I should 
also add that I think people have the right to offer their loyality to whatever
or whoever they want to.  If I feel that Kurds are Iranians, it simply means
that I will treat them as such.  If they don't feel I am their countryman,
they don't have to treat me as one of theirown. 

>Do the rest of sufferers inside Iraq deserve it or what?

What do you mean by "deserve it"?  That implies that you are asking if there
is an inherent right for "brotherhood" between us and whoever that suffers in
Iraq.  Beyond general humanitarian obligations I do not see such right for 
them.  However, having a common enemy/cause/... does certainly add to feeling
of closeness. 

>  And in the case of
>"Shia's in South-East Iraq", how come they "seem to be the ""only"" civilized
>people in Iraq" (which, by implication, rules out the Iraqi Kurds as civilized
>too!)?
>

That boolean statement is to be evaluated as "except (A & B) who SEEM to be
the only civilized people".  People being plural, applies to both groups.
The reasoning is purely subjective.  This statement was meant more to be
annoying than a complete reflection of my personal beliefs.  Although, if you
look at the actions/events throughout Iraq's entire history, you will find that
few if any of the uncivilized ones were led/participated by the above groups.

>Your xenophobic hate manifests again when you state that "You Ba'thies are
>dirity" (sic).  If you are referring to the idelogy, then no one is dirty just
>beacause they "believe" in something.

Really?  What if I believe that my personal comfort is far more important than
other people's?  Or that I can rape and murder whoever I want for my personal
pleasure?  Would such beliefs (or lack of) make me dirty?  I don't think you
really know what Ba'th party's foundations are.  Think something along the
worst of Fascism and Neo-natzism (actually scratch the "neo" part).

>  And if you say so because some (you cannot claim that all)

Why can't I?  Think about it and see if it is logically possible or not.

> did something wrong or horrible, you can not generalize it
>to all of them (including Jaber).

>  And because of your hate towards Ba'thies,
>you refrain from condemning (indeed, you approve of) the implicit threat in
>Taqwaa's message.  How again uncharacteristic of you, if I may say so.
>

I really did not see a threat in Taqwaa's wrods.  To me it refered to the 
current relationship between Iraqies and Americans.

>Friendship and brother/sisterhood have nothing to do with being "Iranian
>anyways" or not.  Nobody should be denied friendship because of race, religion,
>nationality or the bad fortune of living under a dictatorship.

I whole heartedly agree!

>  If the long
>history of wars and xenophic hate has not taught us this simple lesson, no
>wonder we should live under such barbaric regimes who are ready to use these
>unhealthy sentiments to wage wars and send millions of innocent people to their
>certain death.

I really don't think Iranians were at war for racial reasons do you?  Nor do I
think that the Khomeinies regime has its foundations in racism.  Negate both
these statements and they do apply to Iraq.

>
>The best advice to the two posters, each supporting one of the two
>war-mongering regimes,

Come now!  I know I said something relatively nice about the regime in Iran
(I would not call them an Iranian regime) but that doesn't make me a supporter
of theirs.  You should know by now that I hate the regime in Iran AT THE LEAST
as much as I hate Saddam's regime.

> was to put their conscience before their allegiance to
>the respective regimes, to condemn violence, to put more value on human lives
>than on ideologies, to care for the victims of the atrocities of their
>respective regimes, to raise above race, religion, nationality, personal
>interests etc, to work for humanity and human understanding and friendship.  We
>have had enough of wars and xenophobic hate.  Let's try human-ness
>
>I hope you are not offended by my response.  I believe we can all learn from
>each other.
>
>-hossein
>---------------------------------------------
>
>* Al-hobb-o yo'mi va yosemm (an Arabic saying).

I mostly agree with you here.  But I should mention that as you pointed out
there has been long tensions between us (I can only think of the pas 2600 years
but it may have been longer).  You can look at the issues on both sides through
their common and otherwise histories and form your openions.  There is 
something to be said for statistics.

Arash,

* Brother and I unite against my cousine.  My brother, I, and my cousine unite
  against a stranger.  (another Arabic saying)

Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian