slashingtongue» Iran http://slashingtongue.com Wed, 28 Jul 2010 11:16:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 en hourly 1 ST solution to Chinese Spying http://slashingtongue.com/politics/st-solution-to-chinese-spying/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/st-solution-to-chinese-spying/#comments Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:14:53 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=971 We have heard it many times over and over again. China is spying on the United States of America. While this may not be much today, it can result in dire consequences in the future. While our government are scratching their heads thinking of what to do with them, we got an idea...

]]> We have heard it many times over and over again. China is spying on the United States of America. While this may not be much today, it can result in dire consequences in the future. While our government are scratching their heads thinking of what to do with them, we got an idea…

China is spying on the United States more than every before. That is what the site www.uscc.gov states. I also find it hard to believe that my nation would be out there trying to frame China as some would suggest. They often ask : Why would China only spy on America and not other countries? My answer would be : what makes you think that China spies only on USA?

The manner the Chinese do it is genius. They do not use agencies like we do. They do not have the FBI, CIA or other securities that are carrying out this operations; they use random kids! They let teens and young adults hack away the CIA on their own and then let them sell the secrets to the Chinese government! That I think is absolutely genius, in an evil sort of way!

Evil, because this is a method the Chinese can use to get unfair trade advantages with us. They do not need to spend billions of dollars worth of their taxpayers money to get the technology like we do. That jeopardizes our economy.

They can also hack and receive military secrets, something which is of a national security interest. While China may have a much smaller military budget, her areas of concern are small as compared to the US. Why do they need that much if they are only defending their borders? Why are they so concerned about our ships in the South China Sea, which is international waters? That is something that we Americans should view as a threat.

So what should we do about it? Well, we have thought about this and we came up with something very simple : Lets copy what they do to us, improve on it, and give them back a taste of their own medicine!Lets use our teenagers and young adults and spy on them. Not only that, we can send them some Trojans as presents too!

Think about it. We can take all the good things from the Chinese. Lets know where their military is located. Lets find out what they think about us in the China Communist Party. It is cheap and effective. How do we know? The Chinese are doing it! Lets give them back their own medicine for a change.

It is not like people have not spied on China before. There was this guy who spied for Taiwan, before their idiot of a President Chen Shui-bian ( now a convict in prison) opened his mouth and the spy got exposed. If the Taiwanese can do it, so can we!

I think nobody would follow this, even if they may agree with me. This is because China holds so much of the US debt and we are still taking lots of debt money from them. We still need China’s help with North Korea, Sudan, and Iran amongst other countries. E.g. If China stops buying Iranian oil, Iran would go bankrupt in a week!

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/st-solution-to-chinese-spying/feed/ 0 Iran’s ultimatum : ST suggested counter ultimatum http://slashingtongue.com/politics/irans-ultimatum-st-suggested-counter-ultimatum/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/irans-ultimatum-st-suggested-counter-ultimatum/#comments Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:27:13 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=932 I have always said that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the Iranian version of President W. George Bush. Well, he recently made remarks that virtually prove me right; He basically told the United States that we be with the Iranians or the Zionists. Well we suggest Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reply...

]]> I have always said that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the Iranian version of President W. George Bush. Well, he recently made remarks that virtually prove me right; He basically told the United States that we be with the Iranians or the Zionists. Well we suggest Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reply…

President Ahmadinejad has given the ultimatum to President Obama : Choose between us or the Zionists. He went as far as to say that he cannot shake our President’s hand because we support and are friends of Israel.

This is the time to draw the line in the sand. If he wants us to choose, than we can give him a choice in return. Choose between being friends with all, or be friends with none at all. It is a very simple ultimatum for President Ahmadinejad to consider.

President Obama can throw in the names of his political challenger Mir-Hossein Moussavi and Neda Agha-Soltan, an innocent girl that was executed and considered a martyr against the cause of President Ahmadinejad. That is how we can play politics with Iran.

I think the biggest players here would be the Russians. It is Russia that is supplying Iran with the nuclear materials like uranium. Right now, Washington and Jerusalem can pressure the Russians with statement like these. If he can make an ultimatum with us today, he can make an ultimatum with the Russians tomorrow. Clever diplomacy can put the pressure on the Russians who can single-handedly stop Iran.

I suggest that we start drawing our big stick with regards to Iranian-American diplomacy. They think they want to show their stick, lets show them ours. It is definitely bigger and holds more ground. We have the backing of many countries all over the world.

I have always wanted the ties between Iran and America to normalize. For one, Iranians cut more slack when it comes to religion as compared to other states. There are still very strict with their version of Islamic laws. But it is still not as bad as many in the Middle East. We do not see women in burkhas which Bill Maher calls bee suits in Iran, we tend to see women wearing scarves.

A second reason is that Iran is strategically located. Russia to the North, Middle East to the West and South Asia and Afghanistan to its East. I think that stabilizing Iran would make a lot of regions live in peace.

However, we are not playing the bad guys in terms of diplomacy. It is the Iranians under the leadership of President Ahmadinejad. We did not set about new ultimatums or ask them to dump their friends. They did. It is they that want to draw the guns and play the diplomatic version of Russian roulette.

So my suggestion is this, if we have to forgo peace with Iran due to this, lets forgo it. Lets us get our guns ready. It is not us that forgo peace for war, it is the Iranians. We should not forget that they had a great chance under President Obama and they are throwing it away…

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/irans-ultimatum-st-suggested-counter-ultimatum/feed/ 0 Obama says time for Iran to decide future path http://slashingtongue.com/news/obama-says-time-for-iran-to-decide-future-path/ http://slashingtongue.com/news/obama-says-time-for-iran-to-decide-future-path/#comments Wed, 04 Nov 2009 06:32:00 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=878 It is time for Iran to decide whether to focus on the past or open the door to greater opportunity, U.S. President Barack Obama said in a statement issued late on Tuesday.

The statement, marking the 30th anniversary of the storming of the U.S. embassy in Tehran and the start of a 444-day hostage crisis, comes as a standoff continues between Iran and world powers over Tehran’s dispute nuclear program continues.

“Iran must choose,” Obama said. Tehran and Washington have been at odds for years over Iran’s nuclear program which Western powers fear is a covert effort to develop nuclear weapons. Iran denies that and says it needs nuclear technology to generate electricity.

Iranian militants stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979 and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

Read more..Click here

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/news/obama-says-time-for-iran-to-decide-future-path/feed/ 1 Iran supplying the Taliban? http://slashingtongue.com/politics/iran-supplying-the-taliban/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/iran-supplying-the-taliban/#comments Thu, 08 Oct 2009 20:05:38 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=747 I have heard of this from the Associated Press a few weeks ago. I really did not pay much attention to it as I felt it was a lot of hear say. However, when CBS covered it recently, I called some friends back at the military and they told me that suspicion of Iranian involvement was growing stronger and stronger.

The biggest reason why I was not alarmed by the views earlier was because Iran and Al Qaeda and the Taliban should be at the opposite end of the spectrum when it comes to their religious views. Iran is Shiite and Al Qaeda and Taliban are Sunni extremists. Anyone that knew the work of Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda’s number #2, would know that he, at least loathes Iran. There were talk of Osama bin Laden’s son living in Iran, but I really would think that that would have had more to do with corruption along the borders in Iran rather than real cooperation. They, at least publicly and on paper declare Shiites as enemies.

However, when you show shells that were so obviously from Iran, what more can you say? It is really a jaw-dropper. Contrary to what the conspiracy theorists think, the Army would never make up stories like this for fun. They may hide things, but never bring out false allegations. So the chances of it being real is very, very high.

That though does not mean that Iran is guilty yet. There could be that very small chance that Iran is not involved in the sale of such weapons. It could be a criminal problem in Iran; where they could smuggle weapons out of the Iranian army and sell it out in the black market.

The evidence though is not on Iran’s side. Iran’s actions are suspicious at best. The manner that they have been caught with their pants down by the Russians with regards to nuclear enrichment is the reason why they put us on the edge. Why should any American trust Iran? It is true that we screwed them over in the past that led to the Iranian Revolution, but we did try to be friends with them in the (President) Clinton years and they refused.

So what should we do if it is a proven fact that Iran is supplying Al Qaeda and the Taliban with weapons? I would follow the rules of engagement. There would be the threat of attack, and rule #1 is : We have a right to use force to defend our selves against attack or threats of attack. There is the threat of our soldiers dying at the hands of weapons supplied by Iran. Iran should either close its shop or feel the brunt of our aggression.

All this should only happen though after there is a thorough investigation with regards to this allegation. We should not make the same mistake of invading an “innocent” country again, like how we got into Iraq.

Lastly, this would blur the lines of Sunni and Shiites in the Middle East if it is true. They would still not like each other but would be treating the US as their common enemy. We are the “bigger devil” for them.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/iran-supplying-the-taliban/feed/ 0 Obama screws up defense shield despite being right! http://slashingtongue.com/politics/obama-screws-up-defense-shield-despite-being-right/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/obama-screws-up-defense-shield-despite-being-right/#comments Sun, 20 Sep 2009 09:18:38 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=654 Yes, you read it right. I am saying that President Obama screwed up his defense shield withdrawal despite him being a 100% right. If there was a poll, I guarantee that there would be less than a third of Americans that support it, because the President sold it wrongly.

I really think that America is getting it all wrong. Firstly, the missiles were, at least officially, there to stop the threat from Iran. The primary threat from Iran is not to Western Europe, but to Israel. Where is the media reporting on this first fact?

If you are going to defend Israel from missiles coming from the East in Iran approaching the target,Israel, why do you put it so far North-West off Israel? It really did not make sense for me to put weapons there. Shouldn’t you rather place your missiles in the Middle East that is much closer to taking down the threat from Iran?

But the world knows the truth. It was never about Iran for the (President) Bush administration. It was always about Russia. President Bush had this idea of surrounding Russia to neutralize the threat that he thought was coming from there. When that happens, Russia would obviously feel the threat. If Russia was building missile shields in Canada, and Mexico, wouldn’t we feel threatened? It just heightened tensions.

I also feel that if the Poles and Czechs feel that they need to be protected from Russia, let them do it themselves. Or they can pay us to do it! Why are we defending Eastern Europe with our money? And there are some that dare say that we betrayed Poland because we are not spending our money and defend them .

Additionally, President Bush was essentially living in the past. Even when terrorists hit us, he still felt that Russia is still the Soviet Union and that Iraq needed to be finished. He could not see the potential of having Russia as a partner.

So the sense of not having the missiles in Eastern Europe is good policy. But the manner it was done was in such terrible taste, that I think that President Obama deserve his condemnation. For one, he did this on the 70th anniversary of Poland being attacked by USSR. There is a sentiment could have easily been exploited.

Secondly, he did the right thing for nothing. This missile shield is something that Russia so badly wanted America to give up. We could have gotten more out of the Russians. We could have gotten cooperation for dealing with the Iranians and the North Koreans.

But no, we just gave up what we want to the Russians for free. We got nothing for giving up the missile defense shield that they did not want. All we got was a statement from President Medvedev is that the recent statement from President Ahmadinejad’s statement was unwarranted. Duh! That is like saying Hitler was wrong to kill Jews and do nothing about it.

This is an epic failure on the part of President Obama. Lets hope it does not happen to

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/obama-screws-up-defense-shield-despite-being-right/feed/ 0 Obama clarifies Biden’s words http://slashingtongue.com/politics/obama-clarifies-bidens-words/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/obama-clarifies-bidens-words/#comments Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:55:41 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=387 President Obama is fighting fire that was caused by Vice President Joe Biden’s remarks yesterday. He has clarified the Vice President’s statements, saying that he does not agree that Israel should attack Iran, but US may not be able stop Israel from doing so.

This is a position of common sense. If the Israelis want to do it, who is there to stop them? That does not mean that America would agree with Israel’s actions. The clarity of this statement that came out of the Presidents mouth was great and nobody could argue with that.

There are also unconfirmed reports coming from blogs (not news agencies) that Israeli leaders would not seek American approval should they want to bomb Iran. The Israeli leaders are not confident that they would get the response they want from President Obama and his administration.

That may spell some trouble at home. We can guarantee that this would become an issue that the Republicans would take up with. They would claim that the President have pushed friends away to get his enemies closer to him. I think that Israel would not by any means want to be on the wrong side of Washington, especially since we give them a lot of aid every year.

President Obama also clearly stated that the policy with Iran is, and has always been during his administration, one of engagement. That should soothe some nerves in the Middle Eash where America may not be that loved, but President Obama is.

I do think that the President is opening himself up to some controversy here. There would definitely be some people that would entertain the thought of President Obama not letting Israel defend herself. This may not be true, but there sure would be some allegations of such from whack-jobs such as Representative Michelle Bachman of This is seriously why America needs more common sense and Vice President Biden must learn to control his mouth. As I said yesterday, VP Biden is right more often than he is wrong. But at times what he say can be taken wrongly and can cause a commotion.

Other non-important news relating to this is that Israel has released former Congresswoman and Independent Presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney. Representative McKinney was on a ship that trespassed Israeli waters with aid to Gaza.

Related articles by Zemanta

Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/obama-clarifies-bidens-words/feed/ 0 President Obama in Russia http://slashingtongue.com/politics/president-obama-in-russia/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/president-obama-in-russia/#comments Tue, 07 Jul 2009 04:40:29 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=383 President Obama is in Moscow in hopes of accomplishing several agendas. He has met some in the first day, but there is worrying lack of progress when it comes to Iran. He is on track with soothing Russian concerns of American weapons around her neighbors, but success on that is issue is yet to be determined.

We told you this before President Obama left for Moscow. He has confirmed and sealed the deal to transport weapons and soldiers across Russian land into Afghanistan and agreed to slash nuclear arsenals with Russia. Thought that was very much expected, it is still a very good job done by the President’s negotiating team. I do not think that this would have been done in President Bush’s term.

The order of nuclear piles and corporation with Pakistan and Afghanistan were some areas where both President Obama and President Medvedev seemed to agree on. That was something that I was happy to see, but still wonder what Prime Minister Vladimir Putin would be thinking. He could hijack the whole thing whenever he wanted.

Other than that, there are some areas that worry me. The most outstanding of which is Iran. Unlike North Korea, which is also a close friend of the Russians, Kremlin and Washington are not on the same page when it comes to the Iranian agenda. Most recently, Kremlin had acknowledged the latest Iranian elections as legitimate, even though many people around the world did not.

Russia is the best party that can negotiate in Iran. For one, they are neighbors. Proximity is something that no diplomacy can ignore. More importantly is that Russia is the only country that has offered a solution to the Iranians on the nuclear issue that many in the world thought was very fair. I feel that the Russian solution of building a nuclear power reactor on Russian soil and transporting electricity to Iran was by far the best deal that came up yet.

President Obama is trying to soothe Russian nerves about America having weapons in Poland and Czech Republic. The Russians fear that the missiles would threaten them. The effort from the President was visible, but I think the results of that would only be out today. Prime Minister Putin too may have a large say in this matter.

President Obama is due to make a speech in Moscow’s New Economic school That is one to watch. If he does that well, he might not have won over Russia skepticism, but at least he would have diminished their fear of America surrounding it.

This speech is not going to be as easy as his other speeches, and a true test to his speech skills. He is not on a ground that loves him a lot. He is on a ground that is nonchalant to what he says. If he could get them chanting, the way he did in Cairo, he would go down in the history books as one of the greatest orators the world has ever seen.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/president-obama-in-russia/feed/ 0 Bumbling Biden at it again…. http://slashingtongue.com/politics/joebiden/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/joebiden/#comments Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:59:09 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=379 We are sad that (President) George Bush is gone, but thank God for (Vice President) Joe Biden. That is an increasingly common phrase from comedians these days. The latest episode of this is not that funny and may not be wrong, but it is really disappointing.

The frustrating thing about this is this: I agree that the VP is right. If Iran has nuclear weapons, Israel should have the right to take it out. So I would understand if readers think that I am hypocritical in the way I am dealing with VP Biden.

But the fact is that we are an opinion site/blog. We are not representing America via our commentary. We represent ourselves. We represent what we think and voice it out. VP Biden on the other hand, represents the Red, White and Blue. You are speaking for the American people, VP Biden!

Does he understand what reaction his words could incite? This could be used as fodder for propaganda in Iran against America. This could undo President Obama’s trip to Cairo where he won a lot of Muslim support there with that speech. President Obama already made it clear that he wants to be on the right side of history. His position was principled but not offensive at all.

Many countries of Middle East are wary of Iran. Iran is Shi’ite while most of the other countries have Sunni majorities or are under Sunni control. Countries over there get nervous whenever Iran goes about claiming things like Qatar is part of their territory. They do not love Iran. But many of them love Israel less, if they love her at all. That is a fact that the world should, or would have come to terms with.

So when VP Biden said that America would support Israel in the invasion of Iran, should the Israelis know if Iran has nuclear weapons, he is aligning himself with Israel rather that the side of good that President Obama had laid out. He is pitting America against the Muslim world again. He has made it black and white when the entire canvas is gray smeared with blood of innocents.

What is sad is that VP Biden is often very right on foreign policy. I still think that his Iraq plan is the best long term plan for that country, even though there would have been some problem in the Kurdish region. He is right about this too. But he can’t shoot his mouth off any way he wants to.

Leave that to us, the commentaries and the blogs, VP Biden. We would tell the world that Israel needs to defend herself against a neighbor that wants to wipe her off the face of the Earth. We would tell them that Israel has history where her citizens were targeted just for being born Jewish. They have taken out nuclear missile plants in Iraq and, more recently, Syria before and we fully support that.

Related articles by Zemanta

Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/joebiden/feed/ 0 Rafsanjani, King-maker in Iran http://slashingtongue.com/politics/rafsanjani-king-maker-in-iran/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/rafsanjani-king-maker-in-iran/#comments Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:41:14 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=364 In the recent weeks on unrest and turmoil, it seems impossible that there could be a middle ground in Iranian politics, to most people. Yet, by any accords the person that is walking on that line and could sway Iran in any direction possible is ex-President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.

First, a background on ex-President Rafsanjani. He right now the only balance of power that can remove the Supreme Leader in Iran, but there are many ways to remove President Rafsanjani too. He was a President from 1989-1997, and lost to current President Ahmadinejad. He was considered a right-winder till recently, where he sought to mend ties with the US. He still wants nuclear weapons and hates Israel though.

The reason that he is considered to be in the middle right now is very simple: He has not endorsed anyone yet. He has been giving mixed signals. He was initially delighted with the turnout in Iran. He also then made a bizarre claim that there would not be a power crisis after this crisis fades out. His most recent statement is that Iranians are still very bitter about the elections despite the recount.

However, something has changed. In the recent hours, there have been calls for the “Reformists” from the Moussavi camp to be indicted on charges of stirring trouble and causing unrest. I think that this would be the time where you can see on which side, President Rafsanjani is on. If he says that they should stand trial, you know that he is with the conservatives. If he is against it, you would know that he is with the “Reformists” or at least not bent on them going down.

It would also be interesting to see how he is going to handle the military complex within Iran that has seen its power surge in recent days. When the crisis began, Iran was a dictatorship that was very much influenced by clerics.

However, the crisis has divided the clerical world in Iran in half, right down the middle. It is the military and militant forces like the Basiji that has usurped the power vacuum. This is one area that some Republicans got it wrong, calling Iran a “Mullah dictatorship”. But have no doubt though, that the person in charge is still Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

The tide of American-Iranian relations is still in rough waters. It is up to President Rafsanjani more than anyone else to steer it clear or otherwise. There is some signs of his influence working. There are already several reports which ST cannot confirm that claim that President Ahmadinejad wants to talk to President Obama on some undisclosed matters. That would not have happened without President Rafsanjani.

In most dramatic terms, the fate of Middle East, America and potentially rests on the judgment of President Rafsanjani. He is now at a cross-roads of history. Lets hope that he chooses the right path, for the sake of Iran and the Middle East.

Suggested reading : CNN, AL Jazeera, Reuters

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/rafsanjani-king-maker-in-iran/feed/ 0 Old Media vs New Media http://slashingtongue.com/politics/old-media-vs-new-media/ http://slashingtongue.com/politics/old-media-vs-new-media/#comments Sun, 05 Jul 2009 04:31:00 +0000 PreetSG http://slashingtongue.com/?p=360 Ever since President Obama asked a reporter from Huffington Post a question before all other news agencies except Associated Press, there has been a war with “old media” and “new media”. We would like you to note that we are not a news organization, we are an opinion site/blog.

Firstly, was that press conference staged? Yes, I think so. Was Huffington Post part of the act? I do not think so! It was a photo-op. The President and his administration were hoping to seem to be tuned in to the Iranian situation. They hoped to be viewed as listening to the ground in Iran. That was what they intended and boy, didn’t it backfire!

Take note, this is coming from a site that technically is a rival site of Huffington Post. In fact I do not rate them very highly as a news network and I feel that they are very partisan. We want to share or if necessary, take away some of their traffic. But, we have to stick to the truth as best as we can. And the truth is, there is only a remote chance that Huffington Post was part of this.

Next, was when traditional media attacking the President via the White House Press Secretary. They were slamming away about town hall meeting where the President took questions from the Internet.

In this case I understand what the Old media is angry about. They would feel angry if their questions are not being answered. What is the process for vetting the questions? And how do they know if it is a first come, first serve basis as the administration claims? Their queries are legitimate in this case.

However, lets give President Obama and his administration a break here. The reason why you take questions from the Internet is because not every member of the world can be at the town hall meeting at the same time.

And they have to censor some questions. The number 1 question that people ask online is “When can we legalize marijuana?” and another popular question is “When can we see your birth certificate?”. These are the questions that he would get despite answering them a million and one times over.

The old media too is not doing itself any favor by their reaction. I do not think it is fair to blast it out on new media just because the status quo is changed. Quit being the big bully! If I were a new media that delivers news, I would not be very happy.

So, we here at ST have come up with a solution; Old media can ask the question in the town hall face to face, while New media dominates the Internet! Time for both should be 50-50. In this simple way, everybody gains!

I hope that this war ends soon. I want to read as much news as possible and not nonsense like this.

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta


]]> http://slashingtongue.com/politics/old-media-vs-new-media/feed/ 0