Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Mon 06/29/2009 View Sun 06/28/2009 View Sat 06/27/2009 View Fri 06/26/2009 View Thu 06/25/2009 View Wed 06/24/2009 View Tue 06/23/2009
1
2009-06-29 
Good morning
Posted by Fred 2009-06-29 00:00|| || Front Page|| [1 views ]  Top

#1 Rather attractive pulls on that Birdseye....
Posted by Besoeker 2009-06-29 07:19||   2009-06-29 07:19|| Front Page Top

#2 Clara Lou, "The Oomph Girl" from Denton Texas



Loaded for Bear

Anchors Aweigh

Pile Driver

Daily Gam Shot

Back to the Future

Nightie Night

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2009-06-29 10:31||   2009-06-29 10:31|| Front Page Top

#3 Well, Fred, I see you have come to your senses about the Iranian Revolution. Unfortunately, that's the way I see it too - hard to beat a bunch of immoral thugs led by deviant mullahs. I do wonder how it would have turned out if The One had been more forceful and demanding in a Reaganesque way.
Posted by Jack is Back!">Jack is Back!  2009-06-29 13:35||   2009-06-29 13:35|| Front Page Top

#4 Won't happen Jack, Ohblablahblah is a coward, he'll only wait it out, then claim he was behind (Whoever wins) all along.
Posted by Redneck Jim 2009-06-29 14:46||   2009-06-29 14:46|| Front Page Top

#5 This was a "hesitation mark." If you've been keeping track, Iran has a cycle of unrest that peaks in June or July every couple years. This was the year they've come closest to date to throwing the ayatollahs out.

The best thing for the ayatollahs would be for Rafsanjani to push the Guardians Council into removing Khamenei and replacing him with someone more reasonable. If they do that, the 1979 Revolution will keep puttering along, most of the same set of religious oligarchs in place, still raking in the money, with maybe a functioning economy.

If Rafsanjani loses and gets dumped, there will be more unrest next year or the year after. It only takes one to succeed, at which point we may well be treated to the sight of ayatollahs dangling from the lamp post, Najaf ascendant over Qom, and a secular Iranian state.

The Shah was allied with the U.S. not because he was that enamored with the U.S., but because Iran's a non-Arab power and the Soviet Union was busy making inroads among the Arabs while puppeteering the Afghans.
Posted by Fred 2009-06-29 18:49||   2009-06-29 18:49|| Front Page Top

#6 Fred, that pretty bit of analysis makes this a Classic, in my opinion.
Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife  2009-06-29 21:02||   2009-06-29 21:02|| Front Page Top

#7 Thank you. It felt like a statement of the obvious.
Posted by Fred 2009-06-29 21:14||   2009-06-29 21:14|| Front Page Top

#8 The best analysis is, my dear.
Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife  2009-06-29 23:29||   2009-06-29 23:29|| Front Page Top

23:29 trailing wife
22:51 CrazyFool
22:26 Barbara Skolaut
22:23 Grunter in Belize
22:23 Barbara Skolaut
22:15 Alaska Paul
22:03 Redneck Jim
21:54 Redneck Jim
21:53 DarthVader
21:51 DarthVader
21:48 DarthVader
21:48 Redneck Jim
21:38 MarkZ
21:31 trailing wife
21:24 Redneck Jim
21:22 Redneck Jim
21:14 Fred
21:14 Redneck Jim
21:02 trailing wife
21:01 Redneck Jim
20:44 Atomic Conspiracy
20:43 Redneck Jim
20:43 donk
20:40 donk









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com