The war in Iran has already begun. "Iran's leadership proclaims its confidence and ambition but it draws power from a western threat that enables it to target and crush grassroots protest." Opinion and analysis from the authors of Iran on the Brink.
posted by Abiezer on Apr 14, 2007 - 26 comments

The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has called for a purge of liberal and secular teachers from the country's universities. Now that this former rogue nation has fallen in line, we can turn out attention to the real terrorist threat: Britain.
posted by thirteenkiller on Sep 5, 2006 - 30 comments

Before we go to war based on whether or not Saddam (or the UN Security Council...) agrees to the Bush administration's proposed UN resolution, would anyone care to discuss what their proposed resolution actually says?
Apparently, the text of the resolution isn't in the public domain... but things leak. According to this article, the resolution allows the UN or its members (including the US) to station armed guards in Iraq, establish no-fly and no-drive zones, and create exclusive ground and air transit corridors. Robert Fisk, one of England's most respected reporters, believes the resolution is a poison pill, designed to lead to "regime change", whether he accepts it or not. So, what else do we know about the proposed resolution, and why isn't anyone talking about it?
posted by insomnia_lj on Oct 9, 2002 - 32 comments

U.S. faces bigger issues than hitting Iraq. A former Japanese diplomat--now chairman of the English-Speaking Union of Japan-- offers a quintessentially Japanese view regarding the manifest folly of a US attack on Iraq. (From The Japan Times). Mr. Hanabusa underscores the formidable difficulty of the victor's creating anything but a puppet "regime change." Since Japan has had some recent experience in this regard, his words merit contemplation by those who favor an immediate attack and damn the foreseeable consequences thereof.
posted by rdone on Sep 3, 2002 - 26 comments

The Right Way to Change a Regime....By James Baker III Oh no, I'm starting to think that James Baker is making some sense.
posted by bas67 on Aug 25, 2002 - 44 comments

Regime change required for a rogue nation? In a soundbite disseminated by the White House and duly picked up by the media, Bush the younger asserted that "the world's worst leaders" will not be permitted to "harbor and develop the world's worst weapons." With the U.S. hinting at a new, unilateral war effort abroad and suspending constitutional rights at home, Adrian Hamilton writes in the Independent (U.K.), "The government which is spending by far the most on weapons of mass destruction, and is now planning to raise its budget by an increase greater than the total defence spending of Europe, is, of course, based in Washington."
posted by xian on Aug 10, 2002 - 27 comments

ANDDOVUS Nations Authorize ÒRegime ChangeÓ for USA
BUENOS AIRES -- The Association of Nations Destroyed, Destabilized or Otherwise Violated by Uncle Sam, or ANDDOVUS, has authorized the ouster of the current U.S. administration by no later than March 2003. Foreign ministers of the 123 nations that make up ANDDOVUS met earlier this week in Buenos Aires, Argentina, where they agreed to appropriate $42.8 billion for what they termed Òregime change in the United States.Ó
posted by mapalm on May 8, 2002 - 11 comments