Tag: iran

EVIL’S PERSONIFICATION

One asks oneself, what leaders in the world today have remorse for the incarcerations, torture, and killings for which they are responsible? What remorse is there in Putin’s, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s, and even our American President’s thoughts?

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

CONFRONTING EVIL (Assessing the Worst of the Worst)

Author: Bill O’Reilly, Josh Hammer

Narrated By: Robert Petkoff

Bill O’Reilly, American conservative commentator, journalist, author, and television host. Josh Hammer, American conservative commentator, attorney, co-author, and columnist.

History taken out of the context of its time often distorts the reality of the past.

“Confronting Evil” is an interesting if not nuanced history of the most notorious leaders in the world. They were responsible for the torture, incarceration, and death of millions. As is true of most if not all histories of famous and infamous leaders, historians and pundits choose facts that reinforce their view of world’ history. Even the best historian is influenced by the time in which they write and their choice of facts.

Nathan Bedford Forest (1821-1877, General in the Confederate States of America during the Civil War.)

One is appalled by the truth of Nathan Bedford Forest’s view of slavery during America’s Civil War. Forest directed the slaughter of people based on the color of their skin. Forest condoned the murder of all who believed in equality of human beings. Forest is considered a hero to some but with the passage of time and a growing belief in human equality, Forest is recognized as a despicable human being by those who know the history of his life and profession. The evidence of science and human accomplishment show that the color of one’s skin is no measure of intelligence or capability. Forest’s mistreatment of slaves and the wealth he created from trading in slaves is reported in this history. By many measures, Forest is shown as an evil person by O’Reilly and Hammer.

The rule of Genghis Kahn is said to have caused the death of 40 million people, an estimated 11% of the global population at his time in history.

Presumed image of Genghis Kahn (1162-1227, Founder and first Khan of the Mongol Empire.)

By some measures, Mao doubled that 40 million number with his “Great Leap Forward”, the “Cultural Revolution”, his labor camp creations, and political purges. Hitler is estimated to have caused the death of 17 million with his genocidal policies while casualties from WWII are estimated at 85 million. Hitler’s antisemitism is born of the same stupidity exhibited by Nathan Bedford Forest in America’s Civil War. The contribution of Jewish society to the world is incalculable.

Mao Zedong (1893-1976) Father of the Peoples Republic of China)

Mao’s great leap forward is estimated to have caused the death of 35 to 45 million citizens. The rule of Stalin is estimated to have caused the death of 20 to 60 million U.S.S.R.’ citizens. Stalin’s takeover of Poland, and the Baltics after WWII and his cruelty is remembered by survivors of his rule.

There are many other evil characters in “Confronting Evil”. In the mind of westerners, the current leaders of Iran and Russia are evil. The leader of Iran, Ruhollah Khomeini is estimated to have ordered deaths of Iranians that exceed 250,000 since his takeover in 1979. Though he has passed, the succession of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has carried on with tens of thousands who have died in Iran’s involvement with Hamas in Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon. The predecessor of the religious leaders of Iran was Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi who reigned from 1941-1970. Pahlavi is estimated to have murdered 3,000 to 20,000 during his reign. These leaders ruled over an impoverished state but incomes per capita fell from $34,660 during the Shah’s reign to $3,150 under Khomeini’s rule. An irony is that income inequality hugely increased in Iran during Khomeini’s rule. Nuanced reality is that poverty and victimization of Iranians is more widely spread under Khomeini than under the former Shah. On an economic scale it appears Khomeini’s evil as a leader exceeds the Shah’s rule. Added to the economic difference is the religious zealotry of Khomeini which widened the gap of sexual inequality in Iran.

Ruhollah Khomeini (1st Supreme Leader of Iran, 1979-1989)

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (Current leader of Iran.)

The authors address the illicit drug industry and the evil of Pablo Escobar in Columbia and “El Chapo” Guzmán in Mexico. Escobar was killed in 1993 when pursued by drug enforcement officers while Guzmán is serving a life sentence in the U.S. The drug industry continues to thrive despite the harm it is doing to America and the world. The leaders of the criminal drug industry care nothing for the consequence of their actions because of the wealth and power the illicit trade offers.

Pablo Escobar (now deceased) noted on the left with “El Chapo”(arrested and imprisoned in America) on the right.

The last two chapters of “Confronting Evil” offer a pithy definition of evil. Evil is defined as doing harm without remorse. One doubts any of the leaders noted by the authors have or had any remorse for the atrocities they have committed. Whether they rationalize their behavior for the good of their people, their religion, or their country—they are evil by O’Reilly and Hammer’s definition. One doubts any of the leaders noted in “Confronting Evil” are remorseful.

One asks oneself, what leaders in the world today have remorse for the incarcerations, torture, and killings for which they are responsible? What remorse is there in Putin’s, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s, and even our American President’s thoughts?

CULTURAL CONFLICT

How could America expect to occupy Iraq for a mere 8 years and 8 months and resolve cultural differences? It could not and did not.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Iraq War 

Author: John Keegan

Narrated By: Simon Vance

John Keegan (Author, 1934-2012, English historian, lecturer, and journalist died at age 78. A recognized authority on warfare.)

John Keegan reflects on the history of Iraq with an analysis of the rise and fall of Saddam Hussein. With the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1922, British control of Baghdad, Basra, and Mosul led to the formation of Iraq by the League of Nations under the supervision of the British. Great Britain offered nation-state independence to Iraq in 1932. Keegan explains early Iraqi leaders failed to centralize control of the newly formed country of Iraq. He argues that failure allowed an authoritarian, unscrupulous, and brutal leader named Saddam Hussein to take control of the country from Ahmed Hassan al-Baker in 1979. Saddam used fear, violence, and murder to eliminate rivals to create a cult of personality that made him look strong and defiant in the eyes of his countrymen and the world.

Saddam Hussein (1937-2006)

Keegan argues Saddam instinctively combined his brutality with the pragmatism of “might makes right” to take control of Iraq’s fragmented leadership. Not since Hitler, Keegan suggests, has a leader managed to combine tyranny with fear to take command of a nation. Saddam magnified regional instability and created international disorder with ruthless brutality, reinforced by a military that chose to follow him out of fear and reward that is gathered from rapine.

Iraq death statistics.

Keegan explains Saddam maintains his position through force but ultimately loses it because of his brutal rule, lies, and poor judgement. Saddam dramatically murders or tortures political rivals to create fear among Iraqi citizens and military henchmen who fear his rath. He initiates a war with Iran in 1980 with the intent of toppling the Shah because he viewed him as a threat to his regime. His plan was to install the Ayatollah Khomeini which seems counter intuitive in view of Khomeini’s religious zealotry; particular considering Saddam’s earlier offer to assassinate him while he lived as an exile in Iraq. Keegan implies Saddam’s decision to support Khomeini as Iran’s leader is similar to the lie Saddam creates about Kuwait slant-drilling into Iraqi oil fields to steal billions in oil. One doubts he ever intended to promote Khomeini to rule Iran. As history shows, the majority of the international community did not believe Saddam’s lie about oil theft and were opposed to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. A disastrous and unresolved eight-year war was fought with Iran and eventually Saddam lost any significant support for occupation of Kuwait.

Saddam rules Iraq for nearly 24 years. One wonders how he ruled as long as he did, just as many Americans wonder how Trump could be re-elected by a majority of American voters.

Considering Saddam’s poor judgement in regard to Khomeini’s power and his belief that Iraq could take over another country without international opposition shows how deluded a dictator can be. Keegan suggests Saddam made too many miscalculations. First among them is the weaknesses he created by presuming that fear of him among his own military force would maintain support of Iraq’s 400,000 soldiers. Saddam is essentially abandoned by his military leaders when Iraq is confronted by an international force to oppose Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait (73% were American soldiers but 34 other countries participated). Not surprisingly, bridges were not destroyed by Saddam’s military as they retreated, and Saddam’s military leaders abandoned their posts.

Keegan explains Saddam’s fall came from a collapse of the illusions, fears, and myths that surrounding his rise to power.

One wonders if the same may happen in Iran in the 21st century. It seems dependent on Iranian people deciding on whether the governance Khomeini insists upon is illusory and the fear Khomeini’s ordered murders, incarcerations, and beliefs have alienated enough Iranian citizens. Because Iran’s governance may be more about religious belief and integrity rather than arbitrary rule, one becomes skeptical. Iran may remain as it is but with a new religious ruler.

Keegan tries to explain America’s mistakes in Iraq without being too partisan.

Keegan offers a clear understanding of Saddam’s rule of Iraq. America made many mistakes because of not understanding the culture of Iraq and presumed their culture would accept Americanization. Tribalism scented with religion exists in Iraq. Without engaging that reality, America could not constructively influence change. The dismantling of Iraq’s military negatively impacted a critical infrastructure that understood the indigenous culture and may have aided American influence in Iraq. By ignoring the dignity of the Iraqi people and the importance of tribe loyalties and religious beliefs, America stubbled through years of destructive occupation. Other authors have noted how tribalism influenced how Iraqi informers had their own agendas for accusing Iraqi tribes of fomenting conflict. Iraq unraveled into insurgency and chaos from which it is still trying to recover.

It has taken nearly a quarter of a century for American government to begin healing the relationship between Indians and 1776 settlers of this country. The possibility of changing Iraqi society in a less than 10 years seems unlikely and, for that matter, inappropriate. Cultural difference is not a disease.

Change is difficult and nearly impossible when cultural differences are not clearly understood and taken into account when a foreign country occupies a native country’s territory. How could America expect to occupy Iraq for a mere 8 years and 8 months and resolve cultural differences? It could not and did not.

HUMAN EQUALITY

Darznik’s novel is based on a woman who believed and acted on a conviction that men and women are created equal.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Song of a Captive Bird

By: Jasmin Darznik

Narrated By: Mozhan Marno

Jasmin Darznik (Iranian born American author with a BA from the University of California and a PhD in English literature from Princeton.)

“…Captive Bird” is classified as a novel. However, it is loosely based on the life of Iranian poet, Forugh Farrokhzad, who defied the traditions of mid-twentieth century Iranian culture. Today’s Iranian culture would undoubtedly be as anti-Farrokhzad as the 1950’s culture in which she lived.

Forugh Farrokhzad

Iranian poet and painter born in Tehran in 1934, died at age 32 from a car accident in 1967.

If even a small part of Darznik’s novel is based on true events, Forugh Farrokhzad was an extraordinary human being who symbolized the truth of sexual equality. In one of the most patriarchal countries in the world, Ms. Farrokhzad rebelled against a conservative and myopic view of women’s rights.

Jasmin Darznik characterizes Farrokhzad as a trailblazer who believed and lived a life of sexual equality.

The story Darznik tells is of a human being choosing to livelife in whatever way her mind and emotions led. Darznik’s heroine fought the restrictions of women’s inequality in a country riven with militant patriarchy. Farrokhzad’s history is one of rebellion against her father, a colonel in the Iranian army, and the societal taboos of Iran, many of which are resurrected in today’s Iranian government.

Darznik’s story is of a woman who acts like a free man, chooses her sexual partners, leaves her husband and only child, and seeks fame as a poet in a land renowned for poetry.

Like a man or any human being, Farrokhzad has sexual desires and ambitions to be something more than a footnote in history. Like husbands who leave their children through divorce or separation, Farrokhzad leaves her son. It is the same habit of many absent fathers who may love their children, but choose, like Farrokhzad, to pursue life beyond being a mother or father.

The world is beginning to understand women and men are 99.9 percent the same with fractional differences for conception, and strength.

The desire for sex, money, power and/or prestige are the same for all human beings. What is remarkable about Farrokhzad life is that she seems to have recognized that belief in one of the most patriarchal countries in the world. The way Farrokhzad lived her life, as reflected by the author, shows why men and women should be treated equally.

This is not a lesson many men or women are willing to learn because it challenges societies definitions of masculinity and femininity. The value of learning that lesson is in the liberation of humanity.

What is not mentioned in Darsnik’s novel is that Farrkhzad was also an artist.

This is a painting done by Farrokhzad despite her principal feminist reputation as a poet in the conservative culture of Iran in the 1950s.

The author’s story suggests Farrokhzad’s father commits her to an asylum after estrangement from her family and her rejection of female inequality. In the asylum, Farrokhzad is heavily sedated and subjected to shock treatments that make her catatonic. She is rescued with her father’s decision to allow her to leave the asylum in the care of a rich Iranian woman. This benefactress is a fellow traveler in Farrokhzad’s belief about women. Farrokhzad eventually recovers from her catatonia and continues her liberated life.

Though the dates Farrokhzad’s real life do not match historical events in Iran, Darznik captures the essence of a remarkable Iranian woman.

The shah of Iran, Mohammad Pahlavi is deposed in 1979. The author conflates the history of the oil industry’s unfair monopolization by Great Britain, the King’s departure and Farrokhzad’s storied life. She tragically dies in a car accident in 1967 at the age of 32. (Some suggest the car accident is suspicious.)

Darznik’s novel is a compelling argument for sexual equality. It is based on a woman who believed and acted on a conviction that men and women are created equal. The author’s story is particularly impactful because the woman she alludes to is born in a country that is among the most patriarchal in the world.