Home » Featured, Politics, War

The Iranian “Third Reich”

4 December 2011 3 Comments

In the early years of the 1930′s, all the signs were present that something extraordinary was going on in Germany.  The German people, impoverished by years of economic recession, and angry with the crushing burden of war reparations, began to turn their attentions to a charismatic ex-army corporal from Austria named, Adolph Hitler.  Desperate for a strong leader, and willing to believe the lies of Hitler and the  Nazi party, the German people abandoned all of the individual rights afforded them by the constitution, and put into power a maniacal and ego-centric dictator.  Within a decade, fifty million people had been killed, Germany and much of Europe had been utterly destroyed, and the maniacal dictator was dead by his own hand.  In the aftermath of  the blood and suffering of World War II, many historians have asked how the great powers of the world could have allowed Hitler to gain such power, and why was nothing done to stop the Nazi‘s while they still had a chance.

Biographers over the last sixty years have done a good job in explaining how Hitler and the Nazi’s came to power, but have not done such a good job in explaining why nothing was done to stop them.  Perhaps the simple answer would be that peace-loving nations will usually choose appeasement and inaction over war and bloodshed, and that the lies of the aggressor will usually trump the reality of truth.   In short, the nations of Western and Eastern Europe knew exactly what Hitler was doing long before the German Wehrmacht began its blood-thirsty war of conquest, but they chose to ignore the warning signs before it was to late.  The question today is whether another powerful nation, with a similar goal of world conquest, again rise to threaten world peace?  Unfortunately, the answer to that question is yes!

Similar to the political situation that arose in Nazi Germany, the people of Iran have abandoned all hopes of a democratic  form of government, and have given absolute power to an elite group of ayatollahs.  These Islamic clerics are neither elected by the people, nor are they accountable to the public for their actions.  They have gained for themselves total dictatorial powers, and may not be questioned by the Iranian media or the public under threat of severe punishment.  Armed with Sharia Law and the Koran (as opposed to Mein Kampf), the leaders of Iran have set their sights on the conquest of the Middle East and beyond.  After developing nuclear weapons capabilities and strengthening their conventional weapons systems, the Iranian dictatorship may first attack Syria and Lebanon, and then move on to the conquests of Iraq and Afghanistan. Turkey and Saudi Arabia may not be far behind. Using the threat of nuclear war, the Iranians will test the will of peace-loving nations to the West and to the East to stop their advances.  The question will, once again, be whether or not other powerful nations in the world will be willing to risk spilling the blood of their own countrymen to stop a rogue nation from conquering and imposing its will on its neighbors.

Now is the time for the powers of the world to unite in their demands for Iran to cease its quest for nuclear weapons, and to open its borders to international inspections.  History must not be allowed a repetition of the world holocaust caused by the unchecked rise of the Third Reich.  It must not be allowed to happen again!



Enhanced by Zemanta


  • Arthur Graham said:

    Interesting parallels between Germany and Iran here, but what about those between Germany and the United States? Sure, Iran may have “Sharia Law and the Koran (as opposed to Mein Kampf)” but if we’re going to make Nazi comparisons (as is the current vogue), let’s at least be fair and admit that A) not only is the U.S. becoming more and more fascist every day, but B) no nation since has been responsible for more senseless bloodshed, and C) perhaps Americans ought to consider who has been “using the threat of nuclear war” to advance their nationalist agenda ever since Hiroshima – When we lead by such example, how can we blame others for trying to keep pace?

    As a side note, it is probably worth remembering that we had our own Holocaust right here on this continent, long before we awarded ourselves the privilege of denouncing such behavior elsewhere.

  • Rich (author) said:

    Arthur G.,
    In a speech to the German people in 1938, Hitler pointed out that the genocide of the native American population, the enslavement of people of African descent, and the union-busting tactics of the robber barons were evidence that America’s own “social solutions” were not much different than the Nazis. From an historical basis he was, of course, somewhat correct, although those conditions were no longer present in the 1930′s when Roosevelt warned Hitler to respect the national boundaries established by the League of Nations.

    It is, I believe, blatantly incorrect to suggest that America has been responsible for more senseless bloodshed than any other nation since the Third Reich. After the end of the war Stalin killed and imprisoned millions of his own people, Mao Tse Tung murdered millions of Chinese in his numerous purges, Pol Pot killed a million innocent Cambodians, and Idi Amin wrecked death and destruction on hundreds of thousands of Ugandans. Admittedly, America has stuck its nose into many conflicts where it did not belong (such as Viet Nam and Iraq), but has not done so with the aim of territorial gain or ethnic cleansing.

    I agree that America has used the threat of nuclear weapons as a deterrent to aggressor nations, but has not used this threat to advance its own “nationalist agenda”, or with the aim of territorial gain. At any rate, I very much appreciate your opinions on these matters.

  • Arthur Graham said:

    Thanks for your reply, Rich. Body counts are always a sticky subject (we might be prone to exaggerate those of our enemies, and the U.S. apparently can’t be bothered to keep track of its own), but I think where we ultimately disagree is how violence/aggression is justified.

    In my mind, to make some grand distinction between the U.S. and “aggressor nations” is to conveniently ignore the fact that we spend more on our military than all other nations combined, garrisoning/policing the entire world over, although some would employ euphemisms such as “defense” or “deterrence” to describe this blatantly aggressive behavior. Just because we don’t wage war with the aim of “territorial gain or ethnic cleansing” (open for debate as far as I’m concerned), this does not excuse the truly massive violence (unmatched in the 21st century) wrought by our own imperialistic endeavors, nation building, “peacekeeping” or what have you.

    Therefore, I have to wonder why Iran seen is such a threat, when all this hubbub over nukes smells suspiciously like the prelude to Iraq all over again… If you ask me, we want to bring back the Shah, someone who will play ball and give us access to oil, just like Saddam did before he started making moves unsanctioned by the cowboys in Washington. I’m not saying that your Germany/Iran comparison is entirely off-base, but there are better historical analogues we could explore to understand what’s currently happening over there.

    Getting back to Nazism, here’s an article on some new legislation Hitler would be proud of:


  • Leave your response!

    Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

    Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

    You can use these tags:
    <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

    Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes