...it could be that the 3,800 expatriate Iranians believe America has more to offer than Iran...

...but we already knew that....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 14, 2007 11:00 AM

I'm not sure that the MEK, and Miriam Rajavi, are not at this point useful to the West. They represent, in the incredible confusion of Iran and its various groups and groupuscules, inside Iran, outside Iran in Iraq and France and the United States, one strand, the crazed leftists who thought, wrongly, that they should oppose the Shah (who looks better every miniute) and that they would be able to handle Khomeini and his primitives. Like the Tudeh Party members who, a a minute after they debarked from the plane that had taken them from their Russian exile in Moscow, were all shot dead right on the tarmac, the MEK prisoners in Iran were massacred by Khomeini.

Are many of the members of MEK not our cup of tea? Of course. No one in the Muslim world, save for a handful of apostates, can be described as our cup of tea -- we, rational, advanced, Western men. But that doesn't mean that MEK doesn't have its uses.

One would like to know much more before insisting this group be disarmed or disbanded. Its efforts might be most helpful. The Arabs setting off bombs in Khuzistan are not our cup of tea, either -- but does anyone think that those bombs do not unsettle the Islamic Republic of Iran, and therefore right now work to our Infidel advantage?

Posted by: Hugh at March 14, 2007 11:13 AM

As a group, the uniformed and formerly armed members of the MEK qualify for Protected status under the Geneva Conventions.

It took over a year from when they first made a ceasefire agreement with the U.S., but a decision to that effect was issued by the deputy U.S. military commander in Baghdad.

They actually prefer to be called PMOI or "People's Mujaheddin Organization of Iran," maintaining that MEK is what the "evil-mullah-regime" calls them.

In any case, the U.S. should be in no hurry to repeat our post-WW2 mistake of turning people we have taken responsibility over to their home governments when it's a near certainty they will be executed and/or tortured.

Likewise, it would be in our own moral interest to keep close tabs on how the Iraqi government handles the 100 it is prosecuting. That doesn't mean I think they didn't do it (whatever they're accused of doing), just that it's bad karma on us if they're not handled properly. Just as Saddam's final moments don't exactly cover us with glory, since he was a U.S. capture.

That doesn't make them good guys, but we (the U.S.) are pretty far down the list of people the PMOI has a beef with.

It might be wise to mentally revisit the who-what-why's of how the PMOI got on the State Dept.'s terrorist organization list.

Posted by: Consul-At-Arms at March 14, 2007 11:25 AM

"It might be wise to mentally revisit the who-what-why's of how the PMOI got on the State Dept.'s terrorist organization list."

Ask Bill Clinton. If the MEK were not on the list of terrorist organizations, individual groups and parties in the U.S. could help fund a greater uprising than even the U.S. gov't has used them for thus far.

The real reasons they were placed on the list was appeasement to the Iranian government. We got our money's worth on that one, I'm sure.

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at March 14, 2007 12:18 PM

Just because the State Department classifies a group as a terrorist group (maybe at the behest of Iran itself) doesn't mean that the Pentagon should go by their classifications.

I agree that the MEK should be used to destabilize Iran as much as possible. However, as Ali Sina points out, they are a Left wing group dedicated to bringing a different type of totalitarianism to Iran, and therefore, shouldn't ever be allowed to gain power. But nothing wrong with using them to de-stabilize Iran.

On Khuzestan, elements of the Shia parties not aligned to Moqtada al Sadr should be encouraged to support the Arab Shia there, and maybe even claim Abadan and Khorramshahr. Create more problems for Iran there. Maybe that might encourage Kurds to get restive, and Azeris to want to bail out to Azerbaijan.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at March 14, 2007 12:19 PM

Oh my, somehow these MEK escaped and we just can not find them.

That is how one handles this nonsense as you don't return people to regimes to slaughter them.

These are the groups I have advocated the CIA train, arm and get to work with other legitimate forces to overthrow the Islamocommunists of Iran.
Thug Islamists like to quote "Your terrorist is my freedom fighter".

Well give them the freedom fighters they are so coy about.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at March 14, 2007 1:01 PM

Oh,sure.They are Iranian "rebels" but they "belong to the Mujahedin-e Khalq"

note to self:rebel=Mujahedin-e

Posted by: anonamustafa at March 14, 2007 1:28 PM

.and build a different kind of Islamist theocracy.

Great, dont you feel better now? What would a 'different kind' of Islamic theocrasy look like?
What changes in Islamic hegemony would we see with 'these' terrorists in charge? A terrorist in charge is a terrorist in charge...dont expect leopards to change thier spots...Allahu Ackbar...

Posted by: duh_swami at March 14, 2007 2:27 PM

I'm not sure that that "democracy" would be much of an improvement. They would still all be muslims!

Posted by: fedupinamerica at March 14, 2007 2:54 PM

BTW, I've quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2007/03/re-iraq-us-at-odds-over-iranian-rebels.html

Posted by: Consul-At-Arms at March 14, 2007 8:54 PM

For those who are not aware and only get their information from Wikipedia, the MEK is the group that brought out papers and exposed Iran's nuclear program, including the centrifuge they intended to hide when the IAEA came calling. Iran has killed close to 150k of the NCLI of which MEK is a key part.

Again, thank Clinton and Maddie half-bright for kissing up to the smiling ayatollah in pure Dhimmi fashion.

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at March 16, 2007 7:54 AM