> I'm afraid that most US leftists won't even study what's happening in
> and to Iran in time, though they ought to be studying it and
> clarifying it to the general public. They must do so objectively,
> without defending the indefensible (e.g., flirtations with Holocaust
> revisionism).
The whole point of discussion lists like this is for people to share information. That way not everyone has to study everything at once. So if you're interested in Iran and you want to make a reasoned case, based on careful study of what's going on there, that US leftists ought to "support" Ahmedinejad, you should make it here (or on MRZine, and post it here). I know I'll certainly read it with a lot of interest.
But I'm not really clear on your position. The idea of invading Iran is basically off the table, even on the right. The idea of bombing Iran is already hugely unpopular, even on mild liberal blogs. And when sanctions are discussed, even the centrist-liberal think tank types emphasize that they should be targeted at the leadership, not at making life difficult for the population (based on fear of pushing Iranian public opinion toward even greater nationalism.) You seem to be going further, saying we should actively "support" the Ahmedinejad government against, say, Rafsanjani or Khatami. To me that conjures up images of Global Exchange reality tours to Iran and so on, which strike me as wildly far-fetched for a lot of reasons, mostly political. But if you have information that supports that kind of position, put it forward - I'd certainly be interested. It would be more persuasive than ex catheda hectoring about how we're all missing the obvious.
Seth