The visual possibility of seeing the historical person (as opposed to the eternal Qur'anic man) on screen is arguably the single most important event allowing Iranians access to modernity.
We've said to the Iranians all along. . . we still remain open to diplomacy. But it's been very clear that the Iranians don't want to engage with us.
Saddam Hussein had nerve gas and used it against his own people, he had used chemical weapons against the Iranians and he almost had a nuclear bomb in 1981 and in 1991. And he had been caught with anthrax in 1995 by the UN inspections after denying that he had it.
There's no embassy for the United States in Iran. So, Iranians process those in other countries.
The legitimacy of the leadership depends on what that country thinks of its leaders. When we lay off, more and more Iranians tend to be critical of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The more abusive we are and the more pressure we put on them, the more nationalism fuses with fundamentalism in Iran.
In the United States, Iran is nothing but a whipping-boy. Few Americans have any real use for Iran. Most of us, what we know and remember about Iran are things like the hostage crisis in 1980, or they think about the Iranian attacks in Lebanon, or on the Khobar Towers. So you don't get a whole lot of political mileage in the United States by going out and advocating better relations with the Iranians.
The Iranians may simply try to run out the clock.
The Obama administration announced a deal with Iran that would prevent the Iranians from making a nuclear weapon. In exchange, we're giving the Iranians Netflix.
The Kurdish minority has been cozying up to the Iranians and given the traditional hatred between the Iranians and the Iraqis, maybe Saddam Hussein sees this as a threat to his dominance of the Kurdish area north of the 36th Parallel.
To Arab Sunni Islamists, Iranians are gabrs (Zoroastrians) while Shi'ites, including Arab ones, are rafidis (heretics) who must be “re-converted” or put to death.
It's not for nothing that the Iranians are known as rug merchants. They are.
I don't see that there is a credible threat for American action - the rhetoric of the U. S. President is too vague, very amorphous. I don't see that Obama's words will be translated into more tangible intentions and therefore this is probably why the Iranians don't take it seriously. They speak out against it and they dismiss it.
The problem is, we've had three generations of Iranians who have come to really hate the United States. The Persians used to be a pretty strong - my on problem with people who say don't talk to him.
The reason why no one had spoken to [Iranians] for the last years is because they sponsored Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinians, Al Qaeda, 911. The last time anyone spoke to the Iranians was when Ronald Reagan said, 'I've just been elected and you better let our hostages go or you guys are absolutely screwed'.
The more patient we are, the closer the Iranians get to a nuclear weapon.
The Iranians are very skilled terrorist, and we'd have to expect that they'd hit at us as hard as they could. Especially in Iraq, where they have a great deal of power and influence.
Too much under the thumb of the Iranians.
There is nothing to encourage. The Iranians should just stay away from us.
In terms of how Iranians see the U. S. government, that's a difficult question. But in terms of how Iranians see Americans, there is a very good mutual belief that they have so much in common with American people and they feel totally related to them. In terms of government, definitely there are some hardcore hardliners who hate the U. S. government, but at the same time, there are some more moderate.
Iranians defend and present their Islamic and Iranian identity to other people worldwide.