Will those, like Sen. John McCain, who continue to compare Iran's upheaval to the 1989 uprisings in Eastern Europe, please read some history.
There is no comparison between the two cases. Eastern European dissidents were wholly and unabashedly pro-American, and called for US support. And they were united among themselves in wanting to throw off the domination of their country by an outside power - the Soviet Union.
Iranian opposition leaders ARE NOT calling for US support, because they know it could be fatal, and would not help them in their efforts. Most of them are nationalists who would reject any Western interference. The leaders of the opposition are part of the governing elite who want change, not revolution.
Indeed, the upheaval in Iran reflects an internal power struggle and the key opposition leaders seek reform of the system, not its overthrow. Opposition leaders would not want an Obama endorsement because they know it would give the regime the excuse to brand them as CIA agents and charge them with treason.
The United States has a long, troubled history with Iran in which we were often seen as the outside imperialist power. We overthrew an elected Iranian overnment in 1953 and have called for regime change in recent years. The last thing opposition leaders want or need is a similar call now. Iran is deeply divided, with a substantial segment of the country still supporting the regime; most Iranians do not want a civil war or a bloody revolution, but are just hoping for a more open system.
So what is it that Sen. McCain, and others braying for an Obama endorsement of the Iranian opposition, think we can offer the Iranian rebels? A quick ticket to jail or execution?