Iranian perception of the satellite shootdown

Wednesday's successful shootdown of the rogue satellite provoked an interesting reaction by the Iranian press. The most viewed article on the site, the overall impression is of a deceptive Pentagon that underestimates the intelligence of the world. The article reads into the motives of the Pentagon, plainly stating:

The operation to shoot down the orbiting spacecraft was clearly designed to send a message to both Russia and China, America’s two major competitors in the race for military dominance in space.

Furthermore, the article criticizes the Pentagon's fear of leaking hydrazine from the satellite in light of its previous decision to use Agent Orange in Vietnam.
Though it would be easy to write off the comparison as ludicrous, this illustrates a peculiar aspect of Iranian-American relations. To Iran, a country of long history and memory, the actions of a government taken within 50 years constitute a continuation of policy, though no American would say that the presidencies of Johnson and Bush 43 are anywhere near so linked.
The article ends ominously:

...once you start shooting down satellites in space, for whatever reason, other countries are sure to follow, and before long, there will be mayhem and havoc in the heavens (as well as on Earth)!

This doomsday approach to the militarization of space aligns Iran more closely with Russia and China, who recently proposed a treaty to prohibit the deployment of weapons in space.

The coverage of the event in the Washington Post is a little more cautious. Noted is the relationship between the satellite take-down and the Russian/Chinese treaty, as well as the potential diplomatic strain. The article's conclusion, however, is ultimately more cynical than its Iranian counterpart. The article quotes proliferation experts as saying that the militarization of space is inevitable, largely because any tool for space defense can be turned around on the offense, as with the Aegis system (or the system successfully tested by the Chinese last year).
And of course, as it is election season (when isn't it?) the journalist inserted a quick tie to the primary candidates:

In a survey of presidential candidates by Washington's Council for a Livable World, Sen. Barack Obama backed a space code of conduct. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said she would constrain space weaponization "as much as possible." Republican candidates did not respond.

The political nod is sandwiched in between expert opinions. We discussed in class today the startling lack of media coverage of candidates' foreign policy. The little soundbites in this article give a little foreign policy snack to anyone interested in the issue, and ultimately, the issue probably isn't important enough for any fu