For the most part, it looks like the international community has been taking a fairly safe tact on this situation. The crisis in Iran is very much an internal affair, and any overt interference from the outside will only hurt whichever party that interference supports. As much of this is a matter of the hearts and minds of Iranians, that can possibly lead to the other party winning out. Moreover, election fraud isn't a certainty as of yet, and if Achmedinejad does end up as the President, then the other countries will have to deal with him. Doing so will be a lot easier if no overt support was given to his opponent.
As is, there is a lot of strain in the system, and the hard line elements in Iran look like they're going to have to make a very difficult choice as to how to respond. There's a decent chance that it can wrap up peacefully - maybe with a recount or even a re-do of the election.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolton
Haven't really been reading up on Iran, but I hope this doesn't end up with a nuke strike. That's the last thing we all need.
|
The only nuclear powers with forces in the region are Pakistan, Russia, Israel and the United States. Of these, Russia and Pakistan have absolutely no intention of using them, and the U.S. has almost no inclination. Only Israel has a slight possibility of using its nukes, and only under the strongest provocation. Even then, it doesn't really have the capability of reaching most Iranian targets, and the U.S. wouldn't let it to so.
Regardless of any rumors and rhetoric to the contrary, Iran doesn't possess nuclear weapons, and there are no indications that it will do so any time soon (being five years or less).
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart
A nuke would probably be the best way to solve the problem. Having a religious regime that is puritanical and senseless adds nothing more to scourge of the earth.
|
Are you actually advocating the killing of tens or hundreds of thousands of people simply because you don't like Iran's government? I hope that you're just joking, because that's just sheer insanity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fipskuul
For what? So that they can try to force Israeli people to leave the region? So that they can nuke anyone they want in the region? So that they can threaten anyone in their region? Sorry. The only reason they want such power is to dictate their terms to other countries in the region. And, that idea is shared by not only the old ones but also the young ones too. I have met many of those so-called reformists studying in US. In essence, they are pretty much similar.
|
Quite simply, all countries desire more power, influence and authority. That's the nature of the beast. There's no need to project desires on another country like that, nor is there any reason to vilify Iran for ambitions that all countries possess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fipskuul
The problem is there are young people on both sides. If those young people trigger the other youth to voice their opinion too, as to create a more radical regime, then it will become a killing each other play. And, in those games, it is usually the side that looks toward the bad side wins, meaning the people supporting the current government. We know from 30 years ago that they are a pretty much capable nation when it comes to killing its own people in batches.
|
Do you have any evidence that any of this is true? It runs counter to just about every credible source that I've read about Iran.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fipskuul
He might be an idiot, but he is halfway there making his country become a nuclear power. And if you ask me he is pretty good with deception skills. He was able to delay any major sanction against his country. A more liberal leader would not have achieved that.
|
None of that is true; which is why there was a strong probability that Achmedinajad would lose the election in the first place.