2009-06-16, 07:51 | Link #22 |
Um-Shmum
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 39
|
the riots are IN iran
the rioters are iranian people themselves i kinda doubt they would use nukes (which they dont yet have) against people in THEIR OWN COUNTRY let me give you the short version there was an election the guy who won seems to be the guy who most of the people DIDNT vote for there is evidence that the goverment faked the results of the election hence, the people riot good for them (if their votes have been stolen, they are right to be pissed about it)
__________________
|
2009-06-16, 07:52 | Link #23 | |
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Their persecution of the Baha'i faith and among others, is purely idiotic. If they ran the country a little more like Malaysia or Indonesia, it wouldn't be that bad. Condemning other ideologies and faith hardcore is ridiculous.
__________________
|
|
2009-06-16, 08:41 | Link #24 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 38
|
On Iran, many people forget that this is a young nation. If I'm not mistaken, more than 50% of the population are younger than 30, i.e. they've never known Iran before the revolution of 1979. However, many of them are fed up with the status quo that ol' Ahmad and the clerics are upholding. Given a chance, they are probably more interested in stuff other than religious prosecution.
Iran wants to be recognised as a power in the Middle East. It's one of the very few Shiite states, and Sunni states have a deep distrust of Iran. Its non-oil economy is suffering, and yeah, things have reached a tipping point. In history, you don't piss off young people, especially if there're lots of them. Do that, and things will hit the fan.
__________________
Last edited by yezhanquan; 2009-06-16 at 09:00. |
2009-06-16, 10:14 | Link #25 | ||
Μ ε r c ü r υ
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
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.
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2009-06-16, 13:11 | Link #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
"Iran's President Mahmud Ahmadinejad controls Iran through a kleptocracy of
Central African proportions, dissipating the country's oil windfall into payoffs to an "entire class of hangers-on of the Islamic revolution"," Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JL16Ak02.html Ahmadinejad & his crew control the money and they don't wanna let go. That has a lot to do with what's happening in Iran right now. Also, more from Michael Totten: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/bl...or_name=totten Last edited by AnimeFan188; 2009-06-16 at 13:49. |
2009-06-16, 14:52 | Link #27 | ||
思想工作
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vereinigte Staaten
Age: 31
|
Israel wants Ahmadinedjad to remain in power so that they can continue to make use of the fact that he's an idiot, particularly with his speech (israel off the map). If there were an outwardly more "normal" (what politicians are normal, really?) guy, it would be harder to maneuver.
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2009-06-16, 15:59 | Link #29 | ||
Μ ε r c ü r υ
Join Date: Jun 2004
|
Quote:
Quote:
And I don't understand what US thinks either. They should be more scared of a more democratic nation there compared to a more oppressive one. Considering the lessons from the past, the next democratic one will not be controlled by US, which may become a bigger threat to them (as the economical threats are bound to have bigger impact on people's lives), especially if they can increase their influence in the region using their newly formed structure. |
||
2009-06-16, 19:14 | Link #30 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
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:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
None of that is true; which is why there was a strong probability that Achmedinajad would lose the election in the first place.
__________________
|
||||
2009-06-16, 21:23 | Link #31 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 38
|
Iran is the heir of the Persian Empire. They are not Arabs, and thus are mistrusted by the Arab states. Given this potential, to deny them a sphere of influence is unwise, to say the least.
On Israel, I can only say that the clock is ticking. The demographic shifts on the ground and the expansion of the settlements will only inflame sentiments, and give the enemies of Israel more ammunition to support their hate speeches.
__________________
|
2009-06-16, 21:47 | Link #32 | |
Gregory House
IT Support
|
Quote:
Democracy is broken--not necessarily by design, but definitely by implementation. Please let's start off with this fact or we'll get nowhere in any sort of discussion. And, finally, do you really wish for a war? Do you really wish for thousands to die completely unjustifiedly?
__________________
|
|
2009-06-16, 22:12 | Link #33 | |
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
Quote:
This is something the Iranian people will have to solve for themselves. No one is immune to change whether we want it or not.
__________________
|
|
2009-06-16, 22:29 | Link #34 |
Senior Member
|
Here is John Green's "5 reasons to doubt the results of the election" video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mqf00InV9E I'm not going to bother to state any personal opinions because I frankly don't know much about it.
__________________
|
2009-06-16, 22:33 | Link #35 | |
Banned
Join Date: May 2006
Age: 39
|
Quote:
As to your last question. The post of his you are quoting shows no such desire. I understand that painting the other guy as a warmonger is a common tactic. |
|
2009-06-16, 22:44 | Link #36 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 38
|
All presidential candidates have to be approved by the Supreme Council. I thought this is common knowledge?
The clerics have misruled for 30 years, and it seems time to settle this issue.
__________________
|
2009-06-16, 23:28 | Link #37 | |
Gregory House
IT Support
|
Quote:
I agree on the idea that the people with true power would be dominating the country anyways (see my "Democracy is broken" statement). What I don't agree is on the idea that the people in power in Iran are somehow essentially different from the people in power in, say, the US or Israel. Do you really think that if the US wanted to bomb Iran it would make any difference who the face of the state is?
__________________
|
|
2009-06-17, 03:47 | Link #38 | ||
Um-Shmum
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 39
|
Quote:
the guy who gets elected is only a FACE he doesnt actually RUN the country, he just FOLLOWS ORDERS from the people who DO so who ever gets ELECTED doesnt make any REAL difference and wont change the people who actually ARE in power the people who actually DO run the country CANT be replaced by elections and hence, better to have a guy who doesnt give anyone any illusions about the fact that the regime is a crazy dangerus fundamentalist regime musavi looks like a reasonable man who might make a good LEADER the problem is that he ISNT running to be elected as leader he is running to be elected as FIGURE HEAD a mouth piece for the ayatolla's this isnt a "Democracy is broken" situation like you make it sound this isnt a Democracy at all and you are seeing it now in full view with whats going on there Quote:
they can be REPLACED not just the head guy, but the entire compasition of the parlament or presidency that is NOT the case in iran ahmadinijad might go, but he isnt the one in power the ones in power are the ones breaking the heads of protestors and blocking access to the media and internet so people cant tell the outside world whats going on your also fundamentaly wrong about the idea that the people in power in iran are the same as the other two cases you named the people in control in iran are DICTATORS who answer to NO ONE becouse they have convinced the people (and to some degree, themselves) that they speak for GOD (and hence, opposing them is like opposing god) show me an american or israeli leader who would dare to say something like that that they are in power because GOD put them in power
__________________
Last edited by bladeofdarkness; 2009-06-17 at 04:10. |
||
2009-06-17, 05:13 | Link #39 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
"The book also shows that in the lead-up to announcing his candidacy for the presidency, Bush told a Texan evangelist that he had had a premonition of some form of national disaster happening. Bush said to James Robinson: 'I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen... I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.' " Bold mine. Though you seem to be missing something on this Iran issue. The one of the reasons the ayatollahs didn't want Mousavi to win is because they're concerned that he wouldn't listen to them. This is a guy who has refused to run for political office for 20 years, all of a sudden changing his mind and wanting to run. He has a fair degree of public support as well. If he came out and ran for office again after all this time, clearly he has a reason. He's even openly stated he wanted political reforms such as allowing privately owned television stations and presidential control of police. That supporting privately owned TV stations alone is enough to get them to not want this guy as president.
__________________
|
|
|
|