Current Events in Iran

[bladeofdarkness]

the leadership is already talking about a RECOUNT of the votes
but since its not likely to CHANGE anything since its the votes themselves that are the problem, its not likely to be enough
this would either end violently
or it would die out slowly and painfully
i cant really see it bringing about the real change

[Vexx]

Focusing on Iran's interesting dilemma, Israeli sentiment seems to be simply publicly admitted they prefer "the current idiot" over Mousavi because Mousavi is harder to demonize. Israeli references on preference:
http://israelpolicyforum.ngphost.com...anian-election
http://www.thejewishweek.com/viewArt...ws/Israel.html

That is their only tidbit in this election story which is primarily about fraud and a small ruling elite. I find Iranian "where is my vote?" rallies encouraging because I regret the US 2000 election (also quite likely won through fraud as long, slow legal action and scrutiny reveals) wasn't reacted to in the same way by complacent Americans.

The focus of the thread is that the educated population and middle class of Iran has woken up for a moment. Also the moderate wing of the clerics have coughed and the Ayatollah blinked. Now *his* position is in jeopardy for praising the election too fast. Unfortunately, if the repressive forces are able to snip enough data lines and feel comfortable, I could see this quickly blowing up into a civil war...

[bladeofdarkness]

too bad it wont last for long
ahmadinijad is just a figure head after all
if put under enough pressure, the Ayatollah might sacrifice his support of ahmadinijad in favor of protecting his position
and then this whole thing would have been for nothing (there isnt any REAL difference anyway)
ahmadinijad might get ousted, but the REAL problem remains

[Sazelyt]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

the worst thing the west could do is seen as meddling in Iran. The Irianian military might not get involve in killing its own people but I am pretty they will get involve if the West is caught meddling.

The US cannot afford another iraq. it might seem strange to bladeofdarkness but what is good for Isarel isn't automatically good for the US.

US has been meddling with Iran's internal affairs for a very long time, it will be difficult to create a separation between the two. And, considering what happened in the ex-Soviet countries with the help of a trigger pulled by US, I will find it really really difficult to believe they have got nothing to do with what is going on in Iran right now.

US WH Press Secretary was about scream with joy on TV that he hardly held himself back. That is based on a few seconds impression I had on him when he was talking about Iran.

[xris]

Reminder

Originally Posted by NightWish

General, friendly, reminder: this thread is about the current events in Iran. Some of you need to seriously rein in your propensity to deviate into unrelated rhetoric. Please keep things on-topic so we don't need to restrict your posting for you.

Not so friendly reminder...

If recent posters do not want to receive Infractions (and therefore possible bans), I suggest you start deleting your own posts or at the least edit out all of the off-topic discussion (and I mean all).

If any of it remains when I look at the thread tomorrow then don't be surprised when you are banned

[Zippicus]

Originally Posted by Fipskuul

US has been meddling with Iran's internal affairs for a very long time, it will be difficult to create a separation between the two. And, considering what happened in the ex-Soviet countries with the help of a trigger pulled by US, I will find it really really difficult to believe they have got nothing to do with what is going on in Iran right now.

US WH Press Secretary was about scream with joy on TV that he hardly held himself back. That is based on a few seconds impression I had on him when he was talking about Iran.

Well the cold war era was handled pretty poorly by pretty much everyone. Not to make excuses or anything but all of that happened before most of the people here were even born. As far as any US involvement in the current mess, I seriously doubt it. I just can't see Obama letting anything that potentially incriminating happening on his watch. And you MUST have the press secretary confused with someone else or you watched something totally misrepresented and out of context.

[Irenicus]

I have to agree. Obama doesn't seem to want or need a Bay of Pigs so early in his term. Moreover, it's quite...arrogant...to suggest that American espionage influence is so strong in Iran that it manages to provoke a near-spontaneous mass reaction in that particular country. Plus, mass protests have never really been the US' preferred weapon of choice. Coup d'etats and strongmen are much easier to orchestrate. :-I

Although I would admit that Western "hawks" are either rejoicing right now for their wet dream coming close to reality (a mass protest in Iran with some potential at toppling the regime) or, like bladeofdarkness' presentation of the Israeli view, show some extreme cynicism by arguing that the radical should still win (or, more cleverly, argue that the radical *will* still win, and only slightly imply their own preferences), just so the enemy would still be around.

As for me, I fear for the safety of those who dare to raise their voice, and hope for their success. Iranians deserve better.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

Moreover, it's quite...arrogant...to suggest that American espionage influence is so strong in Iran that it manages to provoke a near-spontaneous mass reaction in that particular country.

It'd be arrogent if he was American, but I believe he's from Turkey. In that case it's more paranoid. The whole idea that the US is some omnipresent villian responsible for all the world's problems is foolish at best. If the US did have the amount of control in Iran needed for such a thing to happen, the whole nuclear issue wouldn't even exist. The US would obviously have enough control to stop Iran's nuclear program if they have the amount of control to get tens maybe hundreds of thousands of people to protest like that. No, this is the Iranian people fed up with they system and wanting reform. Even if the elections were fair, the government still needs to satasify the reform movement.

[monir]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

Even if the elections were fair, the government still needs to satasify the reform movement.

Agreed! That's why I also believe like others who have already pointed out about why outside meddling poses a grave risk. A nation will change if its people desire for such and not the other way around.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

Although I would admit that Western "hawks" are either rejoicing right now for their wet dream coming close to reality (a mass protest in Iran with some potential at toppling the regime) or, like bladeofdarkness' presentation of the Israeli view, show some extreme cynicism by arguing that the radical should still win (or, more cleverly, argue that the radical *will* still win, and only slightly imply their own preferences), just so the enemy would still be around.

its not so much cynicism as realisem
musavi is NOT really that different then ahmadinijad as he seems to be portrayed
the man has played a key role in the creation of iran's nuke progrem as well as chemical weapons
has shown support for the hizballa (funding it to be the spear head against the "little satan")
and has refused to release american hostages during the crisis
he is NOT some nice guy who just wants to bring about world peace and happiness for all
he is part of the same radical system and has been for YEARS (since its very begining)
he may LOOK better and talk nicer, but he is only looking better because he is standing NEXT to ahmadinijad
and you can put the head of sadam hussain onto the body of a cobra snake and it would still compare favorably with ahmadinijad (yeah, i stole it, so what )

so when i say that the radical's will STILL win in the end
i'm not saying it becouse i prefer it
i would MUCH rather the iranian people oust the whole regime altogether and start anew
let them live better healthier and more promising life (X-BOX 360 for all)
happy people are less likely to pick fights with other countries
but when you have a regime that is fandamentally dictatorial, then they would ALWAYS be picking fights becouse its the only way to distract from their own failures
they have already blamed the riots on the west
they already say that obama showing interest in whats happening (like every other human being with access to a news paper) is "the US sticking its nose in iran's private affeirs"
i'm still waiting to hear them blame it on the jewish zionist concepiracy (and you know they will eventually)

[SaintessHeart]

Just in case you guys don't know, Kham (vocal pun unintended, his name is bloody too long to spell) issued a fatwa making it illegal to stockpile nuclear weapons.

I don't think they will keep to their word since fatwas can be reversed (Salem Rushdie is damn sad though, Khom died and the fatwa just remained there).

Originally Posted by Vexx

Focusing on Iran's interesting dilemma, Israeli sentiment seems to be simply publicly admitted they prefer "the current idiot" over Mousavi because Mousavi is harder to demonize. Israeli references on preference:
http://israelpolicyforum.ngphost.com...anian-election
http://www.thejewishweek.com/viewArt...ws/Israel.html

That is their only tidbit in this election story which is primarily about fraud and a small ruling elite. I find Iranian "where is my vote?" rallies encouraging because I regret the US 2000 election (also quite likely won through fraud as long, slow legal action and scrutiny reveals) wasn't reacted to in the same way by complacent Americans.

The focus of the thread is that the educated population and middle class of Iran has woken up for a moment. Also the moderate wing of the clerics have coughed and the Ayatollah blinked. Now *his* position is in jeopardy for praising the election too fast. Unfortunately, if the repressive forces are able to snip enough data lines and feel comfortable, I could see this quickly blowing up into a civil war...

If it is another civil war, I wish US or anyone else would start another Operation Cyclone (in which the CIA shipped Stingers to the Mujahideen to fight the Soviets). All we need is random weapons lying around to make the Earth's onshore oilfields spurt out BLOOD again.

But if it is a civil war, whatever the outcome is, it is going to make Iran more hostile to the world than before. Now that they have nukes, I think it is a bad idea to push for WWIII.

[bladeofdarkness]

when ?
and who ?
are you talking hamenai

and they dont HAVE nukes YET
the goal is that they DONT get them

[SaintessHeart]

Khamieni and Khomieni. Seriously, if they mess this up, their names are going to be synonymous with "stupid" and "noob" in the coming history books of the future, just like how Bush-ism is pretty much synonymous with "bullcrap" now.

It isn't hard to put together a nuke. The difficult part is the quality control, because if you mess up, everyone dies, not just your enemy.

[bladeofdarkness]

by messing this up
do you mean about the upraising
or the nuke progrem
or what
i'm not sure i understand you

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

by messing this up
do you mean about the upraising
or the nuke progrem
or what
i'm not sure i understand you

It is in the same line. I meant the nuke. But you could say that it works for both.

Iran collapsing isn't a good idea. As the world's third largest oil producer, its output can seriously damage the world economy just like the 1970s' Oil Embargo. Given how much we are relying on oil as an alternative to gold (investors STOCKPILE oil because it can sell faster than gold when there is a demand as there is a larger market), it can mean WWIII.

If US invades Iran, it is the end of its superpower status. Trust me on that.

[bladeofdarkness]

putting together a nuke is harder then you make it sound
and they dont want a NUKE
they want an arsenal

and i doubt the US needs to invade iran
they just have to start playing hardball and forcing senction after secnction until the iranian goverment is faced with the choice of giving up its nuke progrem
or starting to eat their own dead
with obama in power, i dont see it happening

[Shadow Kira01]

Obama 'deeply troubled' by Iran violence

No doubt about it..

Spoiler for speculation with a lack of knowledge on the recent issue:

Obama was most likely planning to improve bilateral ties with Iran by going on an apology tour but unfortunately, even if American President Obama is willing to do so, the Iranians will not accept something so trivial. Perhaps, an apology from Obama means an insult to America's national pride but to Iran, it means nothing and don't worth anything either. Instead, the Iranians have solid objectives: 1) to possess nukes and the right to use it, 2) to enhanced their military technology, especially in the fields of missiles as that they have the intention of destroying Israel whether the world likes it or not, and 3) the recent rally of Iranians chanting the words "Death to America!" definitely isn't a dramatic act or a joke. It is most likely that Iran has the intention of destroying the United States as well.

However, it seems that there are quite a number of Iranians who are against this motion and problematic ideals which explains the recent rallies and clashes which result in the death of 7 individuals, as well as many wounded.

Generally, this is a serious problem but there doesn't appear to be a feasible solution to this recent crisis as that any move made by the United States will have a large disadvantageous ring to it. Currently, the majority of Iranians seek to have war and want to glorify it. Forcing an one-sided peace ideal onto them cannot be done without doing it by gunpoint but Americans certainly wouldn't want to be involved in something like that. Or perhaps to say, half of America would definitely not do anything unless Iran actually attacks which shouldn't be anytime soon as that Iran needs to be united first.

For that matter, economic sanctions wouldn't fare well. Diplomatic pressure won't work at all as that not every veto-wielder is supportive of the one-sided ideal. Military action is definitely out of the question. And thus, the best solution would be to ignore the current situation in Iran while keeping a close eye to the situation, while accepting that no action is the best action.

As of now, the Iranian government are trying to maintain a good image in the world so that the world will see Israel and the United States as the bad guys if they pull something off as a reaction to the recent spate of violent rallies. However, it also appears that the Iranian government do not have full control over its citizens and that if their citizens start attacking random non-Iranians, it would only be considered as an unlucky tragedy and nothing more.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

they have already blamed the riots on the west
they already say that obama showing interest in whats happening (like every other human being with access to a news paper) is "the US sticking its nose in iran's private affeirs"
i'm still waiting to hear them blame it on the jewish zionist concepiracy (and you know they will eventually)

did i fucking call it or what

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...733635,00.html

Spoiler for Iran says thwarted election day bomb plot:

Iran's Intelligence Ministry said on Thursday it had uncovered a foreign-linked terrorist plot to plant bombs in mosques and other crowded places in Tehran during the country's June 12 presidential election.

State broadcaster IRIB quoted a ministry statement as saying several terrorist groups had been discovered, adding they were linked to Iran's foreign enemies, including Israel.

[LeoXiao]

and they dont HAVE nukes YET
the goal is that they DONT get them

Realistically, if they want nukes, who can stop them? You want the UN to put in sanctions? Good luck getting Russia and China to agree. You want Israel to bomb them like with Iraq? Great, you just gave Iran a pretext to demonize Israel. You want NATO to take a "harsh" stance on the issue? By looking at North Korea, what good is that going to do?

[bladeofdarkness]

actually its a mix of one and two
get china and russia to agree to the senctions (basiclly give them a better offer then the iranians do)
and destroy or disable whatever existing installations they DO have in place
NATO isnt likely to do much i agree
but the other two options are valid

and demonizing israel is what the DO
with or without an excuse
and world public opinion buys into it regardless to whether or not its true
might as well get blamed for what you actually DID (and rob them of their nuke producing ability) then get blamed for stuff ANYWAY and allow them to get nukes
judging historiclly, people will condamn you today and thank you tomorrow
and that goes for the entire region (most of the arab states are also pissing themselves at the idea of an atomic iran