Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49

Thread: Iran...

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Omnipresence
    Posts
    2,025


    Default

    Good to see things staying the same. Mass protests, violent repression etc has been going on for months in Georgia (the country). This goes mostly unreported, apart for a little article buried somewhere. But that's an ally and a country where a bunch of the developed world has actual influence and it's also a country to which democracy has already been spread, so that needs to be ignored.

    Anyway on to the official enemy: Iran. The election results were obviously fake. But to say that Moussavi had won, and that he deserves to be in "power", is probably as much of a coup d'état. The most likely scenario is that Ahmadinejad didn't have enough votes for an outright win (as most pre election info indicated) and Khamenei and his buddies wanted to avoid a runoff between Ahmadinejad and Moussavi which could more or less split the country more. Typical supporters of Ahmadinejad are the working class, poor (like the Basijis) because he did do some redistribution downwards while natural resource prices were high (sometimes called bribing by people who like to see it go upwards) and Moussavi getting the young, middle class, more secular (in Iranian standards) urban ones. They obviously sucked at faking the results though. Like most authocratic regimes they suck at propaganda, atleast compared to your average liberal democracy.

    Moussavi would seem like a nice evolution within Iran, although far from a revolution. It's like choosing between Colin Powell and John Bolton under the Bush regime. One is a nice figurehead, while the other is pretty much a dick. Still two assholes and figureheads though. The advantage of Ahmadinejad is that he's hard to ignore, while with Moussavi we can probably pretend everything is fine within Iran. Just like in Georgia.
    Last edited by Jesus; 06-17-2009 at 02:46 AM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    4,424


    Default

    Stalin once said that it's not who they vote for, but who counts the votes is what matters most.

    President "I'm in a dinna jacket" is scum. Period. He probably didn't win the elections and the whole thing is a charade. Serves them right for letting a regime like that sit on them for 30 years. It's a self rewarding/punishing system, and I love to see Iran collapsing. This is what happens when you let religious hustlers take over. Learn and move on.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,140


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Little_Miss_1565 View Post
    Rachel Maddow is on CNBC right now discussing that Obama coming out in support of Moussavi would backfire hugely and only serve to prop up Ahmadinejad. Wise words. I saw something on Twitter saying Marjane Satrapi had documentation from the election council in Iran noting that Ahmadinejad only got 8% of the vote or something, and that this is more like a coup d'etat than election fraud.

    8% ??? and he ended up with 63 ?! Yes, if this is true, it is definitely more than fraud
    ___________________________________________

    All the Beautiful Things you do

    Respect my authoritah !

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,555


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus View Post
    Good to see things staying the same. Mass protests, violent repression etc has been going on for months in Georgia (the country). This goes mostly unreported, apart for a little article buried somewhere. But that's an ally and a country where a bunch of the developed world has actual influence and it's also a country to which democracy has already been spread, so that needs to be ignored.

    Anyway on to the official enemy: Iran. The election results were obviously fake. But to say that Moussavi had won, and that he deserves to be in "power", is probably as much of a coup d'état. The most likely scenario is that Ahmadinejad didn't have enough votes for an outright win (as most pre election info indicated) and Khamenei and his buddies wanted to avoid a runoff between Ahmadinejad and Moussavi which could more or less split the country more. Typical supporters of Ahmadinejad are the working class, poor (like the Basijis) because he did do some redistribution downwards while natural resource prices were high (sometimes called bribing by people who like to see it go upwards) and Moussavi getting the young, middle class, more secular (in Iranian standards) urban ones. They obviously sucked at faking the results though. Like most authocratic regimes they suck at propaganda, atleast compared to your average liberal democracy.

    Moussavi would seem like a nice evolution within Iran, although far from a revolution. It's like choosing between Colin Powell and John Bolton under the Bush regime. One is a nice figurehead, while the other is pretty much a dick. Still two assholes and figureheads though. The advantage of Ahmadinejad is that he's hard to ignore, while with Moussavi we can probably pretend everything is fine within Iran. Just like in Georgia.
    This is probably true, though Mousavi is likely to win in a runoff.
    That being said yeah its not like he's that much of an improvement, but luckily at this point, it seems that people are trying to move on even further than that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oxygene View Post
    Stalin once said that it's not who they vote for, but who counts the votes is what matters most.

    President "I'm in a dinna jacket" is scum. Period. He probably didn't win the elections and the whole thing is a charade. Serves them right for letting a regime like that sit on them for 30 years. It's a self rewarding/punishing system, and I love to see Iran collapsing. This is what happens when you let religious hustlers take over. Learn and move on.
    Exactly. Now, the regime in charge gained power because of the Iran Iraq war, and stupid foreign influence made people take the personal abuse to at least keep sovereignty or something ... that being said yes I'd like to see this turn into a collapse so the whole government changes (though hopefully not through the loss of excessive number of lives)

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,008


    Default

    Personally, I'm pretty convinced something funny happened. But I'm not fully convinced that there was an outright theft of the election. It's obviously telling that the number of protesters against the election is so large; if the opposition truly got beat 2-1 there should not be such a groundswell of unrest. However, it is very difficult to discern truth from fallacy in what we hear coming out of Iran. Just as we must be vigilant in discerning the veracity of the claims the state makes, we must also do likewise with information from the public. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.
    omg sigged fuck you

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Omnipresence
    Posts
    2,025


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hshduppsnt View Post
    This is probably true, though Mousavi is likely to win in a runoff.
    That being said yeah its not like he's that much of an improvement, but luckily at this point, it seems that people are trying to move on even further than that.
    Hmm back then maybe Mousavi would have won, but now he'd definitely win though. Which makes the fake results all the more strange though, they should have stuk with more realistic fake results... if that makes sense.

    But if the revolution succeeds, it'll be interesting to see how US policy is gonna change. Given that's he still is basically a figurehead of the regime and he'll most likely just continue stuff like their nuclear policy. Are they gonna lift the sanctions? Also since Iran is one of the 3 biggest havens for refugees of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the other two being Syria and Pakistan (funny thing how all 3 are usually considered terrorist harboring countries too, there might be a connection...). Are they gonna transfer money to deal with the refugees, because they are a burden on the Iranian economy. Because up until now this was mostly unmentionable since Iran is to be considered a source for unstability in the region, taking in over a million refugees doesn't quite fit that frame.
    If policy towards Iran doesn't change enough, then there is a big change that things will turn more autocratic afterwards like they did after Khatami.
    Last edited by Jesus; 06-18-2009 at 02:22 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    148


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oxygene View Post
    Stalin once said that it's not who they vote for, but who counts the votes is what matters most.

    President "I'm in a dinna jacket" is scum. Period. He probably didn't win the elections and the whole thing is a charade. Serves them right for letting a regime like that sit on them for 30 years. It's a self rewarding/punishing system, and I love to see Iran collapsing. This is what happens when you let religious hustlers take over. Learn and move on.
    Rhetoric like this damages the discourse on this issue and contributes to the ignorance of the American public on foreign policy issues. First of all, while Ahmedinijad is hardly a saint, it's ver interesting that prolific human right violators like Burma or Saudi Arabia or Israel get a free pass, depending on economic/political significance, this has very little to do with morality. Also whats' commonly misunderstood is the Iraqi president is more like the Queen of england, he has a little more of a direct role, but he's not running the show, he has higher authorities to answer to, and espite his bellicose rhetoric which is just hot air, the Iranian government has been very shrewd in their foreign policy. I'll remind you that Iran attempted at least three times to engage the Bush administration and offered considerable concessions, including halting all enrichment of uranium, of course they were talking to the wrong administration. Also Iran was the most vocal supporter of the FISSBAN treaty on nuclear proliferation which received virtually unanimous support, 179 in favor, to two against, the United States and Palau, which is smaller than Hawaii.

    Now, we have to address the more basic question of why the Iranian government and the relationship with the US is the way that it is. this comes down to the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh. This is the singularly most defining moment in US-Iranian history, the biggest presence in Iranian's minds with regards to the US. Sadly, most Americans know little or nothing about this event. During the cold war the US employed aggressive clandestine operations under the pretense of fighting communism. This involved all sorts of morally dubious activities, protecting Nazi war criminals, arming terrorist groups, and selling weapons to dictatorships. The CIA was also involved in overthrowing a number of democratically elected governments, such as in Guatemala, Zaire, Chile, and Iran. (And later Nicaragua, Haiti, etc.) Iran WAS a pro-western democracy. Unfortunately for him,. Mossadegh tried to nationalize petroleum reserves which were monopolized by foreign interests who were basically draining the country's national resources and pocketing the cash, much like in Guatemala with United Fruit. This was totally unacceptable. (Mossadegh was executed four days later.) So the CIA and the British government largely at the behest of British Petroleum engineered a coup, replacing the democracy with an autocratic system under the Shah. To maintain order the CIA helped to create the feared SAVAK secret police force to terrorize the population into obediance, and British Petroleum went on as usual. So when you're bemoaning the absence of moderate leadership in Iran, be mindful that this is because we tortured and killed all of them. Thus, bearing some measure of responsibility.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Northwest United States
    Posts
    4,069


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NGNM85 View Post
    Rhetoric like this damages the discourse on this issue and contributes to the ignorance of the American public on foreign policy issues.
    Oxygene isn't American.
    "There are no fools more bothersome than those with wit"

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    148


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IamSam View Post
    Oxygene isn't American.
    Whoops. Oh well, that's really secondary, anyhow.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    4,424


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NGNM85 View Post
    Whoops. Oh well, that's really secondary, anyhow.
    Yeah I'm actually in the range of those nukes...

    But we have a nice saying where I am from "stop beating the poison ivy bush with my dick"

    In other words, all the shit you've just said is valid from a "war on Iraq supporter" perspective. I have no issue with burma, with israel with saudi arabia, because they are no threat to my safety. They have no universal beef with the western world. Do I support their shitty actions? No. Iran however directly affects the nazi right wing in my country by harboring them supporting them by giving them a soap box for them to shout out their holocaust denial right wing mindless propaganda, putting them in the news and shit. And I won't even bother going into any detail.

    It's really fucking easy to judge something from a velvet chair when it doesn't hit home. Some can't afford that luxury.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •