So Much For Reform In Iran

So Much For Reform In Iran (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

ThatDamnedPanda -> So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 11:04:17 AM)
Well, that was fun while it lasted - you know, the illusion that the will of the Iranian people might actually compel their government to move toward a more moderate centrist position. quote: (CBS/AP) Supporters of the main election challenger to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clashed with police and set up barricades of burning tires Saturday as authorities declared the hard-line president was re-elected in a landslide. Opponents responded with the most serious unrest in the capital in a decade and charges that the result was the work of a "dictatorship." Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, closed the door on any chance he could use his limitless powers to intervene in the disputes from Friday's election. In a message on state TV, he urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad, calling the result a "divine assessment." But Ahmadinejad's main challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi, has rejected the result as rigged and urged his supporters to resist a government of "lies and dictatorship." Amateur video distributed on the Internet on Saturday showed a large group of supporters of Iran's main opposition candidate marching through downtown Tehran, near his campaign offices, before gathering together. The demonstrators chanted slogans condemning the results of disputed presidential elections that gave 62.6 percent of the vote to the incumbent Ahmadinejad. Iranian authorities said that opposition candidate Mousavi only took 33.75 percent of the vote in a contest that was widely perceived to be much closer than the official results. Iranian Election Fraud So. Where do we go from here? Does this mean anything in regards to Western relations with Iran? Would it have truly made any substantive difference had a moderate president been elected? Thought, reactions, opinions; informed or otherwise?

Politesub53 -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 11:37:41 AM)
Whoever had won, the Ayatollah still holds the real power. Mousavi is claiming the vote was rigged, and that maybe so. That said, there was a sizeable proportion of the people that wanted change. Incidentally, the Iranians living in the US, were able to vote, thats some 400,000 voters. I suspect the majority of them voted for Mousavi, he didnt actually oversea much change last time he had power, but his view of world issues seems to be changing. The intellectuals in Iran see the need for change and dialogue with the west. Lets not forget it was people power that got rid of the Shah, so the Ayatollah will be very aware of the current public opinion.

TheHeretic -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 11:46:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda So. Where do we go from here? Does this mean anything in regards to Western relations with Iran? Would it have truly made any substantive difference had a moderate president been elected? Thought, reactions, opinions; informed or otherwise? Young people staging violent protests in Iran??? Who has ever heard of such a thing? I'm inclined to believe the official numbers are accurate, anyway. We deal with the gov't they have, not the one we'd prefer, and we keep our noses entirely clear of their internal situation.

DarkSteven -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 3:09:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic We deal with the gov't they have, not the one we'd prefer, and we keep our noses entirely clear of their internal situation. It's not that simple. Obama was planning to thaw relations with Iran somewhat, He's still like to do that, but he can't do it now without granting the government legitimacy. He's not got a clear path forward now.

LadyEllen -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 4:01:13 PM)
its important within Iran that any rapprochement with the west can be shown to be on Iranian terms. Ali Khameini may be a saint or a sinner, but whichever it is, he's no fool. E

TheHeretic -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 4:47:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven he can't do it now without granting the government legitimacy. I don't understand what you mean by this at all, Steve. The mullahs, and their cherry-picked elected officials have been the legitimate government in Iran for 30-ish years. We don't have normal diplomatic relations of course (something about them committing an act of war when they seized our embassy), but I don't think we have ever tried denying they existed. The signed Bible Reagan sent them is even a nice souvenir of our acknowledgement Were you perhaps suggesting that Pres. Obama kind of put his foot in his mouth with his comments about holocaust deniers, when I'm-a-nut-job will be who he has to deal with? He likes apologizing on behalf of the country. It shouldn't be any problem at all for him to apologize for his own statements, right?

Politesub53 -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 4:54:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic We don't have normal diplomatic relations of course (something about them committing an act of war when they seized our embassy), To be honest, they probably consider the west started things by over throwing their government in the 1950s. I know that doesnt fit with your line of thinking, but still.

TheHeretic -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/13/2009 5:50:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 To be honest, they probably consider the west started things by over throwing their government in the 1950s. I know that doesnt fit with your line of thinking, but still. No. Understanding that they had plenty of reason to be pissed at us fits just fine. All the more reason for this administration to offer no opinions at all. I'm confident that President Obama has all the skills to say nothing, in a very eloquent way, on the subject. If we actually want to get anywhere with Iran, we need to stay way back from even the perception of fucking with their politics. I said that to begin with.

TheHeretic -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 9:30:06 AM)
Updated news story here And in the subject of getting the foot into the mouth, and sticking our nose where it won't be helpful, here is what the story says about the Vice-President: Vice President Joe Biden said Sunday he has doubts about whether the election was free and fair, as Ahmadinejad claims. He said the U.S. and other countries need more time to analyze the results before making a better judgment about the vote.

Musicmystery -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 9:36:40 AM)
Alas, we have no credibility at all, though, since we overthrew the last democracy and installed the Shah. For some reason, Iranians don't trust us. [and no, before y'all either/or people get all righteous, I don't think this means we should "coddle" them or tolerate their actions because they're "misunderstood."]

MarsBonfire -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 10:36:06 AM)
I think we should just pity them. After all, we have only just gotten out of a similar situation ourselves: the rustic countryside dwellers, prone to believeing propaganda, voting in an extremist, unsophisticated boob, who is ultimately controlled by the extremist elements of his own government. I wonder if Iran had any "Which candidate would you rather have a beer with" type polls?

Musicmystery -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 10:38:54 AM)
quote: I wonder if Iran had any "Which candidate would you rather have a beer with" type polls? Alas, Islam does not allow drinking alcohol... [;)]

kdsub -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 10:44:38 AM)
It is important I think that Obama keeps an open and fair policy towards Iran despite the government in power or how they maintain that power. There are few countries in this world outside of N. Korea that can totally control the news from the outside world. I believe the people of Iran will eventually realize their problems lie within rather than without. Some years ago China’s youth rebelled against the inner oppression but our government responded with aggression towards China rather than providing support by example. Now the youth of China don’t even know what happened at Tiananmen Square nor would they care. We don’t want to make the same mistakes with Iran. BUT time is running out on nuclear weapons…like it or not we must keep the pressure up there…but be sure the Iranian people understand it is the weapon and not the people we are against. Butch

Musicmystery -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 10:47:59 AM)
While I agree we must work to prevent Iran becoming a nuclear power....we won't realistically be able to do so. They will in time achieve this, one way or another. It's just not that hard for a determined government.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 11:38:51 AM)
This though is what the International community needs to seriously examine. Why is it not that difficult? If the UN agrees that this technology needs to be limited and controlled, what needs to be changed to do so? Also, is it considered a direct threat to it's neighbors that a country delcares are enemies, if that country develops nuclear weapons? quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery While I agree we must work to prevent Iran becoming a nuclear power....we won't realistically be able to do so. They will in time achieve this, one way or another. It's just not that hard for a determined government.

Musicmystery -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 1:03:42 PM)
Hi Orion, Of course. So what's the magic answer? Until someone answers that, it remains a question of when. Trust me, if I think of a solution, I'll contact the White House immediately. Live well, Tim

OrionTheWolf -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 2:45:44 PM)
Hi Tim, The same answer to the question "What ultimately establishes rights?", and the answer would be force. The type of force would depend upon the situation. For North Korea, the interdiction mentioned in the latest UN resolution is a good start. It needs to have teeth though. In the end that force may be miltarily applied, but that is the last option in conflict resolution. If/when it is done it needs to have the backing of the UN, or led by one of the neighboring countries that are in immediate threat from N. Korea. Orion quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Hi Orion, Of course. So what's the magic answer? Until someone answers that, it remains a question of when. Trust me, if I think of a solution, I'll contact the White House immediately. Live well, Tim

rulemylife -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 3:16:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf The same answer to the question "What ultimately establishes rights?", and the answer would be force. The type of force would depend upon the situation. For North Korea, the interdiction mentioned in the latest UN resolution is a good start. It needs to have teeth though. In the end that force may be miltarily applied, but that is the last option in conflict resolution. If/when it is done it needs to have the backing of the UN, or led by one of the neighboring countries that are in immediate threat from N. Korea. Force ultimately establishes rights? Am I misinterpreting your meaning or are you saying "might makes right"?

OrionTheWolf -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 3:29:32 PM)
Might has always established right. Then when someone else feels it is wrong, they use force to establish their right. He who is strongest will have the most rights. If you are wealthy in a capitalist nation, then you will have more rights than someone who is poor. If it is a communist nation, then the person with the most political clout. Does this make it morally right or wrong? That would depend upon which side of the issue you are on. quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf The same answer to the question "What ultimately establishes rights?", and the answer would be force. The type of force would depend upon the situation. For North Korea, the interdiction mentioned in the latest UN resolution is a good start. It needs to have teeth though. In the end that force may be miltarily applied, but that is the last option in conflict resolution. If/when it is done it needs to have the backing of the UN, or led by one of the neighboring countries that are in immediate threat from N. Korea. Force ultimately establishes rights? Am I misinterpreting your meaning or are you saying "might makes right"?

viewingthesite11 -> RE: So Much For Reform In Iran (6/14/2009 4:04:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf Might has always established right. Then when someone else feels it is wrong, they use force to establish their right. He who is strongest will have the most rights. If you are wealthy in a capitalist nation, then you will have more rights than someone who is poor. If it is a communist nation, then the person with the most political clout. Does this make it morally right or wrong? That would depend upon which side of the issue you are on. Did you read the sun tzu Orion? That was by far the smartest political statement I have ever read on this site. There is someone on this planet that understand politics for what it is. [:)]

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.0703125