Iranian Elections [Archive] - Page 2

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-21-2009, 13:47

It makes a huge difference to the Iranian people, who are the ones with the largest stake in all this. Any prospective government that may be set up after this would have to remember that they owe their postition to the people and the people have shown a willingness to assert their right.

Just like the Islamic Revolution, you mean?

Currently Iran is Constitutionally a Democratic Republic with theological safeguards to prevent a repeat of the oppressive and forced Westernisation under the Shah. This seems to still be what the public wants

At best we will see the Supreme Leader fettered by the Guardian Council, I expect. The justification will be that no living man measures up to the original Supreme Leader. This will make abuse of the Constitution more difficult, but it is unlikely to result in the reform Westerners want to see.

Fragony

06-21-2009, 13:50

edit: huh

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-21-2009, 13:55

Could be the end of the political islam though

I think it unlikely, so long as voters and candidates are Muslim. Dinnerjacket was elected on a tax and welfare platform, irrc, not an Islamic one.

I'm a religious man, and I won't vote hard against my theological principles, I'm also not an idiot and will not vote solely on them. Lest we forget, 50 years ago religion was a powerful political motivator in Britain. Secularism is a very recent invention, and it's not doing as well as it was 20 years ago.

Furunculus

06-21-2009, 14:05

Best post of the day. Please read it (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/opinion/21tehran.html?_r=1). Reprinted below the tag.

powerful article.

spmetla

06-21-2009, 14:12

Definitely a good article. Saw Cohen doing an interview on CNN last night too, pretty much summed up what he wrote there. It would definitely be a tough position to be a regular police officer during all of this, required to up hold 'law and order' yet be asked to suppress your friends and neighbors. I'm curious as to how the regular military will react.

Samurai Waki

06-21-2009, 14:25

For the reasons stated in the article, the military may not be activated for these reasons exactly. Things could possibly dissolve into a sort of Spanish Civil War Redux.

Marshal Murat

06-21-2009, 17:43

CNN Zakaria gives a good analogy (http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/19/zakaria.iran.elections/)

CNN: But shouldn't the U.S. be more vocal in support for the Iranian protesters?

Zakaria: I think a good historic analogy is President George H.W. Bush's cautious response to the cracks in the Soviet empire in 1989. Then, many neo-conservatives were livid with Bush for not loudly supporting those trying to topple the communist regimes in Eastern Europe. But Bush's concern was that the situation was fragile. Those regimes could easily crack down on the protestors and the Soviet Union could send in tanks. Handing the communists reasons to react forcefully would help no one, least of all the protesters. Bush's basic approach was correct and has been vindicated by history.

Adrian II

06-21-2009, 18:53

May I extend a particular thanks to Lemur for your excellent range of articles and blogs that have been so useful in understanding and following what is going on.Fully seconded. I'm busy for my paper more than anything else right now, but I come back here every once to see what the Lemur dug up.
:bow:

seireikhaan

06-21-2009, 19:16

1) Thanks, Lemur, for keeping on tab for this. :bow:

2) Good luck, Iran. This looks like it can only get bloodier now that Khomeini has pigeonholed himself into support for Achmadinijad. I can't express my awe for the protesters to stand against the might of the government, and their willingness to die for a cause.

Lemur

06-21-2009, 19:26

While I appreciate the compliments (what prosimian wouldn't?) I'm hardly the only person contributing to this thread.

Great article on what Mousavi's latest communication means (http://garysick.tumblr.com/post/127559367/mousavis-new-revolutionary-manifesto):

He acknowledges, interestingly, that his own voice at the beginning was less ‘eloquent’ than he would have wished and that the people were ahead of him in turning the movement green. But now he accepts the “burden of duty put on our shoulders by the destiny of generations and ages” [...]

It is apparent from this statement that Mousavi’s movement — and Mousavi himself — have evolved enormously in the past week. The candidate started as a mild-mannered reformer. After the searing events of the past several days, he has dared to preach a counter sermon to Khamene’i’s lecture on Islamic government. Although he never mentions the Leader by name, there is no overlooking the direct contradiction of his arguments. This open opposition to the Leader by a political figure is unprecedented.

Mousavi has in fact issued a manifesto for a new vision of the Islamic Republic. The repression and disdain of the government has brought the opposition to a place they probably never dreamed of going. And no one knows where any of the parties are likely to go next.

But for outside observers, it is like standing on the edge of a glacier and feeling the ice begin to crack under your feet.

-edit-

Another good one (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6544274.ece):

ARTEMIS, a 41-year-old Tehra-ni woman, is the proud holder of a law degree, but one who has never been allowed to work. She was clear about why she joined the million-plus men, women and children who took to the streets of Tehran last Monday.

“People want freedom and justice,” she said. “They stole the vote. No one in his right mind believes this result.”

She said she had been afraid to voice criticism before. “The neighbours listen to you, and people go to prison just for what they say, or what they write. But this is contagious. What you are seeing, all these people, this comes from 30 years of oppression and now we have had enough.” [...]

“I was afraid to speak at all before. I thought we were a tiny minority,” said Mona, a 24-year-old software designer in the oversized designer sunglasses favoured by Tehran’s fashionable young women, and a tight red “manteau”, the overcoat that gives a scant nod to the law that women must cover their heads and bodies in public. “But now I feel we are the majority. I am not afraid any more. For me, fear is over.”

Adrian II

06-21-2009, 19:43

“I was afraid to speak at all before. I thought we were a tiny minority,” said Mona [..]There you have it. That's the spirit that all the police in the world couldn't push back into the bottle. Even if the hardline tollahs win, they will be shaking in their slippers at the sight of a crowd from now on. Any crowd, even a crowd which they themselves summoned.

Remember Ceaucescu.

Marshal Murat

06-21-2009, 20:37

What I have to say that is interesting is the subtle changes in how reporters are viewing the situation. I was reading one HuffPost article about Rasfanjani and the "Assembly of Experts", the one council endowed with the power to remove the Ayatollah. In the first couple days, reporters always said "Assembly of Experts with the power to remove the Ayatollah, but that's not likely to happen." to "Assembly of Experts with the power to remove the Ayatollah".

Perception is key to winning any political struggle. Before these riots, when only "students" took to the streets, it was indeed a minority. With thousands of Iranians in Tehran (along with Shiraz and other cities) moving against the Iranian government, it's hard to say "these are only soccer hooligans and terrorists."

I don't have a source for this nugget of info, but during the Russian Civil War, the Reds called themselves "Bolsheviks" not because they were a majority but they wanted to project the image of massive influence, which made many Western leaders skeptical of supporting the White Army because it was perceived that they lacked widespread support that the Bolshevik "majority" seemed to maintain.

Adrian II

06-21-2009, 20:49

I don't have a source for this nugget of info, but during the Russian Civil War, the Reds called themselves "Bolsheviks" not because they were a majority but they wanted to project the image of massive influence, which made many Western leaders skeptical of supporting the White Army because it was perceived that they lacked widespread support that the Bolshevik "majority" seemed to maintain.There are many sources for that episode, though not online that I know of. The term refers to a split in the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party at their Second Congress which took place in 1902 in Brussels. Because of the location a lot of radical hotheads (who had been banned from Russie proper) were attending. The more moderate marxists were more likely to be in Russia at that time or had considerable trouble making it. Lenin and his ilk wanted to turn the party into a quasi-military organisation. They got a small majority, hence called themselves Bolsheviks (those in the majority) as opposed to the minority Mensheviks (those in the minority). So the term Bolsheviks refers to a majority within the party ranks not within Russia as a whole, though they would have embraced the latter suggestion without hesitation.

They never had a majority in any regular election. They were a clear minority in the Russian Constituent Assembly election of 1917. But Lenin mobilised a bunch of sailors and disbanded the assembly by force.

Lemur

06-21-2009, 21:37

Implications (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/dissent-of-the-day-7.html#more): "In this contest, there is a claim on both sides for the spirit of the 1979 revolution. But there is also a recognition, I think for Mousavi, that the Islamicness of the Islamic Republic has led Iran to this depraved state of affairs. I find it very hard to believe that if Mousavi's movement succeeds there will still be a supreme leader. He has talked about returning Iran's government to its people, and he is openly defying now Khamenei. In Persian thought there is a concept called Farr, the aura around the emperor. Roger Cohen wrote about this idea yesterday. Well it's gone. And that aura, this notion that the people's institutions, the presidency and the majlis must be checked by clerics, is gone too. None of this means that Islam will not thrive in Iran, but it will be a quietist Islam, the kind advocated by Montazeri and Sistani. Khomeinism, if Mousavi succeeds, is finished."

Alexander the Pretty Good

06-22-2009, 00:44

And that would be an auspicious thing.

ICantSpellDawg

06-22-2009, 02:23

Although Mousavi seems like an opportunist, sometimes opportunists are able to channel real emotion and reform - and get lucky. Hopefully the government buckles without too much more bloodshed. This could be a great lesson for human rights in China and the Arab States if it works. Only North Korea seems to do repression correctly these days - once you give a yard, people get smart and demand a country.

Jolt

06-22-2009, 04:04

I for one think with the way things are shaping, is Islamic Republic is :daisy: , things are rapidly spiralling out of control for them as there is no end in sight for the protests.

Fragony

06-22-2009, 08:58

Perspective of a HOT exile

http://hetvrijevolk.com/?pagina=8678

HopAlongBunny

06-22-2009, 10:31

Perspective of a HOT exile

http://hetvrijevolk.com/?pagina=8678

Interesting.

So what it boils down to is an internal power struggle between elites with Mousavi taking the "democratic" path since the easy route is closed.

Very ugly...I wonder if the military is likewise split, as they will probably be the ultimate arbiters of settlement. Choice between repression or "glorious revolution" followed by repression...hmm.

ICantSpellDawg

06-22-2009, 13:03

Basij an Rev-G's are such a bunch of jerks. I think Khamenei is wildly miscalculating and should have at least bent for the run-off.

This is going to either get really aweful or go on hiatus

Husar

06-22-2009, 13:12

Iran is like the Iran of the Middle East.

Now that I said something really clever, I must say the regime is looking a bit like loons, they expel the press, supress demonstrations etc. etc. and now they started saying secret agents from Britain* tried to rig the elections and think about breaking contact with nations who oppose the current regime, yet somehow they seem to think that their people should accept them as the innocent and rightful rulers that they are not. :laugh4:

*for further information about the cruelties of the British Empire and how it wants to take over the world, go here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=118606)

Kagemusha

06-22-2009, 13:26

My hope is getting stronger by the day. People are dying in Iran for freedom. That tells something about their resolve. And not just some students. You see people from all demographics who are united against the totalitarian goverment. I truly hope there is enough will in Iran for revolution.

rory_20_uk

06-22-2009, 13:39

The cracks are truely showing... It's official - more votes than voters in 50 cities! (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6553843.ece)

~:smoking:

Fragony

06-22-2009, 14:16

Jolt

06-22-2009, 15:08

The dead girl, way to go beards.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/LiveLeak-dot-com-d679a046ae56-neda.png

The sculpurer doing her statue will have to try hard to match her beauty, but this will be the face of Iran's next revolution.

edit: that girl isn't 16 that can't be her. Oh whatever. Is it just me or are Iranian women very pretty. EA, comfirm.

No they aren't! They are muslims! They have horns at the back of their heads and have sharp and pointy teeth! I'm surprised you actually called an Iranian Muslim girl beatiful.

I confirm that there have been more votes than voters. Awesome. Isl. Rep. of Iran is FUBAR'd.

HopAlongBunny

06-22-2009, 15:08

It's not just you :beam:

And now back to your regularly scheduled thread discussion...

Fragony

06-22-2009, 15:28

No they aren't! They are muslims! They have horns at the back of their heads and have sharp and pointy teeth! I'm surprised you actually called an Iranian Muslim girl beatiful.

Oh they are beautiful alright, I'd hit it.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-22-2009, 15:59

No they aren't! They are muslims! They have horns at the back of their heads and have sharp and pointy teeth! I'm surprised you actually called an Iranian Muslim girl beatiful.

I confirm that there have been more votes than voters. Awesome. Isl. Rep. of Iran is FUBAR'd.

Maybe Frag likes horns and pointy teeth? He is Dutch after all, they're in to all sorts of crazy stuff.

Personally, I prefer Lebenese or Palastinian women to Iranians, but they're all beautiful.

OT: I have been saying for the last few days that even if there is a revolution it will probably not turn out how some here want. The things Iranians are now saying seem to sadly bear that out.

On the other hand, a new revolution may get away from the old elite completely.

Furunculus

06-22-2009, 17:22

the beebs (historic) role in iranian revolutionary politics:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/edwest/blog/2009/06/22/how_the_bbc_helped_bring_the_ayatollah_to_power

Devastatin Dave

06-22-2009, 19:20

Don't watch the video of this poor girl dying. I regret that I did, now her face haunts me. :shame:

Adrian II

06-22-2009, 21:46

Disgusting. We already had Microsoft, Google and Yahoo conniving with the autocrats in Beijing. Now we learn that Siemens and Nokia built a state-of-the-art internet surveillance system for the Tehran ayatollahs. I'll bet that many western governments have wet dreams about similar capabilities...

The Iranian regime has developed, with the assistance of European telecommunications companies, one of the world's most sophisticated mechanisms for controlling and censoring the Internet, allowing it to examine the content of individual online communications on a massive scale.

Linky (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562668777335653.html#mod=article-outset-box)

Nikos_Rouvelas

06-22-2009, 23:20

Don't watch the video of this poor girl dying. I regret that I did, now her face haunts me. :shame:

I second that. What's happening in Iran is disgusting, the people are yearning for freedom and are being met with bullets and tear gas. They may crush this latest revolution, but the dead will be vindicated and it will never be forgotten. Some day Iran will be free, and these brave protesters are sowing the seeds.

Hooahguy

06-23-2009, 00:51

israel should get involved.
:smash:

CountArach

06-23-2009, 01:40

israel should get involved.
:smash:
You had seriously better be joking. The only thing that could be worse for these revolutionaries is for American to get involved.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-23-2009, 01:54

You had seriously better be joking. The only thing that could be worse for these revolutionaries is for American to get involved.

No, I don't think that would be worse. Some of the protestors would wlcome America.

Samurai Waki

06-23-2009, 02:10

America has it's own problems to deal with, between our own * ups in the Middle East/Central Asia, A Financial Crisis, and low deployment strength. If Iranians really want a representative government, they'll have one; these things don't generally take days, or weeks. The Powers that be aren't just going to roll over, they're going to fight this tooth and nail as it appears. This sort of thing will be years in the making.

CountArach

06-23-2009, 02:13

No, I don't think that would be worse. Some of the protestors would wlcome America.
But then the ruling group can just shout American Imperialism from the rooftops and it is all over.

This isn't America's battle to fight. Nor should it be.

KukriKhan

06-23-2009, 02:16

No, I don't think that would be worse. Some of the protestors would wlcome America.

Some reports have the protesters wondering about UN help. Sadly "dismay" (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-06/23/content_11584127.htm) and "hope" is as strong as their gonna get.

They're on their own, and now they know it. God bless and keep them. A General Strike has been called for tomorrow (beginning right about now, Iran-time). I'm staying away from work Tuesday, in solidarity. Today: I am Persian. (As pathetic and insignificant as my tiny little action might be.)

Hooahguy

06-23-2009, 02:21

You had seriously better be joking. The only thing that could be worse for these revolutionaries is for American to get involved.
:yes:
you got it.

CountArach

06-23-2009, 03:12

Thanks to the Huffington Post for the link to this uplifting video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UnXP89jlcc) of rallies around the world in support of the protestors.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-23-2009, 03:14

But then the ruling group can just shout American Imperialism from the rooftops and it is all over.

This isn't America's battle to fight. Nor should it be.

I didn't say any of that, I was simply pointing out:

America>Israel in this instance.

Devastatin Dave

06-23-2009, 03:35

But then the ruling group can just shout American Imperialism from the rooftops and it is all over.

This isn't America's battle to fight. Nor should it be.

Exactly, I'm hoping, believe it or not, Obama does not take the bait on this and does not allow this to become a West Imperialism war cry for Anotherdinnerjacket and his thug government. I mourn the loss of these brave men and women, but lets face the facts and understand that even if there is a "revolution" who knows what the next group of muslim nutters that take over won't be as crazy as the last group.

seireikhaan

06-23-2009, 03:48

Devastatin Dave = CountArach

:clown:

On a serious note, though, I wish Iran luck. Things are already bad, and now that Khomeini has pigeonholed himself into support of Achmadinijad, this isn't going to get better any time soon, methinks. Hopefully a stable, secure, peaceful, and freer Iran can emerge from this.

Devastatin Dave

06-23-2009, 04:23

Devastatin Dave = CountArach

:clown:

Actually, I wouldn't agree completely with that equation. I have the belief that the religion of Islam will never permit peace or stablility as long as there is a Western, Judeo-Christain, Buddist, Hindu, Shinto, or for that matter, a secular nation on earth. Islam mean submit and there can never be peace until either Islam is eradicated or the muslim eradicates the infidels. No offense to the muslims here, its just were I stand the moderate muslim will NEVER be able to control their more radical bretheren and the moderate will always lose to the rasical because the radical is the true Islam, sorry to say.

I'm sure Count has a very different opinion. He'll believe, like many on this board, that Islam is a peacefull religion even until the dull knife finally severs their skull from their neck.

Good luck Iran

Samurai Waki

06-23-2009, 04:44

While I could say a rebuttal to this, I think this subject of "Islam is teh evil" has been hashed and rehashed so many times over, that I just don't care anymore to even respectfully disagree, while coming up with points to counter this so-called sense of "fact." Believe what you will, but its ridiculous.

CountArach

06-23-2009, 05:01

I'm sure Count has a very different opinion. He'll believe, like many on this board, that Islam is a peacefull religion even until the dull knife finally severs their skull from their neck.
I believe that both sides are wrong. The Islamophobe view is so beat-up and the Islamophile view is clearly not at odds with reality. I have the same problem with Islam that I have with every other religion.

Hosakawa Tito

06-23-2009, 12:51

Heh, I just wish McCain would shut his pie-hole. The world doesn't revolve around the US and his hypocritically arrogant "we're more moral defenders of human rights & freedoms" than Obama, the Democrats, and the rest of the world etal; does more damage to the reformists in Iran and the Republican Party's image with the rest of the world. Talk about not being able to see the forest for the trees...:wall:

Fragony

06-23-2009, 13:36

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/iranian_babe.jpg

Ok that settles it, let's attack and take what's rightfully ours for whatever reason.

Lemur

06-23-2009, 13:40

A detailed profile of Neda (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-neda23-2009jun23,0,366975,full.story).

-edit-

Didn't Stalin do something like this? Or was it China? Security forces charging parents of slain protesters "bullet fees." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124571865270639351.html)

When Mr. Alipour didn't return home that night, his parents began to worry. All day, they had heard gunshots ringing in the distance. His father, Yousef, first called his fiancée and friends. No one had heard from him.

At the crack of dawn, his father began searching at police stations, then hospitals and then the morgue.

Upon learning of his son's death, the elder Mr. Alipour was told the family had to pay an equivalent of $3,000 as a "bullet fee"—a fee for the bullet used by security forces—before taking the body back, relatives said.

Hax

06-23-2009, 16:38

Ok that settles it, let's attack and take what's rightfully ours for whatever reason.

Ever occur to you that girl is also one of those horrible Muslims?

Fragony

06-23-2009, 16:49

Ever occur to you that girl is also one of those horrible Muslims?

I like muslim chicks, like all chicks really. I don't like the way they are treated though.

tibilicus

06-23-2009, 19:39

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8115358.stm In retaliation to the dismissal of two UK diplomats.

Good riddance I say, we don't want any one associated with the regime in this country.

It looks like the Iranians are pretty desperate in looking for scape goats though. I think when Gordon Brown seems like a plausible scape-goat your really in trouble..

Samurai Waki

06-23-2009, 19:46

The Iranian Government is trying to use the same tactics it did thirty years ago. When the charges of American/UK over-meddling in the state of Iran was legitimate. However, I don't think many Iranians have seen an American or British person except on a TV since that time. So, its not likely anyone will buy it. Anotherdinnerjacket and Co are basically grabbing at straws right now.

tibilicus

06-23-2009, 20:04

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD6HmwF01s0&feature=player_profilepage

I bet these people have such high levels of self esteem..

Viking

06-23-2009, 23:00

This is what happnes to unruly football players:

Their gesture attracted worldwide comment and drew the attention of football fans to Iran's political turmoil. Now the country's authorities have taken revenge by imposing life bans on players who sported green wristbands in a recent World Cup match in protest against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's disputed re-election.

According to the pro-government newspaper Iran, four players – Ali Karimi, 31, Mehdi Mahdavikia, 32, Hosein Ka'abi, 24 and Vahid Hashemian, 32 – have been "retired" from the sport after their gesture in last Wednesday's match against South Korea in Seoul.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/23/iran-football-protest-ban

FactionHeir

06-23-2009, 23:16

Well, sport is supposed to be apolitical, and if you are representing your nation abroad as part of your national team, then you probably shouldn't be venting against your government while doing so.

tibilicus

06-23-2009, 23:16

Updates for you all.

I'm not sure if this has been posted already but the website of Hossein Mousavi will provide reliable news.

http://www.mir-hosseinmousavi.com/

Also it appears another rally is planned for Wednesday. If this keeps up Tehran, which is already being effected will grind to a halt.

Also the war games begin. http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSHOS233576

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/22/navy-hangs-persian-gulf-questions-mount-defecting-iranian-revolutionary-guard/

FactionHeir

06-23-2009, 23:19

The opposition leader provides reliable news? Hardly. Truth is somewhere between what Ahmedinejad and Mousavi write rather than fully in one camp.

tibilicus

06-23-2009, 23:22

The opposition leader provides reliable news? Hardly. Truth is somewhere between what Ahmedinejad and Mousavi write rather than fully in one camp.

I'm referring to reliable news on opposition actions. Planned rallies ect.

Viking

06-23-2009, 23:27

Well, sport is supposed to be apolitical, and if you are representing your nation abroad as part of your national team, then you probably shouldn't be venting against your government while doing so.

I accidentally left out the important bit:

None of the team members were given back their passports upon returning to Tehran after the match, which ended in a 1-1 draw – a result that ended Iran's hopes of qualifying for next year's tournament.

which is political.

CountArach

06-24-2009, 01:56

Also the war games begin. http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSHOS233576

The military exercise plans were announced last month.
Doesn't sound too bad to me... unless they start bombing citizens...

Lemur

06-24-2009, 03:05

This is what heroism looks like (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/20090622/revolutionary-guards-iran-iranian-protests.htm):

A commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards has been arrested for refusing to obey Iran's Supreme Leader, according to reports from the Balatarin website.

General Ali Fazli, who was recently appointed as a commander of the Revolutionary Guards in the province of Tehran, is reported to have been arrested after he refused to carry out orders from the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei to use force on people protesting the controversial re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Fazli, a veteran of the devastating Iran-Iraq war is also believed to have been sacked and taken to an unknown location.

Sheogorath

06-24-2009, 06:42

Xiahou

06-24-2009, 06:56

Meanwhile, Obama condemns violence against Iran protesters (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama)
"No iron fist is strong enough to shut off the world from bearing witness to peaceful protests of justice," he said during a nearly hourlong White House news conference dominated by the unrest in Iran. "Those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history."
"We can't say definitively what exactly happened at polling places throughout the country," Obama said. "What we know is that a sizable percentage of the Iranian people themselves, spanning Iranian society, consider this election illegitimate. It's not an isolated instance, a little grumbling here or there. There is significant question about the legitimacy of the election." Now I guess the Supreme Leader will declare the protesters to be American puppets and they'll all go home in shame. :dizzy2:

We also find out from this article about some of Obama's plans to reach out to the Iranian regime- invite them over for a 4th of July party... seriously. :inquisitive:
He made clear that one recent overture to Iran — the authorization for U.S. embassies to invite Iranian officials to Independence Day parties — was likely to disappear without changes. "That's a choice the Iranians are going to have to make," Obama said.

Edit: Also...
Intensified crackdown mutes protests in Iran (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_iran_election)

Adrian II

06-24-2009, 09:00

We also find out from this article about some of Obama's plans to reach out to the Iranian regime- invite them over for a 4th of July party... seriously. :inquisitive:Hahaha, he might as well invite them to play ping pong. That would be equally ineffect..

Um, wait... :inquisitive:

FactionHeir

06-24-2009, 09:36

The more I think about it, the more I believe that Mousavi is probably no better than Ahmedinejad if he were to come to power. His positions in some matters were the same pre-election already and while he's now touting more liberal credentials, its probably all politics to get more people on his side (pandering and all). At least with the current president you know what you are getting and he doesn't seem too fussed about veiling his intentions or using overly diplomatic language. Easier to deal with really.

Hax

06-24-2009, 11:12

Don't forget ex-president Khatami stopped his campaign in favour of Mousavi, and I do think he knew what he was talking about. Not to mention Mousavi was one of Khatami's chief advisors during his presidency.

Fragony

06-24-2009, 11:23

The more I think about it, the more I believe that Mousavi is probably no better than Ahmedinejad if he were to come to power.

But of course.

And the backlash all the more severe, sit back, grab some pretzels, and watch idiots destroy themselves. Don't be so hasty, they are done for, they are going to claw a lot of people on their way down, but down they go.

KukriKhan

06-24-2009, 13:58

Credit where credit is due: those folks know how to hold a tea-party. Not some namby-pamby tea-bagging demo.

From the west's point of view, whoever gets the big job after all this, if he's believeable when he says they're just building nuke power plants, not bombs, then it's all good. No matter how much talk is done with/at Ahmadinejad, he'll never be believeable.

Even though the protesters and I probably disagree on politics, policy & philosophy, the American Rebel in me stands in awed admiration, I admit; these guys don't quit, and aren't daunted by the powers that be, or the liklihood of failure. They may die, but they insist that THEY WILL BE HEARD.

Good on 'em.

Lemur

06-24-2009, 14:41

We also find out from this article about some of Obama's plans to reach out to the Iranian regime- invite them over for a 4th of July party... seriously. :inquisitive:
That's not exactly what he said, as your own quote proves. Xiahou, much like Matt Drudge, you seem to be intent on relating everything back to Obama; I hope you find this activity rewarding and fulfilling.

Meanwhile, Roger Cohen has another killer essay (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/opinion/24iht-edcohen.html?pagewanted=print).

I said the Islamic Republic has been weakened. Why? I see five principal factors. The first is that the supreme leader’s post — the apex of the structure conceived by the revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini — has been undermined. The keystone of the arch is now loose.

Khamenei, far from an arbiter with a Prophet-like authority, has looked more like a ruthless infighter. His word has been defied. At night, from rooftops, I’ve even heard people call for his death. The unthinkable has occurred.

The second is that the hypocritical but effective contract that bound society has been broken. The regime never had active support from more than 20 percent of the population. But acquiescence was secured by using only highly targeted repression (leaving the majority free to go about its business), and by giving people a vote for the president every four years.

That’s over. Repression will be broad and ferocious in the coming months. The acquiescent have already become the angry. You can’t turn Iran into Burma: The resistance of a society this varied and savvy will be fierce.

The third is that a faction loyal to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, fiercely nationalistic and mystically religious, has made a power grab so bold that fissures in the establishment have become canyons.

Members of this faction include Hassan Taeb, the leader of the Basiji militia; Saeed Jalili, the head of the National Security Council and chief nuclear negotiator; and Mojtaba Khamenei, the reclusive but influential son of the supreme leader.

They have their way for now, but the cost to Iran has been immense, and the rearguard action led by Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a father of the revolution, and Mir Hussein Moussavi, the opposition leader, will be intense.

The fourth is that Iran’s international rhetoric, effective in Ahmadinejad’s first term, will be far less so now. Every time he talks of justice and ethics, his two favorite words, video will roll of Neda Agha Soltan’s murder and the regime’s truncheon-wielding goons at work. The president may prove too much of a liability to preserve.

The fifth is that, at the very peak of its post-revolution population boom, the regime has lost a whole new generation — and particularly the women of that generation — by failing to adapt.

-edit-

Question: Why didn't the Supreme Leader blame everything on Ahmadinejad and throw him under a bus? It was the logical move, but instead he backed Dinnerjacket completely. Thoughts?

Xiahou

06-24-2009, 16:18

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-24-2009, 16:20

Opinion: Fixing the election was unneccessary and has backfired. At best a reformist leader could only lean Iran in a direction, not actually make a change of course. In Iranian terms Moussavi may be such a reformer even if he is still fiercely right-wing in our eyes; the failure to elect him must mean something though.

Two possibilities occur to me:

1. The Supreme Leader is weak, or losing grip of his mental faculties. In such a situation Dinnerjacket may have more power than we might otherwise expect.

2. The Regime was already scared, they know the young don't back the revolution and they are trying to maintain control.

Seamus Fermanagh

06-24-2009, 20:55

What is the reformist element within the council of clerics? Is THIS element posing a threat to Khamanei and thus generating the harsh line he's taking?

Good essay Lemur, nice points by Cohen.

I think the Iranian leadership may be facing a bit of a "governor Tarquin" experience, without an available Deathstar to extinguish the rebellion.

Hosakawa Tito

06-24-2009, 23:43

Question: Why didn't the Supreme Leader blame everything on Ahmadinejad and throw him under a bus? It was the logical move, but instead he backed Dinnerjacket completely. Thoughts?

Just a guess, but I think Moussavi is viewed as too willing to compromise/negotiate on the "nuclear issue" in future talks with the West. Ahmadinejad is much more inflexible on the subject and would drive a much harder bargain if any at all. Khamenei mentioned right after the election that Dinnerjacket's views were more in line with his...so it was "divine intervention" that Dinnerjacket won so convincingly. with a little help from his friends

Alexander the Pretty Good

06-24-2009, 23:52

CountArach

06-25-2009, 01:13

Those with facebook should join this group (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=100466151430) to show solidarity. A guy in Tehran sent out this message for members of the group:

Thank you all my friends... all the firends of my people, as we face this terrible day. I myself I am broken at heart. The wicked deeds of this eveil ayatollah do not stop. My twin has been shot and my mother is sick with grief. I do not know what to do. the world is dark for us. Please invite anyone you can to join this group, any group. go to your strret corner and stand with a placard. Please help. that is all i can say. help us.

KukriKhan

06-25-2009, 01:29

Sheogorath

06-25-2009, 03:44

"Don't be too proud of this state terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a protester is insignificant next to the power of Twitter."

It was destroying protesters that got them in trouble in the first place. Need I point out the Neda topic?

Poor Ayatollah. I bet Vader never had these problems. As I recall the Empire's method of dealing with protesters is to land shuttlecraft on top of them.

Alexander the Pretty Good

06-25-2009, 03:51

It's hard coming up with star wars references if you don't let the bad guys have a death star!

Devastatin Dave

06-25-2009, 03:51

Hahaha, he might as well invite them to play ping pong. That would be equally ineffect..

Um, wait... :inquisitive:

I was thinking along the lines of offering some kosher hot dogs.:laugh4:

Too bad the civilians don't have a right to bare arms like Neda's fiance said in an intervue.

Sheogorath

06-25-2009, 04:07

It's hard coming up with star wars references if you don't let the bad guys have a death star!

You could have compared the protesters to Ewoks. :yes:

Ronin

06-25-2009, 11:10

I just read a news item about the German-Finish company I work for and apparently this whole mess is our fault....:dizzy2: according to some people...

how weird waking up one day and find out you work for the 'evil empire'

Louis VI the Fat

06-25-2009, 12:09

Adrian II

06-25-2009, 14:45

Too bad the civilians don't have a right to bare arms like Neda's fiance said in an intervue.True.

What a pity, then, that you've annulled your own reasoning in a previous post. The one where you said we couldn't trust any Iranian with a gun because they will create a bloodbath anyway.

Prodigal

06-25-2009, 15:34

Presently both sides having guns would at least help balance the debate. The difference between now & the last revolution is simply that bearded nutters with guns are now the establishment and being sneaky sandpeople, (star war ref. am not going out of my way to be a total bigot), they took all their weapons with them once they got what they wanted.

Final thing, if the number of people killed so far happened in any number of other countries it already would be classed as a bloodbath. Why is it some countries & their regimes don't get bloodbatch status until the body count hits triple figures or higher.

CountArach

06-25-2009, 15:39

While I certainly see the logic in giving the people guns, wouldn't that just do two things:
1) lead to an even greater escalation in violence
And
2) Seeing as there is no police force and the state would have no monopoly on violence - wouldn't there be an increase in the rate of armed crime? People without guns rely on the police force to protect them and when the police force is not around to do so those who would have legally obtained weapons would have these people at their mercy.

Adrian II

06-25-2009, 17:08

[..] when the police force is not around to do so those who would have legally obtained weapons would have these people at their mercy.Don't you see the irony in this sentence?

Crazed Rabbit

06-25-2009, 17:43

While I certainly see the logic in giving the people guns, wouldn't that just do two things:
1) lead to an even greater escalation in violence
Like the USA and USSR having nukes led to WWIII? Right now, the violence is the police and Baji (sp?) shooting protesters, who have only rocks. I think they might be more reluctant if they were facing tens of thousands of protesters with guns. Any possible escalation of that would be protesters shooting back.

And
2) Seeing as there is no police force and the state would have no monopoly on violence
Yes, that would be good for an oppressive state such as this one.

- wouldn't there be an increase in the rate of armed crime? People without guns rely on the police force to protect them and when the police force is not around to do so those who would have legally obtained weapons would have these people at their mercy.

No. Simply look at various US states to see that gun ownership doesn't correlate with crime. Or look at Switzerland and Britain.
Police don't protect people, they go to crime scenes and try to find out who did what.
Right now the police force is shooting people. People are completely at their mercy ( see Adrian's post). I don't know what you mean about people being at the mercy of those who are not police (or not Baji in Iran) and own guns; are you suggesting that gun owners would go around ordering people without guns to work for them or something? Guns do not transform a normal person into a whacko.

CR

Ronin

06-25-2009, 17:56

Poor Ronin. Ah well, Anakin never figured it out until it was too late too.

I found it kind of bizarre when the project director said he found my lack of faith disturbing in the weekly meeting the other day...but I just thought he was weird. :laugh4:

well back to work programming our surveila....errr....communications equipment.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-25-2009, 18:58

Like the USA and USSR having nukes led to WWIII? Right now, the violence is the police and Baji (sp?) shooting protesters, who have only rocks. I think they might be more reluctant if they were facing tens of thousands of protesters with guns. Any possible escalation of that would be protesters shooting back.

Yeah, that works really well. Look at Iraq and Afganistan.

Samurai Waki

06-25-2009, 19:56

You can count on one thing, armed civilians will be coming forthwith. Iran isn't an Island.

Adrian II

06-25-2009, 20:03

Police don't protect people, they go to crime scenes and try to find out who did what.I know that this is your personal view and probably your personal experience as well. Other countries have different expectations when it comes to p'licing. I'm not going to bother you with details about the Dutch police. Suffice it to say they used to have a role similar to that of the British bobby. Nowadays they all want to be stereotype American cops: drive around on cars, intimidate ordinary citizens and chase easy prey before the camera's of the local tv channel. In case of a real emergency they are as strong as the weakest link in the chain, and nowadays that's pretty weak I'm afraid. Still, they have an important part to play in maintaining public order and protecting people from all sorts of harm, not just the criminal type.

Apart from this, I totally agree with your post.
Yeah, that works really well. Look at Iraq and Afganistan.It does. In fact, it works so well that considerable foreign armed forces have great trouble keeping order and maintaining the upper hand in those countries.

If the Iranian protesters would have had guns, you can bet your sweet caboose there would have been a recount.

Sheogorath

06-25-2009, 21:37

If the Iranian protesters would have had guns, you can bet your sweet caboose there would have been a recount.

Considering the behavior of the Iranian leadership thus far, the only counting going on would be a body count.

While guns would improve the chance for reform, said reform would be achieved in a revolutionary manner. IE: The Ayatollah gets his head stuck on a pike outside whatever the Iranian equivalent of the Capitol Building is and somebody else holds a new election.
That or whatshisface installs himself as Supreme Peoples Dictator For Life.

Crazed Rabbit

06-25-2009, 22:50

I know that this is your personal view and probably your personal experience as well. Other countries have different expectations when it comes to p'licing. I'm not going to bother you with details about the Dutch police. Suffice it to say they used to have a role similar to that of the British bobby. Nowadays they all want to be stereotype American cops: drive around on cars, intimidate ordinary citizens and chase easy prey before the camera's of the local tv channel. In case of a real emergency they are as strong as the weakest link in the chain, and nowadays that's pretty weak I'm afraid. Still, they have an important part to play in maintaining public order and protecting people from all sorts of harm, not just the criminal type.

True. A pity about your cops.

While guns would improve the chance for reform, said reform would be achieved in a revolutionary manner.

I don't think it would necessarily be a revolution. The government may have simply backed down and recounted (or counted, really) the votes correctly. They wouldn't want 100,000 angry, armed people in the capital city to start attacking them.

CR

Sheogorath

06-26-2009, 00:25

I don't think it would necessarily be a revolution. The government may have simply backed down and recounted (or counted, really) the votes correctly. They wouldn't want 100,000 angry, armed people in the capital city to start attacking them.

CR

From what I can see, the Iranian government is reacting to the situation the same way Saddam's government reacted to the US invasion of Iraq, namely by plugging their ears and going "LALALALALA THE REVOLUTIONARIES HAVE BEEN DRIVEN INTO THE SEA, THEY WILL NEVER REACH BAGHDA- I MEAN TEHRAN. LALALALALA."

Not EXACTLY the same situation, of course, but things like saying that Neda girl was killed by protesters, calling the protesters 'bad Muslims' and saying they're all American spies...that might work in North Korea, but the Iranian government doesn't have enough information control to make it work there.

And, let's face it, they're basically whipping the horse after leaving the barn door open with a trail of carrots leading out of it. And setting the barn on fire.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

06-26-2009, 01:45

Hmmm, the Iranian MPs are not keen on dinnerjacket's victory, either it would seem: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8118783.stm

Lemur

06-26-2009, 02:37

saying that Neda girl was killed by protesters,
Didn't you hear? The CIA killed Neda. It's true, I heard it on the teevee.

BLITZER: Are you seriously accusing the CIA of killing Nada?

GHADIRI (through translator): We say that the bullet that was found in her head was not a bullet that you could find in Iran. These are the bullets that the CIA and terrorist groups use. Of course they warned that there would be a bloodshed in these demonstrations and then they could attribute that to the Islamic republic. This is part of a common act of CIA in various countries.

BLITZER: Do you really believe that, Mr. Ambassador? You're a distinguished diplomat representing Iran. This is a very serious accusation that you're making, that the CIA was responsible for killing this beautiful, young woman.

GHADIRI (through translator): I'm not saying that the CIA had done this. There are different groups. Could be intelligence services, could be CIA, could be the terrorists. However, these are the people who do these things. You could ask Mr. Andreotti, who was an Italian diplomat whether Gladitators were a secret group related to CIA or not. Now they of course they use better methods. Of course, you're not going to say that CIA is a sacred organization that hasn't done anything to other worlds.

BLITZER: Mr. Ambassador, why won't your government allow people to go mourn at a memorial service for Nada, as her family has requested?

GHADIRI (through translator): We have no problem with mournings. Naturally we don't want to provide an opportunity for the rioters to come in and make the situation worse.

CountArach

06-26-2009, 02:43

These are the bullets that the CIA and terrorist groups use.
It gets worse! The US is funding Terrorists as well!

Sheogorath

06-26-2009, 03:26

It gets worse! The US is funding Terrorists as well!

I am shocked, sir, shocked, that the United States of America would fund a morally questionable operation.
:no:

CountArach

06-26-2009, 03:30

I am shocked, sir, shocked, that the United States of America would fund a morally questionable operation.
:no:
Yeah they have always been morally upright members of the International community.

Crazed Rabbit

06-26-2009, 03:39

Didn't you hear? The CIA killed Neda. It's true, I heard it on the teevee

Will anyone believe that?*

CR
*Well, outside 5% of crazies

Hax

06-26-2009, 07:33

What is Rafsanjani doing?

Reliable sources in Iran are suggesting that a possible compromise to put an end to the violent uprising that has rocked Iran for the past two weeks may be in the works. I have previously reported that the second most powerful man in Iran, Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, the head of the Assembly of Experts (the body with the power to choose and dismiss the Supreme Leader) is in the city of Qom—the country’s religious center—trying to rally enough votes from his fellow Assembly members to remove the current Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei from power. News out of Iran suggests that he may be succeeding. At the very least, it seems he may have gained enough support from the clerical establishment to force a compromise from Khamenei, one that would entail a run-off election between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his main reformist rival Mir Hossein Mousavi.

source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-06-25/a-deal-to-save-iran/

HopAlongBunny

06-26-2009, 08:52

Didn't you hear? The CIA killed Neda. It's true, I heard it on the teevee.

BLITZER: Are you seriously accusing the CIA of killing Nada?.

Classic use of disinformation; the truth value of the statement is not as important as getting the statement out. Interesting to learn that the CIA and terrorists have standard issue ammunition that can be readily identified.

Compromise engineered by Rafsanjani? I wonder if the politics that lead to Khamenei's call for a crackdown can be so easily reversed.

Fragony

06-26-2009, 13:59

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/10575d8d_Fuck_you_Ahmadinejad.jpg
:2thumbsup:

Louis VI the Fat

06-26-2009, 14:06

Didn't you hear? The CIA killed Neda. It's true, I heard it on the teevee.

BLITZER: Are you seriously accusing the CIA of killing Nada?

GHADIRI (through translator): We say that the bullet that was found in her head was not a bullet that you could find in Iran. These are the bullets that the CIA and terrorist groups use.

For one thing, the current events in Iran serve to make the Iranian government appear as scared, lying, ridiculous despots.

On another note, I've been rather amused at the Tehran rethoric. They consistently brand their opponents 'terrorists', they clamp down on freedom in the name of fighting terrorism, they conjure up alarmist imagery of 'alien' and 'terrorist' infringement of Iranian homeland security, all with an agressive 'with us or against us' attitude. One wonders where they got the inspiration for their rethoric from.

The upside is that this shows again the extent to which nations not on top look at the one's that are. Many are obsessed by them, frustrated by them. At once, they will clamour for their destruction, challenging them at every opportunity, while simultanously imitating them -usually in a poor, crooked, despotic attempt. The less they succeed in catching up or surpassing them, the more despotic they become, making them less succesful in turn. A dramatic vicious circle.

The Islamism of Iran is not a return to Mediaeval ways as it is sometimes thought, nor a (return to) pure Islam as they portray themselves. It is a modern response to modern challenges.

Vladimir

06-26-2009, 14:39

One also wonders how one can think of the Iranian government as anything but. And don't fall for the political game, especially when played by this particular actor.

I do love the classic CIA and terrorist bullet association. It's a classic!

Prodigal

06-26-2009, 15:56

While I certainly see the logic in giving the people guns, wouldn't that just do two things:
1) lead to an even greater escalation in violence

Yes it certainly would, but damn, have been on liveleak & they're just shooting into crowds. Something has to give one way or another over there, and it doesn't look like the idiot in power is going to make the miniscule concession of putting the moderate hard line party puppet in place of the hard hard line party puppet.

It smacks of a madness induced power trip, what's the difference between a blue M&M & a red one? B'all except the colour, and the twit running the country is sitting there foaming at the mouth screaming "I LIKE BLUE! shoot, batter, lock up anyone who likes red".

What is really making me so :furious3: angry about it all, is the pretence of choice. Why bother! *fill in 46 letter streamed expletives here* Why tell people they have a choice, (however pitiful it is), then insult them with falsification.

What is it that these people want so badly that they're willing to get killed over it?

I am horrified that it may not be much more than wanting to be able to hold hands in public, wear what they want, & be able to vote for who they want.

Prodigal

06-26-2009, 18:30

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/10575d8d_Fuck_you_Ahmadinejad.jpg
:2thumbsup:

Don't think I've ever said this to a total stranger...But I love you man! Please tell me that's not photoshopped :laugh4:

Fragony

06-26-2009, 19:17

Don't think I've ever said this to a total stranger...But I love you man! Please tell me that's not photoshopped :laugh4:

I hope not or my dreamgirl doesn't exist. These Iranians, something about them.

Viking

06-26-2009, 20:39

What's your source?

Cute Wolf

06-27-2009, 11:12

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/10575d8d_Fuck_you_Ahmadinejad.jpg
:2thumbsup:

Pretty well photoshopped... just looks for ahmedinejad's dashboard... the girl's shadow or reflection couldn't be seen... but the sideway men hands and shadows are actually well seen...

naut

06-27-2009, 11:38

Well it seems Ayatollah Khatami has been speaking (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6583797.ece), and saying some wise and calming things. :rolleyes:

A hardline cleric close to the Iranian regime demanded the execution of leading demonstrators yesterday as the opposition ended the week in disarray.

In a televised sermon at Friday prayers in Tehran, Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami called on the judiciary to “punish leading rioters firmly and without showing any mercy to teach everyone a lesson”. He said that those leaders were backed by the United States and Israel. They should be treated as mohareb — people who wage war against God — and deserved execution.

In a clear warning to all other dissenters, he declared: “Anybody who fights against the Islamic system or the leader of Islamic society, fight him until complete destruction.”

The Ayatollah claimed that Neda Soltan, the woman shot during a demonstration last Saturday, had been killed by fellow protesters because “government forces do not shoot at a lady standing in a side street”.

Husar

06-27-2009, 13:30

That's very reassuring.

Lemur

06-29-2009, 23:54

Fareed Zakaria, probably the smartest commentator on the region, weighs in (http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/fareed_zakaria/2009/06/no_velvet_revolution_for_iran.html):

While the regime's legitimacy has cracked -- a fatal wound in the long run -- for now it will probably be able to use its guns and money to consolidate power. And it has plenty of both. [...] The United States has always underestimated the raw power of nationalism across the world, assuming that people will not be taken in by cheap and transparent appeals against foreign domination. But look at what is happening in Iraq, where Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki boasts that U.S. troop withdrawals are a "a heroic repulsion of the foreign occupiers." Of course Maliki would not be in office but for those occupying forces, who protect his government to this day. A canny politician, though, he knows what will appeal to the Iraqi people.

Ahmadinejad is also a politician with considerable mass appeal. He knows that accusing the United States and Britain of interference works in some quarters. Our effort should be to make sure that those accusations seem as loony and baseless as possible.

Hosakawa Tito

06-30-2009, 00:12

Yeah, I'm sure Dinnerjacket is having the BBC workers "confessions" of aiding the Brit spies amongst us beaten out of them as we speak. There are plenty who will believe it, unfortunately.

Aemilius Paulus

06-30-2009, 15:17

On another note, I've been rather amused at the Tehran rethoric. They consistently brand their opponents 'terrorists', they clamp down on freedom in the name of fighting terrorism, they conjure up alarmist imagery of 'alien' and 'terrorist' infringement of Iranian homeland security, all with an agressive 'with us or against us' attitude. One wonders where they got the inspiration for their rethoric from.

I assume that was a snipe at US. But why?

CountArach

06-30-2009, 15:21

I assume that was a snipe at US. But why?
I would say it is because Louis is making a point about the use of language and rhetoric in modern political discourse. That was a comment on the origins of this... plus Louis is always quite snarky in his own hilarious way.

Aemilius Paulus

06-30-2009, 17:12

I would say it is because Louis is making a point about the use of language and rhetoric in modern political discourse. That was a comment on the origins of this... plus Louis is always quite snarky in his own hilarious way.
We all love Louis. His comments are always witty and humorous :2thumbsup:. Amazing how intelligent a person has to be to almost always make things so amusing. As my English teacher said, good humour is the sign of high intelligence, and usually the comedians are quite sharp themselves. (unless they have ghost writers :no:)

Vladimir

06-30-2009, 20:15

We all love Louis. His comments are always witty and humorous :2thumbsup:. Amazing how intelligent a person has to be to almost always make things so amusing. As my English teacher said, good humour is the sign of high intelligence, and usually the comedians are quite sharp themselves. (unless they have ghost writers :no:)

Cross post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=2275726&postcount=68).

:laugh4:

Strike For The South

06-30-2009, 20:24

I tuaght the forg all he knows!

drone

06-30-2009, 22:18

I wonder where Dâriûsh is in all of this mess.

Aemilius Paulus

07-01-2009, 04:43

Cross post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=2275726&postcount=68).

:laugh4:
Sorry, do not get it. Nor feel like thinking about it to see the connection. I have had enough thinking by now, after a day of classes. School ( or more correctly, learning in classes) is year-round for me now.

Louis VI the Fat

07-02-2009, 03:35

I assume that was a snipe at US. But why?It was a snipe at Bush.

Why? Because Bush made a mess. Where a clear head and soberness were called for, with his emotional and inflammotory rethoric he manouevred himself in a position of Commander in Chief presiding over a war that led to a torture and rape camp manned by US forces. A disgrace for which he deserves more than a little snide commentary at a games forum.

More important in the current thread, is that I thought there is some irony in the Iranian hardliners taking their cue from Bush, rethorically. The protesters were deemed terrorists, and rights infringed upon to fight these terorists. It is obvious that ten years ago the protesters wouldn't have been labelled terrorists by Tehran.

The protesters would still have been shot and nothing would've been different, but that's not the revealing bit. Revealing is how much the Iranian junta takes its cue not only from the koran, but also from such worldy sources as (opposition to) the US/the UK/the West. It reveals their simultaneous admiration and revulsion of America, the combination of these two which leads to so much frustration. It shows that they do not resent America for what it is, but for the position it has. That of top dog. A position which they themselves covet so much. Etcetera.

It is the tragedy of all fascist ideologies. Which is the ideology of nations that are second rank, but feel they ought to have been top dog. Whether defeated Germany, lagging Russia, or the underdeveloped Islamic world.

Aemilius Paulus

07-02-2009, 20:10

It is the tragedy of all fascist ideologies. Which is the ideology of nations that are second rank, but feel they ought to have been top dog. Whether defeated Germany, lagging Russia, or the underdeveloped Islamic world.
I agree :no:

Fragony

07-03-2009, 11:17

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443708720&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

I always thought he was kinda evil :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Prodigal

07-03-2009, 18:23

It was a snipe at Bush.

Why? Because Bush made a mess. Where a clear head and soberness were called for, with his emotional and inflammotory rethoric he manouevred himself in a position of Commander in Chief presiding over a war that led to a torture and rape camp manned by US forces. A disgrace for which he deserves more than a little snide commentary at a games forum.

More important in the current thread, is that I thought there is some irony in the Iranian hardliners taking their cue from Bush, rethorically. The protesters were deemed terrorists, and rights infringed upon to fight these terorists. It is obvious that ten years ago the protesters wouldn't have been labelled terrorists by Tehran.

The protesters would still have been shot and nothing would've been different, but that's not the revealing bit. Revealing is how much the Iranian junta takes its cue not only from the koran, but also from such worldy sources as (opposition to) the US/the UK/the West. It reveals their simultaneous admiration and revulsion of America, the combination of these two which leads to so much frustration. It shows that they do not resent America for what it is, but for the position it has. That of top dog. A position which they themselves covet so much. Etcetera.

It is the tragedy of all fascist ideologies. Which is the ideology of nations that are second rank, but feel they ought to have been top dog. Whether defeated Germany, lagging Russia, or the underdeveloped Islamic world.

Very well said. You're frighteningly articulate...Are you sure you're French?

Aemilius Paulus

07-03-2009, 18:58

You're frighteningly articulate...Are you sure you're French?
He is Louis. That is all you need to know.

Prodigal

07-03-2009, 19:31

He is Louis. That is all you need to know.

Couldn't we poll & make him an honourary world leader or something?

Louis VI the Fat

07-03-2009, 20:31

We all love Louis. His comments are always witty and humorous :2thumbsup:. Amazing how intelligent a person has to be to almost always make things so amusing.

(unless they have ghost writers :no:)Ghost writers? Nah. We don't employ ghost writers.

'We' are a team of some 27 odd reknowned experts posting under the single account of 'Louis' for ease of reference. Our expertises include, but are not limited to, art, history, architecture, international relations, Americanology, biology, European studies, gender studies, human geography, legal history, bluffology and linguistics.

Depending on the topic at hand, the appropriate expert responds. These responses are then edited for readability by our team of novelists and humourists. Or by crazy uncle Pierre Lefou - whom we try to keep away from using this account as much as possible.

Very well said. You're frighteningly articulate...Are you sure you're French?My nickname is François Desouche. :book:

And well..what can I say? I just speak my mind, which is trained in the world's best schools, and refined by a thousand years of cultural superiority. :beatnik2:

Besides, the Taco tuaght me all I kown. :us-texas:

Fragony

07-04-2009, 06:38

See? He's French alright.

Prodigal

07-04-2009, 09:36

:laugh4: yeah, there can be no doubt, thousand years of cultural superiority is a clincher :yes:

Crazed Rabbit

07-05-2009, 01:18

:laugh4: yeah, there can be no doubt, thousand years of cultural superiority is a clincher :yes:

Well who can argue with that? We all know how French culture is beginning to dominate the US, and how frightened nationalist politicians are demanding desperate measures like secretaries of culture to ensure that US culture is not wiped from its own country.

CR

Lemur

07-05-2009, 03:54

Fragony

07-05-2009, 16:58

There is freaky and there is freaky. Not just a power-politician he might just actually believe all that crap.

http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1063353.html

The hammer of god :sweatdrop:

Meneldil

07-05-2009, 18:21

Well who can argue with that? We all know how French culture is beginning to dominate the US, and how frightened nationalist politicians are demanding desperate measures like secretaries of culture to ensure that US culture is not wiped from its own country.

CR

Since we're OOT, I don't see anything wrong with trying to keep american mainstream 'culture' (if by culture, you mean movies made for braindead idiots) out of France. Fast and Furious is crap. Movies with Nicolas Cage are crap. SWAT is crap. Thing is, given the amount of money found in Hollywood, US producers can keep on producing crap and flood the world with it. The ministry support french productions (sometimes good, often crap - Luc Besson produces mostly crap, Taken was crap), and that's about it.
Then again, the ministry of culture has many aims, and 99% of those could hardly be labelled as nationalist. Cultural globalization is happening, it has good and bad effects. Trying to prevent the worst ones is by my standards a good idea.

Back to Iran.

aimlesswanderer

07-06-2009, 07:56

This may or may not be big (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/05/world/middleeast/05iran.html?_r=1&hp), but it certainly shows that the Greens ain't going away, no matter how many students they torture and put on TV to "confess."

The most important group of religious leaders in Iran has called the disputed presidential election and the new government illegitimate, an act of defiance against the country’s supreme leader and the most public sign of a major split in the country’s clerical establishment. [...]

“This crack in the clerical establishment and the fact they are siding with the people and Moussavi in my view is the most historic crack in the 30 years of the Islamic republic,” said Abbas Milani, director of the Iranian Studies Program at Stanford University. “Remember they are going against an election verified and sanctified by Khamenei.”

Interesting, but I haven't seen any indications that there is any split between the hardliners and the guys with the guns. If that happens then the 'moderates' may have chance.

I suspect that there must be frantic behind the scenes activity between all the centres of power, but we don't hear about it unless they go public like in this case. Perhaps this will sway others, we will wait and see.

a completely inoffensive name

07-08-2009, 08:00

To help jump start this conversation again, here is a recent article I found on reddit.com that might add a little more information to discuss about.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/world/middleeast/08iran.html?_r=1&src=twt&twt=nytimes

aimlesswanderer

07-08-2009, 14:56

Interesting, it seems somewhat like now that the opposition has shown that it has mass appeal and is committed, the struggle has moved behind the scenes. While the low level people get hauled off, the influential opposition figures have used the number and commitment of the protesters to push their case.

I am not entirely sure that the aims of the protesters and their influential backers are always the same, however. It seemed like many of the protesters wanted more democracy, while their backers may want merely a tweaking of the system.

CountArach

07-08-2009, 15:34

I am not entirely sure that the aims of the protesters and their influential backers are always the same, however. It seemed like many of the protesters wanted more democracy, while their backers may want merely a tweaking of the system.
Yeah that's going to be a problem. But once the protestors get organised and show themselves the leaders will have no choice but to submit to majority will.

Ice

07-08-2009, 15:42

Sarmatian

07-08-2009, 23:34

The total moved Iran ahead of China as “the world’s worst jailer of journalists,” the organization said, noting that 24 of the 30 had been jailed since the election.

That's pretty bad record to hold.

I know I shouldn't but it seems that something in me forces me to point out hipocrisy whenever I see it...

Link (http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/no-justice-victims-nato-bombings-20090423)

CountArach

07-10-2009, 06:13

Protests continue (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/10/world/middleeast/10iran.html?bl&ex=1247371200&en=a0ddbfdb1569336c&ei=5087%0A) in Tehran.

Louis VI the Fat

07-10-2009, 07:03

I know I shouldn't but it seems that something in me forces me to point out hipocrisy whenever I see it...

Link (http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/no-justice-victims-nato-bombings-20090423)I'd say that this 'something in you' are the lingering whisperings of Serbian state propaganda about victimization and warmongering, one source of which was targeted in this attack.

Sorry for the dead, they didn't deserve to die. Serbian warmongering, however, did.

Banquo's Ghost

07-10-2009, 07:43

I'd say that this 'something in you' are the lingering whisperings of Serbian state propaganda about victimization and warmongering, one source of which was targeted in this attack.

Sorry for the dead, they didn't deserve to die. Serbian warmongering, however, did.

This twist of blue touch paper is a matter for another thread.

Please let's stay on topic, gentlemen.

Thank you kindly.

:bow:

Vladimir

07-10-2009, 15:27

Protests continue (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/10/world/middleeast/10iran.html?bl&ex=1247371200&en=a0ddbfdb1569336c&ei=5087%0A) in Tehran.

Wow. Thar article makes me so sad.

I wonder how the teleprompter will reply to this.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

07-10-2009, 16:30

Yeah that's going to be a problem. But once the protestors get organised and show themselves the leaders will have no choice but to submit to majority will.

Impossible without the backing of some part of the elite. If that elite is subsequently toppled it will be in a bloody purge akin to the Terror. Not something to look foward to.

We must hope a moderate leader will arise from within the establishement to prevent mob-rule.

Fragony

07-11-2009, 06:08

Nothing new but interesting to watch nonetheless, especially since it is further proof that Iranian chicks are hot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSITy_taD3E

Hosakawa Tito

07-11-2009, 13:42

Go Green!

Fragony

07-11-2009, 16:42

Go Green!

Oh yeah. These Iranians there is something about them, we will be best friends one day.

Hax

07-17-2009, 22:17

The main slogans were “Baradar’e basiji chera Baradr Koshi” (”Brother basiji, why do you kill your brother?”, the speaker after Rafi was urging people to shout “death to America” and “death to Israel” people responded in mass by shouting “death to Russia” and “death to the dictator”,

Minor update, I think to the liking of Hooahguy.

Viking

07-24-2009, 21:55

A funny bit of information:

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has ordered President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to dismiss his choice to serve as vice-president, state TV says.

Appointing Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie was "against your interest and the interests of the government", the ayatollah wrote to Mr Ahmadinejad.

State news agency Irna later reported the dismissal had gone ahead, said AP.

Mr Mashaie had caused controversy in 2008 when he said Iranians were friends with the Israelis.

[...]

Mr Ahmadinejad, who is known for his own outspoken views against Israel, has previously defended Mr Mashaie, calling him modest and loyal to Iran's Islamic system.

[...]

The row over Israel broke out last year when Mr Mashaie, then minister in charge of tourism, was quoted as saying that Iranians were friends with the Israeli people, despite the conflict between their governments.

"Today, Iran is friends with the American and Israeli people," he said, according to the semi-official Fars News Agency. "No nation in the world is our enemy."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8168202.stm

Fragony

07-27-2009, 07:14

yay

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/demo.jpg

:smitten:

Fragony

07-27-2009, 10:42

This deserves bumpage. Just read something interesting on the weblog of powerpersian Afshin Ellian, looks like the violence is becomming ever more random. We know these people get arrested and murdered, but when the head of intelligence is allowed to pick up his son, obviously tortured to death, things are really falling apart. And he isn't the only high official who can bury what is left of their offspring.

It's in dutch, here is it if you speak it/know translater http://www.elsevier.nl/web/10242035/Afshin-Ellian/Strijders-van-Allah-eten-eigen-kinderen-op.htm

Fragony

07-28-2009, 11:16

CountArach

07-28-2009, 11:31

frustrated 28 hours later: why is there so little attention for this, this might be bigger than the wall, the death of the islamic revolution exactly where it started, the mother of fails, who's going to argue with us that western-civilization is the way to go after that. The west MUST speak out it are our natural allies that are being hunted down by these savages and we have so much to gain ie the support of moderate muslims.
I think you misunderstand what is likely to come out of this. If you are hoping for a Secular state... don't.

Prince Cobra

07-28-2009, 11:33

frustrated 28 hours later: why is there so little attention for this, this might be bigger than the wall, the death of the islamic revolution exactly where it started, the mother of fails, who's going to argue with us that western-civilization is the way to go after that. The west MUST speak out it are our natural allies that are being hunted down by these savages and we have so much to gain ie the support of moderate muslims.

The West shall be silent. Anything else is a mistake since the officials will put the blame for the protests on the West.

I think you misunderstand what is likely to come out of this. If you are hoping for a Secular state... don't.

I doubt anybody can say what will come out of this.

Fragony

07-28-2009, 11:55

If you are hoping for a Secular state... don't.

But I do, and I don't think I am being overly optimistic here. Do you think these guys on the streets are very religious, they don't know anything but religious oppresion. And the 'death to Israel/America' has kinda been replaced by 'shame on Russia/China' when the bearded idiots there are cautiously trying to organise their spontanious protests. The people are taking the streets.

Cronos Impera

07-28-2009, 14:48

Frag, you miss a point here.

Iran isn't going to become a Secular state, it is merely changing the clerics in power. Iran allready has an opposition inside the clerical establishment. When the revolution ends, you'll see just another Moeslem claming victory and condemnig the past for not standing to Islamic idelas and becoming degenerate. And the fools will be in the graves and they won't speak.

Fragony

07-28-2009, 15:20

Frag, you miss a point here.

Iran isn't going to become a Secular state, it is merely changing the clerics in power.

Not anymore, Mousavi has been forced into a hero's role, no way back for him. Iran is going to be a secular state. Or nothing at all.

Banquo's Ghost

07-28-2009, 17:43

Not anymore, Mousavi has been forced into a hero's role, no way back for him. Iran is going to be a secular state. Or nothing at all.

I would share your dream, but it's unrealistic. Mousavi et al are still keen on an Islamic republic, but maybe one that can engage positively with the world rather than view everyone as enemies/satans.

In a way, despite my preference for all states to be secular, it would be a greater triumph for the region to have a pluralist, democratic and Islamic republic - just to show it can be done and provide hope for others.

It would be doubly ironic if this were to develop in Iran, rather than the failing social engineering tried for Iraq.

However, the reality is that we can hope at best for a less belligerent, more outward facing Iran which takes its place as the regional power through engagement rather than nuclear aspirations.

Fragony

07-28-2009, 18:06

CountArach

07-29-2009, 09:12

No it is not unrealistic, Mousavi will have to give them what they want, more freedom and a more relaxed foreign policy, and they are going to make sure he does, and how bad will it be when he turns out to be a dissapointment. He better deliver expectations are rather high.
Well then that begs the question - how much are the protesters dedicated to Mousavi? If the answer is that they are more devoted to Secularism (As undoubtedly many are) then it will be as you say. However, if the answer is that they are less reformist and not too displeased with the current Constitutional arrangement then they would settle for a reshuffling of the cards so to speak. So we have to think to ourselves about what degree we can assume that the true Secular reformists represent the will of the majority of Iranians.

I can't answer that, and I don't think that anyone can with any degree of certainty.

Fragony

07-29-2009, 09:29

It's like Claudius and the praetorians, he has no choice. The Iranians know fully well what a piece of is Moussavi is he's their vessel they made him a hero. It has been set in motion we need to tip it over, or at least let them know we support their cause. And we damn should support their cause if we are to take our values seriously. Russia and China aren't going to be pleased and I know it's very complicated when it comes to international relations, the USA is a lame duck here and it's better if they aren't involved but Europe can make a difference if it speaks out, so does Canada and Australia.

aimlesswanderer

07-29-2009, 14:07

I hope that Iran turns into a secular democratic country, but the more realistic outcome would be a similar structure to the current one, but with less religious influence and more democracy. Or it could go the other way and become more autocratic and repressive. Though there may have been much support from protesters, the army, revolutionary guards, police and basij seem to have stayed loyal to the regime, so the opposition doesn't have much of a chance if that doesn't change.

At least the president now seems to be in dispute with the Supreme leader, as that will make it difficult for him to do much, and the opposition may be able to exploit that.

The UK shouldn't be too eager to say much, given past history, and other countries should also be cautious when commenting on the situation. Nothing better to rally support than to have evil outsiders meddling in domestic affairs.

Fragony

07-29-2009, 14:45

I hope that Iran turns into a secular democratic country, but the more realistic outcome would be a similar structure to the current one, but with less religious influence and more democracy.

Yes but in the same way as some European country's, Netherlands being one of them, are still monarchies. These beards are going to be on a leash, some religious leaders have given Moussavi their support, beards are in a pretty bad position at the moment, it says something when the authority of the highest religious leader of a country like Iran is being openly challenged. Kinda sceptical about the army and guards have sided with the regime, since the regime has to hire foreign mercenary's to do the bad things, seems to me that army and the guards are deeply devided and using them is a very big risk. I am really confident that this regime is done for, and that if we help the Iranians things will be better, the Iranians are denying the wish for Islamic states with sharia law legitimacy.