View Full Version : Iran election, 2013
Populus Romanus
05-18-2013, 13:37
Guardian Council should be saying who will be allowed to run on Monday. Personally, I kind of doubt anything like the 2009 protests will ever happen again. But the reformists may have a chance this election no that Rafsanjani has entered the race. I am interested what will happen with Mashaei, Ahmadinejad's lapdog. Khamenei seems to want him banned from election. Ghalibaf appears to be the Supreme Leader's choice.
Change in Iran!
Empire*Of*Media
05-18-2013, 13:51
Guardian Council should be saying who will be allowed to run on Monday. Personally, I kind of doubt anything like the 2009 protests will ever happen again. But the reformists may have a chance this election no that Rafsanjani has entered the race. I am interested what will happen with Mashaei, Ahmadinejad's lapdog. Khamenei seems to want him banned from election. Ghalibaf appears to be the Supreme Leader's choice.
Change in Iran!
how do you know those names ?!!?!!?!
actually there will be no more revolt!! it was suppressed completely!! Islamic Republic isnt like Soviets or any dictatorship! too much strong with dark policies!! somehow worse than N.Korea !!
and tell you one thing, this is not election it is selection !!!! this selection is to silence Westerns and to say i have legitimation! and no one can say anything against the so called SUPREME LEADER & Revolutionary Guards !! they have the Nation and country!! and many people will go for the selection, because they are have to!! if they dont many concessions will not be given to some and many more life limitation for many that dont go to so called VOTE !! i hope USA do something!! i even accept an imperialistic puppet of USA in Iran!! its better than this islamists that ruined Iran and backed it to 400 years ago !!
Populus Romanus
05-18-2013, 14:10
how do you know those names ?!!?!!?!Internet, bro.
Seamus Fermanagh
05-18-2013, 14:48
.... i even accept an imperialistic puppet of USA in Iran!! its better than this islamists that ruined Iran and backed it to 400 years ago !!
We're not really good with those. We tend to start nice and realpolitik but then get disgusted with the corruption etc. and end up encouraging dissent etc. First we get Marcos in power, then we end up loving on Aquino; We get the Shah in place and things are rolling, but then we end up lobbying for Khomeini's return from exile; We have Batista roll in from Florida in '52, but then leave him out on a limb later on....
You want a good puppet set up? You need the Soviets or the Vickie Brits. They knew how to keep a puppet tied in place. For pete's sake the Aussies and others still (at least formally) acknowlege QE-II as their "head of state!" Now THAT is satrapy done right.
Greyblades
05-18-2013, 17:37
Heck we even managed to turn our greatest screwup into our biggest ally. Britannia be awesome puppeteer overlords yo.
Don't forget Canada in the Crown.
Empire*Of*Media
05-18-2013, 21:37
We're not really good with those. We tend to start nice and realpolitik but then get disgusted with the corruption etc. and end up encouraging dissent etc. First we get Marcos in power, then we end up loving on Aquino; We get the Shah in place and things are rolling, but then we end up lobbying for Khomeini's return from exile; We have Batista roll in from Florida in '52, but then leave him out on a limb later on....
You want a good puppet set up? You need the Soviets or the Vickie Brits. They knew how to keep a puppet tied in place. For pete's sake the Aussies and others still (at least formally) acknowlege QE-II as their "head of state!" Now THAT is satrapy done right.
wow!! how do you know those things ??!! its very good an American to know these things, so your speciall American!! because your from those rare understanable and curiuos paople !!
yes your right! but britains did not have puppets, they straightly interfere or did whatever they want in those nations!!
HoreTore
05-19-2013, 16:11
No, France did the "let's turn our colonies French"-thing, the brits did the "let them do whatever they like as long as they give us their money"-thing.
It was only when the empire collapsed that the Brits started meddling with the colonials, until that time they were pretty relaxed about how the colonies were run(as long as the cash kept flowing).
Empire*Of*Media
05-19-2013, 20:05
No, France did the "let's turn our colonies French"-thing, the brits did the "let them do whatever they like as long as they give us their money"-thing.
It was only when the empire collapsed that the Brits started meddling with the colonials, until that time they were pretty relaxed about how the colonies were run(as long as the cash kept flowing).
yes the French too, but French failed to control the world, brits succeded the gave all to USA!
Most Americans know these things. Just some of them don't care. :shrug:
i disagree, your special, and rare, Americans are drowned in their own life & pleasures!! and if they hear about this things, not only they dont care, but they mock anyone speak about this things!!
and do you know USA with a designed Coupe and fired Mosaddeq and destroyed The First Democracy??!
and , how do you know Khomeini was brought by imperialis USA??!
and do you know USA with a designed Coupe and fired Mosaddeq and destroyed The First Democracy??!
and , how do you know Khomeini was brought by imperialis USA??!
I wouldn't say "most" Americans know, but a large percentage does. Once Mosaddegh nationalized the oil industry, the coup was bound to happen. The cash stopped flowing, so the UK got help from one of it's puppets to get it back. HoreTore's statement holds true.
Mohammad Mosaddegh did seem to have the groundings for making Iran into a good nation. It is a shame it turned out with a coup.
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
05-20-2013, 01:10
i disagree, your special, and rare, Americans are drowned in their own life & pleasures!! and if they hear about this things, not only they dont care, but they mock anyone speak about this things!!
and do you know USA with a designed Coupe and fired Mosaddeq and destroyed The First Democracy??!
and , how do you know Khomeini was brought by imperialis USA??!
You assume we are ignorant?
We would be stupid people not to know the names of our enemies, and Iran is an enemy of the West at present - with Good reason.
HopAlongBunny
05-20-2013, 01:46
You want a good puppet set up? You need the Soviets or the Vickie Brits. They knew how to keep a puppet tied in place. For pete's sake the Aussies and others still (at least formally) acknowlege QE-II as their "head of state!" Now THAT is satrapy done right.
Queen E as our head-of-state saves us from the embarrassment of admitting that the clowns in Parliament are our government.
Papewaio
05-20-2013, 05:23
What will we do when it's Charles turn?
Mind you a green divorcée is quite modern...
Empire*Of*Media
05-20-2013, 08:30
You assume we are ignorant?
We would be stupid people not to know the names of our enemies, and Iran is an enemy of the West at present - with Good reason.
no no no Dear !!! i never said that!! but you just dont care for anything going around the world!! and because they control you mind undirectly By Propaganda & Media, you cant believe what USA's Government have done/still doing to Nations, because of Imperialistic Benefits !!
Papewaio
05-20-2013, 20:59
PVC is a rather British chap.
Britain, US and Australia all have large multicultural facets. Would a new Kurdistan have these or would it be a mono ethnic group?
Empire*Of*Media
05-21-2013, 07:46
PVC is a rather British chap.
Britain, US and Australia all have large multicultural facets. Would a new Kurdistan have these or would it be a mono ethnic group?
what sould isa ???? they are too much complicated, nevershare their secrecy and planing for the their NEW WORLD !!!
Populus Romanus
05-22-2013, 00:28
Rafsanjani and Mashaei are both banned. So much for democracy, lol.
Empire*Of*Media
05-22-2013, 17:32
Rafsanjani and Mashaei are both banned. So much for democracy, lol.
i was surprised for Rafsanjani!! he was a pillar and vertebral column
of Islamic regime once !!
komnenos
06-15-2013, 12:14
Congratulation to the world! Based on recent news it's obvious that Rohani who is member of "Eslahtalab" faction(the faction that started the green movement) is going to win the election in Iran, however the votes haven't been counted. :bounce:
Congratulation to the world! Based on recent news it's obvious that Rohani who is member of "Eslahtalab" faction(the faction that started the green movement) is going to win the election in Iran, however the votes haven't been counted. :bounce:
That would be good news
This came as a surprise to me, to be honest.
komnenos
06-15-2013, 15:55
I hope they don't delay the election to second time.
komnenos
06-15-2013, 17:24
At last the election counting finished. Hasan Rohani became the president of Iran by more than 18 millions votes!
In other words:
1.Hasan Rohani :50.6%
2. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf :16.6%
3.Saiid Jalili : 11.4%
4.Rezaii: 10.6
5.Ali Akbar Velaiati :6.2%
6.Mohammad Gharazi :1.2%
:bounce:
still dont have an opinion on the results, I have to see what word-play Jon Stewart can do with the name.
Unless he's back from vacation Monday, it'll be John Oliver doing the word play.
Iran sends 4000 soldiers to Syria, I don't understand things anymore, if I ever did
komnenos
06-16-2013, 21:40
What do you think about Mashaei. I really liked that he became president, because he is really wise and had many plans. His believes was different from other candidates.I heard that He had promised that he would make huge and great changes in Iran and would solve all the problems. His thoughts is somehow near to socialism.
HopAlongBunny
06-16-2013, 22:29
I hope it all comes true :yes:
But if I had a penny for every promise of Utopia made by politicians....:creep:
HoreTore
06-17-2013, 11:40
What do you think about Mashaei. I really liked that he became president, because he is really wise and had many plans. His believes was different from other candidates.I heard that He had promised that he would make huge and great changes in Iran and would solve all the problems. His thoughts is somehow near to socialism.
That's the foundation all totalitarian ideas rest on. The dream of the perfect society. It always ends in a massacre.
komnenos
06-17-2013, 12:18
Yes you're right. And I should say I didn't mean that he is a socialist. I said just his thoughts are near to socialism. And the virtue of this is that his thoughts are far from other politicians' thoughts in Iran that their believes are based on moralism.
We shouldn't expect all too much probably. But I've been eying the Green Wave and I like what I saw. Iranians should be our best friends in the region, not our enemies. Iran isn't a nation of goatherders, hoping for the best
HoreTore
06-17-2013, 13:45
Yes you're right. And I should say I didn't mean that he is a socialist. I said just his thoughts are near to socialism. And the virtue of this is that his thoughts are far from other politicians' thoughts in Iran that their believes are based on moralism.
I have no idea what the man is about, my comment was just a general observation which may or may not have relevance to him.
As for the term "socialist", it's a term which is nearly devoid of all meaning in the countries between central Asia and South Africa, as every prospective ruler who wishes to do something for the poor and disenfranchised is quickly labeled a "socialist" based on a simple desire to give aid to the poor.
If he really was a proper socialist, he would be calling on the dismantling of religion in Iran and move towards state atheism and materialism.
Call me naive, but I'm having difficulty imagining such a ruler taking power in the Islamic Republic of Iran....
Why care about definitions. You can turn Hitler into a socialist and Stalin into a capitalist, it's easy
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
06-17-2013, 21:55
I have no idea what the man is about, my comment was just a general observation which may or may not have relevance to him.
As for the term "socialist", it's a term which is nearly devoid of all meaning in the countries between central Asia and South Africa, as every prospective ruler who wishes to do something for the poor and disenfranchised is quickly labeled a "socialist" based on a simple desire to give aid to the poor.
If he really was a proper socialist, he would be calling on the dismantling of religion in Iran and move towards state atheism and materialism.
Call me naive, but I'm having difficulty imagining such a ruler taking power in the Islamic Republic of Iran....
Socialist government =/= Atheist government.
Still - in practice I mostly agree.
Now who's for Ice Hockey in Hell?
Socialism doesn’t equal Atheist Government but it implies a clear separation between State and Religion. A believer in a faith can be socialist as the goal is political. Socialism is not a Religion but a Political/Financial/societal programme that implies no state-religions. So, yes, it is difficult to imagine a socialist still alive in Iran.
HoreTore
06-18-2013, 11:05
Socialism doesn’t equal Atheist Government but it implies a clear separation between State and Religion. A believer in a faith can be socialist as the goal is political. Socialism is not a Religion but a Political/Financial/societal programme that implies no state-religions. So, yes, it is difficult to imagine a socialist still alive in Iran.
Highly debatable.
Lenin viewed the christian socialists as an absurdity. He respected the Jewish socialists, but they were secular and jewish on more ethnic grounds than religious.
The Catholic church in South America has given a major contribution to Marxism and plenty of them did not see socialism outside the state, but would rather have a marxist church ingrained in the socialist state.
Anyway, I did say "proper socialist", not just "socialist", you know. And I do tend to be on the leninist side when defining "proper".... A rejection of traditional society and a materialistic view of society is what I deem "proper"(and that's subjective, of course). That will usually imply a rejection and dismantling of religious thought and organization.
komnenos
06-20-2013, 10:19
I don't agree with socialism at all but if you pay attention, you can see that it has many goodness and virtue to use it in a government to improve. I think it's better to use the good parts of it and create a great government.
HopAlongBunny
06-20-2013, 11:18
Ok, so not "socialism" but "social policy". ~D
komnenos
06-22-2013, 11:45
Yes yes I mean this. Sorry!
Rhyfelwyr
07-03-2013, 13:54
Hopefully this will prove more than talk. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/02/iran-president-hassan-rouhani-progressive-views)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.