Iranian Commanders assassinated...

[Dreadnought]

[QUOTE=Dreadnought;687625]Iraq is not sovereign, it is under occupation. As for Gaza, Hamas is the government, Iran funds them. Iran doesn't fund any militants active against the Syrian government and as for Lebanon, let's first see 1-man 1-vote being allowed in elections and than we'll talk further about disarming HEzbollah.

Umm NO, Iraq is soverign, She has her own forces enforcing Iraqi law in her provinces creates her own oil marketing and sales and has her own elected leaders. US forces are only backing their patrols. Thats not occupation, thats called assistance. Hamas is a terror group and not a legitimate government (but ofcoarse you would state that it is) and never will be. Iran funds terror in Gaza and that is an undisputable fact.

Syria and Iran BOTH have nuclear weapons ambitions and it is well known and that is exactly why Israel took out the reactor that no one wants to talk about. It sent a message to Iran.

let's first see 1-man 1-vote being allowed in elections and than we'll talk further about disarming HEzbollah.

BETTER YET LETS SEE THAT IN IRAN, 1 MAN, 1 VOTE, INSTEAD OF 1 MAN 1,OOO VOTES

MAYBE JUST MAYBE THEY ARE MORE THEN FAMILIAR WITH YOU LEADERS TYPE OF VOTING, HENSE KEEPING YOUR INFLUENCE OUT OF THEIR GOVERNMENT!:))

[HillTribe]

Iran could be the nation that triggers an Islamic renaissance in the Middle East. Its people are young, generally pro-western, liberal, and many even atheist! I actually came across many Iranians who professed atheism and a weird combination of mysticism! The Wahabbis who the international community is trying to fight from Morocco to Pakistan hate the Shia of Iran and fear their dominance.

It is the regime in Iran that is dangerous (The guardian council and all). Actually the regime seems disconnected with the pulse of the nation. Case in point the recently disputed elections. Give the civil society in Iran encouragement and the Islamic Republic will be overthrown and a more liberal government will take effect. The people of Iran are just itching for a change. Iran ought to be a natural ally of the democratically predisposed nations. Too bad the CIA overthrew the Mossadekh government in the 1950's. Hope the west will take a more long term perspective on Iran when the regime topples.

However, the more the international community pushes Iran into the corner, the more the Iranians will galvanize around the banner of the Islamic Republic.

[Dreadnought]

And that may very well be the future because the International community is not going to allow that regime a nuclear weapon any time soon no matter what happens. IMO, we dont have any problems with the Iranain people, its the regime, If the people see us as bad due to sanctions because of that regime then theres not much that can be done about it. But they can do alot about the regime that rules the country.

[HillTribe]

As an Iran observer I feel that the majority of the people hate the regime. But the regime is simply too brutal to acquiesce to the people's wishes. There could be a way to deny the Iranians the bomb and boot out the regime without hurting the ordinary Iranians.

I am new to the board... therefore I have a really stupid question... What does IMO mean?

[Dreadnought]

As an Iran observer I feel that the majority of the people hate the regime. But the regime is simply too brutal to acquiesce to the people's wishes. There could be a way to deny the Iranians the bomb and boot out the regime without hurting the ordinary Iranians.

I am new to the board... therefore I have a really stupid question... What does IMO mean?

Welcome to the thread. IMO= In My Opinion.:) (PS, There really isint any stupid questions here)

If theres a way to do all that without any harm to those people I think you would have made many ears stand up no doubt.;).

[HillTribe]

Thank you for clearing that...I dont feel so stupid anymore. :)

[Dreadnought]

Thank you for clearing that...I dont feel so stupid anymore. :)

:);)

[zraver]

As an Iran observer I feel that the majority of the people hate the regime. But the regime is simply too brutal to acquiesce to the people's wishes.

Your belief is mistaken, while large parts of the people do hate the regime they are not the majority. A-jad might very well have won the election honestly for the simple fact he controls the Basiji some 9 million men on paper. This is a signifigant slice of the Iranian electorate. The rural poor also tend to favor the regime as long as it keeps its social supports in place. The faction the west wants to be working with is a very large group- urban middle class, college kids, moderate clerics but its by no way clear this is a majority.

[Kermanshahi]

Umm NO, Iraq is soverign, She has her own forces enforcing Iraqi law in her provinces creates her own oil marketing and sales and has her own elceted leaders. US forces are only backing their patrols. Thats not occupation, that assistance.

They are powerless, Americans call the shots in Iraq and until they leave and leave Iraq to the Iraqis it will be occupation. Ofcourse the US always finds loopholes to make that they are officialy not occupiers but assisting a gov't or on a "peace mission", but in reality they are occcupying powers.

Iran has been helping Iraqis against their opressors for decades, first the Ba'athists and now the Americans and will continue to do so until our brothers are free.

Hamas is a terror group not a legitimate government (but ofcoarse you would state that it is) and never will be. Iran funds terror in Gaza a duely noted and undisputable fact.

Hamas stood in the Palestinian elections and won it. They are the legitimate government.

Syria and Iran BOTH have nuclear weapons ambitions and it is well known and that is exactly why Israel took out the reactor that no one wnats to talk about. It sent a message to Iran.

Israel didn't take out a reactor. They went through Turkey and bombed some abandoned camel shed on the other side of the border, than some Zio-fanboys ridiculously claimed it was a reactor. It was merely an attempt by Israel to flex their muscles, show Syria what they can do. Iran isn't impressed at all and in our case the Turks won't cooperate.

BETTER YET LETS SEE THAT IN IRAN, 1 MAN, 1 VOTE

MAYBE JUST MAYBE THEY ARE MORE THEN FAMILIAR WITH YOU LEADERS TYPE OF VOTING, HENSE KEEPING YOUR INFLUENCE OUT.:))

There is a 1-man 1-vote system in Iran. Unlike in Lebanon were the seats are unfairly divided per religious groups and the Muslims (65%) get only 45% of the seats while the Christians (30%) get 50% of the seats. And among the Muslims, although there are atleast 2x as many Shi'a as Sunni Muslims the seats are divided half-half. In Iran the MPs are elected per how many votes they get and the vote of some people isn't worth 3x the vote of other people because of their religion. Iran, there are however several religious groups who are far to smal to get a seat in parliament and thus there are 5 seats reserved for them.

Iran could be the nation that triggers an Islamic renaissance in the Middle East. Its people are young, generally pro-western, liberal, and many even atheist! I actually came across many Iranians who professed atheism and a weird combination of mysticism!

Well, not exactly. The people of Iran are generally secular and nationalistic. But do not confuse anti-regime with pro-Western. Most Iranians would want a government with similar foreign policies to this one, but different internal politics.

The Wahabbis who the international community is trying to fight from Morocco to Pakistan hate the Shia of Iran and fear their dominance.

The Americans and their allies have been supporting the Sunnis against the Shi'a throughout history. Whether in Saudi Arabia, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Iraq, in Bahrain, in Lebanon, in Yemen, Shi'a have been opressed for centuries by Sunnis. Since the revolution Iran has been helping Shi'a to fight back, Americans call it "terrorism".
However it are the Sunnis who they actually need to be fighting. All terror attacks in non-Muslim countries, by Muslims, were by Sunnis. In Iraq and Afghanistan it are mainly the Sunnis who are fighting America and 100% of the suicide bombings in both countries were by Sunnis.
Iran has been supporting Shi'a militia in Iraq against Saddam and in Afghanistan against the Taliban for years. At the time they were all called terrorists by America, funded by evil Iran against legitimate governments. After America's split up with some of these goverments (such as Iraq) they are forced to cooperate with the Shi'a against the countries Sunnis and now they suddenly aren't terrorists anymore.

It is the regime in Iran that is dangerous (The guardian council and all). Actually the regime seems disconnected with the pulse of the nation. Case in point the recently disputed elections. Give the civil society in Iran encouragement and the Islamic Republic will be overthrown and a more liberal government will take effect. The people of Iran are just itching for a change. Iran ought to be a natural ally of the democratically predisposed nations. Too bad the CIA overthrew the Mossadekh government in the 1950's. Hope the west will take a more long term perspective on Iran when the regime topples.

American efforts to dominate Iran in the last 50-60 years have all been counterproductive. The situation can never become as good anymore as it would have been if Mossadeq had stayed in power, but it can be saved to some extend. Problem is that America is still making matters worse on themselfes.

However, the more the international community pushes Iran into the corner, the more the Iranians will galvanize around the banner of the Islamic Republic.

True, and infact the Islamic regime would have collapsed by end 1980 to mid 1981, it was the time were they were the weakest and other factions were strongest while Iran was least stable. Instead of letting this happen the Americans pushed Saddam to invade Iran, to overthrow the regime with force, this enabled the regime to put all of Iran behind it and crush any other factions. Specially those which alligned themselfes with Saddam such as the MKO (an organisation which used to enjoy large public support) lost all their sympathy among Iranian people and their members are hated nation wide.

As an Iran observer I feel that the majority of the people hate the regime. But the regime is simply too brutal to acquiesce to the people's wishes. There could be a way to deny the Iranians the bomb and boot out the regime without hurting the ordinary Iranians.

I am new to the board... therefore I have a really stupid question... What does IMO mean?

Well not exactly all of them hate the regime. But the majority are definetly unhappy about their policies. Those who demand a complete regime change are not in majority in Iran, however a vast majority of the population would want some serious changes in the regimes internal policies. More political freedom, more social and religious freedom and some federalism is what most Iranians would want rather than how the government is ruling now.
Only the very religious Shi'as, support this regime, about 15% of the population or so.

Personally I would have much preferred a Mossadeq government. Pitty the Americans thought he'd be to good for Iran and had to so desperatly destroy Iran democracy to get in power a puppet who ruined the country and America more powerfull.:(

[zraver]

They are powerless, Americans call the shots in Iraq and until they leave and leave Iraq to the Iraqis it will be occupation. Ofcourse the US always finds loopholes to make that they are officialy not occupiers but assisting a gov't or on a "peace mission", but in reality they are occcupying powers.

The Iraqi government was recognized as sovereign by the UN.

Iran has been helping Iraqis against their opressors for decades, first the Ba'athists and now the Americans and will continue to do so until our brothers are free.

Nice propaganda line, but Iranian help comes with puppet strings. Iraqis are not stupid, that is why the openly pro-Iran party got its butt handed to it during provincial elections.

Hamas stood in the Palestinian elections and won it. They are the legitimate government.

Your right, so what they attack Israel, its not a terror group making the attack, it is the people of Palestine. When one government attacks another its called war.

Israel didn't take out a reactor. They went through Turkey and bombed some abandoned camel shed on the other side of the border, than some Zio-fanboys ridiculously claimed it was a reactor. It was merely an attempt by Israel to flex their muscles, show Syria what they can do. Iran isn't impressed at all and in our case the Turks won't cooperate.

It was a nuclear site, and while you might not be impressed, I am sure your generals feel different. But the difference between them and you is their ability to see the details. When an entire nations communications grid goes dark and not 1 SAM fires as the return flights passes over Damascus you'd better believe your generals took notice.

There is a 1-man 1-vote system in Iran.

Not really, people can only vote for approved candidates, non-shia cannot hold high office, the incumbants can openly use state resources for re-election inclusing police asets to attack the opposistion.



Well, not exactly. The people of Iran are generally secular and nationalistic. But do not confuse anti-regime with pro-Western. Most Iranians would want a government with similar foreign policies to this one, but different internal politics.

The Americans and their allies have been supporting the Sunnis against the Shi'a throughout history.

Funny I thought the US standing for Iran vs the USSR/UK, and allowing the Shah to build a military bigger and better than any of his neighbors but the USSR were both historical events.

Whether in Saudi Arabia, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Iraq, in Bahrain, in Lebanon, in Yemen, Shi'a have been opressed for centuries by Sunnis. Since the revolution Iran has been helping Shi'a to fight back, Americans call it "terrorism".

How is blowing up a Jewish ticket counter in Argentina fighting back?

However it are the Sunnis who they actually need to be fighting. All terror attacks in non-Muslim countries, by Muslims, were by Sunnis.

Actually about 98% are Sunni, but Shia are not blameless.

American efforts to dominate Iran in the last 50-60 years have all been counterproductive. The situation can never become as good anymore as it would have been if Mossadeq had stayed in power, but it can be saved to some extend. Problem is that America is still making matters worse on themselfes.

Iran is the one making it worse. It is making armaments it does not need to threaten a country it doe snot border. Its breaking international law as regards nuclear technology and engaging in brinkmanship.

True, and infact the Islamic regime would have collapsed by end 1980 to mid 1981, it was the time were they were the weakest and other factions were strongest while Iran was least stable. Instead of letting this happen the Americans pushed Saddam to invade Iran, to overthrow the regime with force, this enabled the regime to put all of Iran behind it and crush any other factions. Specially those which alligned themselfes with Saddam such as the MKO (an organisation which used to enjoy large public support) lost all their sympathy among Iranian people and their members are hated nation wide.

The IR had already corrupted the system and seized power after collapsing the populist government.

[1980s]

Your belief is mistaken, while large parts of the people do hate the regime they are not the majority. A-jad might very well have won the election honestly for the simple fact he controls the Basiji some 9 million men on paper. This is a signifigant slice of the Iranian electorate. The rural poor also tend to favor the regime as long as it keeps its social supports in place. The faction the west wants to be working with is a very large group- urban middle class, college kids, moderate clerics but its by no way clear this is a majority.

No im afraid it is you that is mistaken. Iranian society and the political-leanings of the people are not so easily lumped into non-descript categories like "rural poor", "urban middle-class", "college kids" and so on. Iran is a huge country with a lot of diversity where pro-government and anti-government feelings find their place among every walk and class in society. And contrary to popular belief among non-Iranians Ahmadinejad is not a legitimate 'populist' and his support-bas is certainly not something that is grounded solely in the working-classes or the 'rural poor'. His constituency is among the Basij and some of the hard-liners in Iranian political circle while his biggest backer is a fanatical cleric called Mesbah Yazdi. Really, this is all that matters because elections in the Islamic Republic have very little credibility and last June's Presidential election just further proved that.

[zraver]

No im afraid it is you that is mistaken. Iranian society and the political-leanings of the people are not so easily lumped into non-descript categories like "rural poor", "urban middle-class", "college kids" and so on. Iran is a huge country with a lot of diversity where pro-government and anti-government feelings find their place among every walk and class in society. And contrary to popular belief among non-Iranians Ahmadinejad is not a legitimate 'populist' and his support-bas is certainly not something that is grounded solely in the working-classes or the 'rural poor'. His constituency is among the Basij and some of the hard-liners in Iranian political circle while his biggest backer is a fanatical cleric called Mesbah Yazdi. Really, this is all that matters because elections in the Islamic Republic have very little credibility and last June's Presidential election just further proved that.

I was going by which way general group classifications vote. Most reformers are among the educated urbanites not the rural populations.

[Kermanshahi]

The Iraqi government was recognized as sovereign by the UN.

It all depends if you value the UN's judgement, I don't.

Nice propaganda line, but Iranian help comes with puppet strings. Iraqis are not stupid, that is why the openly pro-Iran party got its butt handed to it during provincial elections.

Wait until the parliamentary elections come, all Shi'a parties have gone into a coalition together and Dawa has been kicked out, they stand no chance at all.

Your right, so what they attack Israel, its not a terror group making the attack, it is the people of Palestine. When one government attacks another its called war.

Well it is war.

It was a nuclear site, and while you might not be impressed, I am sure your generals feel different. But the difference between them and you is their ability to see the details. When an entire nations communications grid goes dark and not 1 SAM fires as the return flights passes over Damascus you'd better believe your generals took notice.

The Syrian's hadn't recieved any of their important SAMs yet during that time. Also the Zionists came via Turkish airspace, the border there was only protected by AA guns, these guns fired but didn't have the range. The site which Israel bombed, was no reactor, it was not protected at all.

Not really, people can only vote for approved candidates, non-shia cannot hold high office, the incumbants can openly use state resources for re-election inclusing police asets to attack the opposistion.

Still, despite the fact that you can only vote for approved candidates, religion and ethnicity doesn't make someone's vote worth 2x or 3x more than someone else's, like in Lebanon.

Funny I thought the US standing for Iran vs the USSR/UK, and allowing the Shah to build a military bigger and better than any of his neighbors but the USSR were both historical events.

Yes, well, Iran is almost a completely Shi'a state, you could have hardly put a Sunni in charge there. And by the time the Americans got involved there was already a Shi'a king.
But in other states such as Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Afghanistan, ect. you always supported Sunnis over the Shi'a and never showed slightest interests in the vast human rights violations commited by the Sunni dictators against their Shi'a citizens.

How is blowing up a Jewish ticket counter in Argentina fighting back?

Iran had no responsibility for this.

Actually about 98% are Sunni, but Shia are not blameless.

Even if you wrongly want to blame that attack in Argentina on Hezbollah, it wouldn't account for 2%.
Besides, these kind of attacks on civilians are against Shi'a religion. The Wahabis however (Bin Laden's group) see it as their responsibility as good Muslims to kill all Shi'a, Christians, Jews and other "infidels" (including all Sunnis which don't think like them).

Iran is the one making it worse. It is making armaments it does not need to threaten a country it doe snot border. Its breaking international law as regards nuclear technology and engaging in brinkmanship.

There is no proof that Iran has done anything so far, in their nuclear program which is not within their international right to do.

The IR had already corrupted the system and seized power after collapsing the populist government.

Yes but their power then was very unstable, they were very unpopulair.

I was going by which way general group classifications vote. Most reformers are among the educated urbanites not the rural populations.

Well I voted for Ahmadinejad and I go against all steriotypes of Ahmadinejad supporters. Not religious, not old, not poor, not from a rural area.

[Dreadnought]

They are powerless, Americans call the shots in Iraq and until they leave and leave Iraq to the Iraqis it will be occupation. Ofcourse the US always finds loopholes to make that they are officialy not occupiers but assisting a gov't or on a "peace mission", but in reality they are occcupying powers.

Iran has been helping Iraqis against their opressors for decades, first the Ba'athists and now the Americans and will continue to do so until our brothers are free.



Hamas stood in the Palestinian elections and won it. They are the legitimate government.



Israel didn't take out a reactor. They went through Turkey and bombed some abandoned camel shed on the other side of the border, than some Zio-fanboys ridiculously claimed it was a reactor. It was merely an attempt by Israel to flex their muscles, show Syria what they can do. Iran isn't impressed at all and in our case the Turks won't cooperate.



There is a 1-man 1-vote system in Iran. Unlike in Lebanon were the seats are unfairly divided per religious groups and the Muslims (65%) get only 45% of the seats while the Christians (30%) get 50% of the seats. And among the Muslims, although there are atleast 2x as many Shi'a as Sunni Muslims the seats are divided half-half. In Iran the MPs are elected per how many votes they get and the vote of some people isn't worth 3x the vote of other people because of their religion. Iran, there are however several religious groups who are far to smal to get a seat in parliament and thus there are 5 seats reserved for them.



Well, not exactly. The people of Iran are generally secular and nationalistic. But do not confuse anti-regime with pro-Western. Most Iranians would want a government with similar foreign policies to this one, but different internal politics.



The Americans and their allies have been supporting the Sunnis against the Shi'a throughout history. Whether in Saudi Arabia, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Iraq, in Bahrain, in Lebanon, in Yemen, Shi'a have been opressed for centuries by Sunnis. Since the revolution Iran has been helping Shi'a to fight back, Americans call it "terrorism".
However it are the Sunnis who they actually need to be fighting. All terror attacks in non-Muslim countries, by Muslims, were by Sunnis. In Iraq and Afghanistan it are mainly the Sunnis who are fighting America and 100% of the suicide bombings in both countries were by Sunnis.
Iran has been supporting Shi'a militia in Iraq against Saddam and in Afghanistan against the Taliban for years. At the time they were all called terrorists by America, funded by evil Iran against legitimate governments. After America's split up with some of these goverments (such as Iraq) they are forced to cooperate with the Shi'a against the countries Sunnis and now they suddenly aren't terrorists anymore.



American efforts to dominate Iran in the last 50-60 years have all been counterproductive. The situation can never become as good anymore as it would have been if Mossadeq had stayed in power, but it can be saved to some extend. Problem is that America is still making matters worse on themselfes.



True, and infact the Islamic regime would have collapsed by end 1980 to mid 1981, it was the time were they were the weakest and other factions were strongest while Iran was least stable. Instead of letting this happen the Americans pushed Saddam to invade Iran, to overthrow the regime with force, this enabled the regime to put all of Iran behind it and crush any other factions. Specially those which alligned themselfes with Saddam such as the MKO (an organisation which used to enjoy large public support) lost all their sympathy among Iranian people and their members are hated nation wide.



Well not exactly all of them hate the regime. But the majority are definetly unhappy about their policies. Those who demand a complete regime change are not in majority in Iran, however a vast majority of the population would want some serious changes in the regimes internal policies. More political freedom, more social and religious freedom and some federalism is what most Iranians would want rather than how the government is ruling now.
Only the very religious Shi'as, support this regime, about 15% of the population or so.

Personally I would have much preferred a Mossadeq government. Pitty the Americans thought he'd be to good for Iran and had to so desperatly destroy Iran democracy to get in power a puppet who ruined the country and America more powerfull.:(

*Utter nonsense. You should be writing fiction (in other words crap and lies for Iran as if enough dont come from it already)

It all depends if you value the UN's judgement, I don't.

We know, You only trust your own. And no doubt it distorts and exagerates truth and ignores plain facts backed by sound reasoning and hard fracts. Perhaps they should hide their nuclear program in your head because as it seems it is thicker then any concrete bunker, earth wall etc known to man.

[mikado]

*Utter nonsense. You should be writing fiction (in other words crap and lies for Iran as if enough dont come from it already)

What an unhelpful contribution. If you disagree with Kermanshahi then counter his points.