Iran Election June 09

[VietPhuong]

They want to keep people at home so fine, stay at home. Don't give them more excuse to kill people. Stop making protest, make strike. Don't go to work. Leave the factories, oil fields, public offices and universities for those barbarians Basij and Revolution Guard to do the job. Without educated people, let's see how they survive.

[Oscar]

Here's a tip for you sparky, I'm not Israeli and holocaust denial is pretty damn touchy for me. I don't care who the audience is or why. When the person doing it has the title 'President' and hosts a conference of likeminded cretins I assume a) he means it; and b) he is not qualified to stand for the local school board.

Try to stay on topic Oscar, pulling in SA or Pakistan is yet another muddying exercise.

That the Iranians elected a cretin is not exactly breaking news. But I don't consider his stupidity as a threat to world peace.

Nice to finally have you on board, sort of. You are right, we do differ. I don't believe Iran can be free under a system where power ultimately rests in the hands of a few clerics. Still, given that you believe that the system as it stands is a democracy I have no doubt that you do.

If you are so eager to dig you should look where I said that Iran was a free and open democracy. Democracies can be totalitarian, Germany comes to mind, a people wilfully voting for a governement that will dramatically curtail freedoms.

There can be populist democracies like Venezuela where Chavez persecutes its opponents, suppress dissents and still stays popular among the majority of its, generally poor, constituents and gets re elected.

Democracy is a process, its neutral.

Then, you have liberal democracy where you enjoy the different freedoms, plus the power to elect your governement . Singapore is not a democracy but one could say Singaporeans enjoy more freedom than the average Venezuelian. Freedom and democracy are not one and the same thing. Well at least I tried to explain that to you.

Your strike rate on Iran sucks Oscar, and all the muddying & tapdancing in the world won't change that. You are right, the sneering doesn't prove my point, simple observation of events is doing just fine.

Boohoo Bigfella this is an opinion board you may radically not agree but unless you prove me that you're specialised in Iranian history this is still a discusion between amateurs, and your opinion sucks. See? I can say it too :)

[ArmAnt]

I believe the election was not rigged, and was fair i support Amadinejad because he will stand up to the Americans and keep the country pure.

[BadKharma]

Oscar I am really surprised, what exactly do you consider a threat to world peace? A country that is striving for nuclear weapons that has leaders that deny the holocaust happened makes for a very dangerous situation. It is not a matter of stupidity it is more online with psychosis. The reason that MAD worked during the Cold War was because the leaders understood just how terrible a nuclear exchange would be. Do you honestly believe that any leader of a country that denies the mass execution of a group of people would have any qualms exterminating part of the worlds population?

[Dreadnought]

The US will be blamed if it does, and damned if doesn't. Don't worry about that: just NEVER apologize for your values, and you'll be alright.

By the way, I'm myself a kind of weird neocon I guess, but I disagree with all the neocons and hawks who are asking Obama a stronger stance at this moment. I don't think he is doing bad. And also, President Obama is green but he is not a bad guy, he is a good guy. So don't be harsh on him, give him a break.

IMO, I agree as well that the President should press Iran to give her people what they were already born with but seem to be denied when the power vacuum gets turned on and the theocracy is in decline. I would hope that he would press Iran much harder then what he is at present but only time will tell.

[Bigfella]

That the Iranians elected a cretin is not exactly breaking news. But I don't consider his stupidity as a threat to world peace.



If you are so eager to dig you should look where I said that Iran was a free and open democracy. Democracies can be totalitarian, Germany comes to mind, a people wilfully voting for a governement that will dramatically curtail freedoms.

There can be populist democracies like Venezuela where Chavez persecutes its opponents, suppress dissents and still stays popular among the majority of its, generally poor, constituents and gets re elected.

Democracy is a process, its neutral.

Then, you have liberal democracy where you enjoy the different freedoms, plus the power to elect your governement . Singapore is not a democracy but one could say Singaporeans enjoy more freedom than the average Venezuelian. Freedom and democracy are not one and the same thing. Well at least I tried to explain that to you.



Boohoo Bigfella this is an opinion board you may radically not agree but unless you prove me that you're specialised in Iranian history this is still a discusion between amateurs, and your opinion sucks. See? I can say it too :)

Congratulations on sucking all the meaning out of the term 'democracy' Oscar. At least I now understand why you throw it around so freely.

Oh, and congratulations on yet more red herrings - where did I say A-jad was a threat to world peace? Try at least one post where you simply stick to the issue at hand, it will be a nice change.

[Bigfella]

Oscar I am really surprised, what exactly do you consider a threat to world peace? A country that is striving for nuclear weapons that has leaders that deny the holocaust happened makes for a very dangerous situation. It is not a matter of stupidity it is more online with psychosis. The reason that MAD worked during the Cold War was because the leaders understood just how terrible a nuclear exchange would be. Do you honestly believe that any leader of a country that denies the mass execution of a group of people would have any qualms exterminating part of the worlds population?

BadKharma,

Much as it pains me, I have to agree with Oscar. A-jad is nasty, loudmouthed, deeply offensive & an embarrasment, but don't get sucked into the whole "he's going to nuke Israel" schtick. It is BS. Even if he did control nukes (in itself unlikely) I can't see any evidence he'll use them. He & the others who run Iran have a clear idea of what will happen if they nuke Israel - they all die. End of story. End of Iran. I can't think of a single nation in history that has undertaken an action knowing it will end in its destruction (lots of them should have known, but that is different).

Out of interest, take a look at the region & take a look at the nations that actually have a track record of attacking their neighbours over the past 30 years. Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan & Syria all have form, while Israel is a serial offender. Iran certainly supports terrorists, but that is something of a regional cottage industry (Afghanistan Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, the US, Saudi Arabia, probably Jordan & definately Israel have all done this within recent memory). It doesn't have a record of directly attacking or invading its neighbours.

A-jad is a threat to other Iranians. He is something of a threat to regional stability (though not the largest). He is not a threat to world peace.

[Bigfella]

IMO, I agree as well that the President should press Iran to give her people what they were already born with but seem to be denied when the power vacuum gets turned on and the theocracy is in decline. I would hope that he would press Iran much harder then what he is at present but only time will tell.

Dread,

What can he realistically do that will actually achieve this end? How does he press iran in a way that achieves this?

Believe it or not, there is a fair bit of underlying dislike for US meddling, even among those Iranians who want more freedom. They have long memories & not especially fond ones of US involvement in their nation. Overt US support for their cause is going to do more harm than good. Obama is doing a good job by sticking to support for principle & the rule of law. As long as the US is hands off the rhetoric of Khamenei & A-jad looks hollow. Get directly involved & it becomes real - poof goes a big chunk of support for the protests.

[Dreadnought]

Yeah, They are as finicky as Iraqi's but its as well and good.

We knew the elections would be a sham, and pretty stupidly they telegraphed it to the world in their own way in which they think the West is stupid enough to buy their reasonings and excuses. A-jad and the Assahola are evil men with evil means at their disposal. (They began arresting supporting clerics families becuase they were going to support the other fellow) They are weakened as leadership and it will be surprising if any civilized nation takes their word as truth. The cloak is lifted and the truth exposed for what it is.

Dictatorship supported by extremeist theocracy but perhaps maybe one day the Iranian people will get their share or democracy and fair elections and maybe even perhaps some rights that the rest of the civilized world enjoys. Until then A-jad and the assahola can look forward to more sanctions and confrontation while having to check over their shoulder on the Iranian people they really pissed off.

Enjoy running that country into the ground A-jad, we will be waiting.

[Pluto]

Hi all,

Joining a bit late in this long yet interesting thread. Here's my take...

Do you believe the vote was rigged, and if so, by enough to change the outcome?

To the first part, well votes are rigged all over the world, be it the US or Pakistan or Iran. So yes the votes would have been rigged in this election as well.

The question is that would the rigging have affected the outcome allowing Ahmadinejad a victory, the answer can be a yes or no.

I'll explain the "no" first. While the West perceives Ahmadinejad as a threat, for many in the Muslim world he epitomises the sole resistance to the "West". There are very few Muslim countries that will stand up against the western states. So he does have support in his Iran (no matter how much we might like to believe otherwise) and in other countries.

Do you believe that the protests will develop into something more, such as regime change or reform of the Iranian system?

Given the current block on the flow of information (television, radio, internet), it is unlikely. The protesters have to find a way to organise themselves and come out on the streets and do so even though they are being threatened with "bloodshed" by the state itself. It's a test of resilience here.

The protesters also have to promote "their" cause. Why are they fighting for a regime change: the average Iranian – who is not university educated, does not use internet, does not know what Twitter – has to be told of the reasons for the cause and its effect. Merely stating that the US is unhappy with the current regime will not be enough to change allegiances.

Thirdly, Iran saw a popular revolution in 1979 and this is a continuation of the policies of the then instated regime. Regime change — probably yes. Reforming the Iranian system — probably not.

Do you have any stories to share about what it taking place inside Iran today?
Not as yet. Though I do have an Iranian friend and he was the one who explained that while his family has migrated to Pakistan because his father could not stand the religious conservatism and state monopoly post-1979, his uncles and aunts did not agree and have stayed in Iran since.

Will get back with a better response later.

[Dreadnought]

Pluto, There is no doubt they were rigged it not even a question, the numbers dont even come close to matching the population in the voting areas.

A-jad, the Assahola and their minions were busy arresting supporting clerics familes that were supporting A-jads rival.

Millions of hand written votes were counted with 2-1/2 hours when modern technology cannot even do that here in the same time frame electronically. So what does that tell you?

Voting offices were closed down as people were still lining up to vote.

*It was the poorest excuse of an election the world has ever seen. Just goes to show you that Iran as long as ruled by Assahola and A-jad and the minions will never change no matter how much you reach an open hand in their direction they will always remain a closed fist. We should stop wasting our time and let Israel finish this game once and for all with the worlds support and continue to choke them via sanctions and the U.N. not recognize them until they can prove that can hold fair elections.

[axeman]

Oscar I am really surprised, what exactly do you consider a threat to world peace? A country that is striving for nuclear weapons that has leaders that deny the holocaust happened makes for a very dangerous situation. It is not a matter of stupidity it is more online with psychosis. The reason that MAD worked during the Cold War was because the leaders understood just how terrible a nuclear exchange would be. Do you honestly believe that any leader of a country that denies the mass execution of a group of people would have any qualms exterminating part of the worlds population?

If Iran (note - Iran, not Ahmedinejad) does get nuclear weapons, it won't be to destroy Israel and themselves in the process. It would, in all probability be used as a deterrence against over-aggressive action. Would it create some unrest in the Middle East ? Sure.
Tell me though, why is it that you have a problem with Iran having nuclear weapons, but not Pakistan ? Or China ?

We knew the elections would be a sham, and pretty stupidly they telegraphed it to the world in their own way in which they think the West is stupid enough to buy their reasonings and excuses.

It doesn't look like they care very much about what the West has to say about them. And more importantly, why should it ?

[Dreadnought]

Tell me though, why is it that you have a problem with Iran having nuclear weapons, but not Pakistan ? Or China ?

*Because Pakistans nukes are somewhat controlled by the Chinese and neither of the two pose a radical religious type threat that Iran does.

[Dreadnought]

It doesn't look like they care very much about what the West has to say about them. And more importantly, why should it ?

*I think at this point nobody cares as to the Iranian government, The people after being bent over probably harbor some serious feelings towards the government at this point and made clear the point that Iran is nothing more then a dictatorship controlled by religious theocracy. In other words radical and untrustworthy. Not the people, the government so this also plays bad for their offshhots such as Hezbollah and Hamas and a few others.

*Its not just the West, and it will pay dividends long into the future everytime A-jad opens his mouth. The world knows what will come out of it and blow it off and Iran will remain in isolation from the outside world. It wont get nuclear weapons though. The world is trying to coax her away from this but in the end and if it comes to it I doubt sanctions will be the road that is chosen to bring the matter to end. Syria learned this lesson not long ago and unveiled who she was dealing with reactor wise.

[Merlin]

I thought it would be in their interest to have the President inauguration early, not July 26 to Aug 19.

Iran's Guardian Council readies timetable for Ahmadinejad inauguration amid protests

23 June [NYDaily] Iran's top election authority on Tuesday ruled out major voting fraud in the disputed presidential election and said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be sworn in for a second term between July 26 and August 19. ....