"Rice Seeks $75 Million to Support Iran's Democrats"

Zoglog

Zoglog

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aKwsWNjn4u2k&refer=us


Feb. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice today asked the U.S. Congress for an extra $75 million this year to support democracy in Iran amid an international standoff over the country's nuclear ambitions.

Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the money would pay for expanded radio broadcasting and new satellite television programming into the country, help for activists and fellowships for Iranian students.

``The United States will actively confront the policies of this Iranian regime, and at the same time we are going to work to support the aspirations of the Iranian people for freedom in their own country,'' Rice said.

The U.S. is trying to help Iranian democrats as it seeks to halt progress by Iran in the possible development of a nuclear weapon. Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has made increasingly hostile statements about the U.S. and allies including Israel.

The Bush administration already has budgeted $10 million in the current fiscal year to support Iranian dissidents and human rights activists.

Iranians intent on opening up the political system of the Islamic state were dealt a blow two years ago when more than 2,000 pro-democracy candidates were barred from running in parliamentary elections. The contests were subsequently won by supporters of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Ahmadinejad has deepened friction with the U.S. and European nations with his insistence on pursuing the nuclear program. United Nations inspectors say the Iranian government hasn't offered its full cooperation or eased concerns that the effort has a military rather than civilian end.

`Total Isolation'

``The regime's policies risk the total isolation of Iran, and the Iranian people shouldn't have to suffer for that,'' Rice said today as she discussed the democracy initiative.

Rice was testifying on Capitol Hill about President George W. Bush's $35.1 billion international affairs budget request for fiscal year 2007. The spending plan covers State Department operations, international peacekeeping and extensive foreign aid programs to combat HIV/AIDS and support postwar recovery in Sudan and elsewhere.

The secretary of state told the panel she plans to visit the Persian Gulf next week to talk about Iran. ``No one wants to see a Middle East that is dominated by an Iranian hegemony, particularly one that has acquired nuclear weapons technology,'' she said.

Security Council

The U.S. wants the UN Security Council to take up the issue of Iran's nuclear program next month, a move that could lead to eventual sanctions unless Iran ceases enriching uranium and resumes full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

``They have now crossed a point where they are in open defiance of the international community,'' Rice said of Iran's enrichment effort, which is a step needed to create a nuclear weapon.

That enrichment, which resumed yesterday, is focusing on research only, the head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization said. ``Currently, there is no plan to undertake enrichment at the industry level,'' Gholam-Reza Aqazadeh told state television, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency.

Russia has proposed to enrich uranium for Iran as a way out of the impasse, an idea that Iranian officials have said they would consider. ``We must do everything possible to put the issue back on the negotiating table,'' Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said today in Vienna.
Click to expand...

Anyone else feel disgusted?
 
Well, it's 8 times the size of the money allocated to the CAMRA act, yet .375% (that's correctly written, slightly larger than one third of one percent) of the $200 billion spent in Iraq thus far.

That it is essentially spending on commercials is interesting. Is it disgusting? Nah; $75 million for tv ads is fiscal conservatism from this gang.
 
When we are trying to make diplomacy with Iran work why are we trying to inflame the situation? I don't see what benefit they hope to gain. Iranians aren't going to have a revolt or even bloodless uprising. This seems more antagonistic than anything, and since we are trying to convince them to stop a particular action I don't see the benefit.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']$75 million for tv ads is fiscal conservatism from this gang.[/QUOTE]
Hell, Ted Stevens couldn't build a decent bridge for 50 people with only $75 million. :lol:
 
What would you have suggested during the Cold War?

Would it have been a bad idea to fund Radio Free Europe and Voice of America? Would it have been in the best interests of negotiating disarmament talks if the BBC World Service not broadcast in 70+ languages including Russian, Polish, Hungarian, Czech and German?

I'm just curious when you feel it's not in the best interest of people's cut off from opposing viewpoints from hearing them.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']What would you have suggested during the Cold War?

Would it have been a bad idea to fund Radio Free Europe and Voice of America? Would it have been in the best interests of negotiating disarmament talks if the BBC World Service not broadcast in 70+ languages including Russian, Polish, Hungarian, Czech and German?

I'm just curious when you feel it's not in the best interest of people's cut off from opposing viewpoints from hearing them.[/QUOTE]

Well they have much greater exposure to opposing views than those in the soviet union did. They have opposition papers, the internet etc. Sure there's restrictions, but they are lesser.

Though we are trying to convince, through diplomacy, Iran not to continue down the path it has started. They essentially are making the final decision here, and antagonizing them further makes it less likely diplomacy will work.

"We will hunt you everywhere, when you wake and when you sleep. We are a blood-drinking people and we know that there is no better blood than Jewish blood." -Idham Ahmed Majila member of the Religion of Peace
Click to expand...

Umm.... PAD..... I typed the name of the quoted person into google and got zero results. I just typed the first and last name, zero results. I typed in the quote, also zero results. You either made it up or just picked some random wacko and thought that was somehow relevant.


"[Homosexuals] want to come into churches and disrupt church services and throw blood all around and try to give people AIDS and spit in the face of ministers." Pat Robertson, "The 700 Club," January 18, 1995
Click to expand...


What exactly does that have to do with christians? I dunno.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']When we are trying to make diplomacy with Iran work why are we trying to inflame the situation? I don't see what benefit they hope to gain. Iranians aren't going to have a revolt or even bloodless uprising. This seems more antagonistic than anything, and since we are trying to convince them to stop a particular action I don't see the benefit.[/QUOTE]

So we should say oh well, you live in a totalitarian theocracy, we don't care if you're free or not? I guess that is the leftist viewpoint now. After all, who makes excuses for the likes of Castro and Chavez? And I'm sure you thought the people in Lebanon, Georgia and Ukraine, not to mention Eastern Europe, would never rise up and throw off the totalitarian yoke either.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Umm.... PAD..... I typed the name of the quoted person into google and got zero results. I just typed the first and last name, zero results. I typed in the quote, also zero results. You either made it up or just picked some random wacko and thought that was somehow relevant. [/QUOTE]

Jesus H. Christ. Do I have to do everything for you? You can't even manage to cut and paste a name or phrase for google results?

Here you go clueless.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']So we should say oh well, you live in a totalitarian theocracy, we don't care if you're free or not? I guess that is the leftist viewpoint now. After all, who makes excuses for the likes of Castro and Chavez? And I'm sure you thought the people in Lebanon, Georgia and Ukraine, not to mention Eastern Europe, would never rise up and throw off the totalitarian yoke either.[/QUOTE]

El, are you so naive to think that broadcasting radio programs such as these are going to help? It's not like Iranians have no access to western media anyway. The issue isn't simply getting them to understand us, there are significant and legitimate issues preventing that. Most know what the u.s. represents, but it's the actions that are at issue. The division is not as simply as communism/capitalism.

But, again, do you honestly think this will have any benefit? And, if you think as I do that this is wasted money, then wasting money to antagonize a regime, one that you're trying to get to respond positively to diplomatic pressure, is foolish. Especially when you really have no way to force them to agree other than through force, which we know isn't an option. Sanctions are one thing, this is just worthless.
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Jesus H. Christ. Do I have to do everything for you? You can't even manage to cut and paste a name or phrase for google results?

Here you go clueless.[/QUOTE]

Something must have been wrong with my connection or with google, as I didn't even type anything just copied and pasted.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Something must have been wrong with my connection or with google, as I didn't even type anything just copied and pasted.[/QUOTE]
I clicked on the link, and I got a page that says that I got no search results. I guess PAD is just using Jihoogle.
 
[quote name='kakomu']I clicked on the link, and I got a page that says that I got no search results. I guess PAD is just using Jihoogle.[/QUOTE]

Hmmm.. when I did a search on google after PAD posted that I found the info. Odd.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']El, are you so naive to think that broadcasting radio programs such as these are going to help? It's not like Iranians have no access to western media anyway. The issue isn't simply getting them to understand us, there are significant and legitimate issues preventing that. Most know what the u.s. represents, but it's the actions that are at issue. The division is not as simply as communism/capitalism.

But, again, do you honestly think this will have any benefit? And, if you think as I do that this is wasted money, then wasting money to antagonize a regime, one that you're trying to get to respond positively to diplomatic pressure, is foolish. Especially when you really have no way to force them to agree other than through force, which we know isn't an option. Sanctions are one thing, this is just worthless.[/QUOTE]

So your view is that the Iranian people hate everything the U.S. stands for so this won't do any good? I totally disagree. You may think the U.S. is evil and imperialistic and are totally taken with that kind of propaganda, but I am not.
 
I don't think their view is completely accurate, but the vast majority aren't going to take seriously a source such as this, especially when they know it comes from us. The success (or lack of) of Al Hurra supports my point, and it appears that this would be more blatant than that channel.

Some Middle East experts assert that the very assumption under which Alhurra was created -- that existing Arab news stations contribute to disdain for the United States -- is flawed. "The managers of Alhurra have stigmatized the competition and stereotyped it as being totally anti-American, and that's simply not true," said Rugh, the former ambassador.

Rather than compete in an already crowded field, Rugh said U.S. policymakers should appear more on al-Jazeera and other widely watched channels. More than 400 Voice of America staff members signed a petition sent to Congress in July charging that Alhurra and Sawa were draining VOA's budgets and not being held to the same editorial standards.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33564-2004Oct14_4.html

A survey of Arab TV news viewers suggests that Alhurra - the Arabic TV station set up by the US government as an alternative news outlet to Al Jazeera - has attracted only a very small audience......

The results included:

Q: When you watch the international news, which of the following networks' broadcasts do you watch most often?

A: Al Jazeera, 45%; MBC, 12%; LBC, 10%; Al-Arabiya, 9%; Abu Dhabi TV, 8%; Al Manar, 4%; Egyptian TV, 4%; Alhurra, 1%

Q: Which network is your second choice?

A: Al-Arabiya, 25%; Al Jazeera, 20%; Abu Dhabi TV, 11%; Egyptian TV, 10%; MBC, 7%: LBC, 6%; Al Manar, 5%; Alhurra, 5%.
Click to expand...
http://www.tvz.tv/newsfile/december/alhurra.htm

Prepare for a repeat, if even. More wasted money, one of the last things we need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top