Turmoil in Iran. Your thoughts?

GuilewasNK

GuilewasNK

CAGiversary!
Feedback
110 (100%)
I don't see a topic for this so here it is.

I think the most amazing thing about the situation in Iran is the ability for technology like Twitter, Youtube and cellphones to get the story out despite the media blackout. It is amazing. Google is even starting to translate Farsi.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/06/19/iran.internet.google/index.html

I also read about Neda today. Really moving stuff.

I have no idea where this turmoil will lead, but I think the fact people are outright defying the Ayatollah is telling.
 
I've been following it as closely as I can. Guardian has a pretty descent live blog that is updated throughout the day with info. Still, its pretty hard finding out credible information. There were reports that EU embassy's were providing first aid to protesters on Sat. night. Still don't know if its true.


I really doubt the protesters will succeed but, I think it shows that the situation in Iran will eventually change as the majority younger generation eventually takes control of the country.
 
[quote name='homeland']I really doubt the protesters will succeed[/QUOTE]
elaborate? if you honestly believe that i'd love to hear why. i couldn't disagree more and i haven't heard anyone who has been 'following this closely' express that sentiment. i'm confident they will succeed and, in many ways, they already have.

Religious leaders are considering an alternative to the supreme leader structure after at least 13 people were killed in the latest unrest to shake Tehran and family members of Ayatollah Rafsanjani were arrested amid calls by former President Mohammad Khatami for the release of all protesters.

Iran's religious clerks in Qom and members of the Assembly of Experts, headed by former President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, are mulling the formation of an alternative collective leadership to replace that of the supreme leader, sources in Qom told Al Arabiya on condition of anonymity.

The influential Rafsanjani, 57, heads two very powerful groups. The most important one is the Assembly of Experts, made up of senior clerics who can elect and dismiss the supreme leader. The second is the Expediency Council, a body that arbitrates disputes between parliament and the unelected Guardian Council, which can block legislation.

Members of the assembly are reportedly considering forming a collective ruling body and scrapping the model of Ayatollah Khomeini as a way out of the civil crisis that has engulfed Tehran in a series of protests,

The discussions have taken place in a series of secret meetings convened in the holy city of Qom and included Jawad al-Shahristani, the supreme representative of Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who is the foremost Shiite leader in Iraq.
Click to expand...
 
Something I'm slightly curious about , is since the Ayatollah keeps saying that he shall stay in power because he still has the majority support of the country on his side , does he really believe that , or is he just saying that to make himself look good/save face?

Because if he really does believe that , then the current situation in the country should wake him up to the fact that "no , your people don't like you , get the fuck out of here".

If on the other hand he doesn't really believe that and is just saying that to save face , then I wish that he would just tell it like it is. I'm in power , I like being in power , and I'm not giving it up to anyone else so screw you.

Unrealistic I know.:lol:
 
I'd like to know one thing. Why did Mousavi claim victory before the ballots were counted? Then, when the ballots were counted, he says it was rigged. Plus there is no real evidence of vote fraud. It may be possible Ahmadinajhad really did win.

Iran: Mousavi claims victory in presidential vote

Published: 06.12.09, 22:17 / Israel News
Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi convened a press conference Friday night and claimed he has won the presidential race, despite the fact that the votes had yet to be tallied.
The official results are not expected until Saturday. (AFP)
Click to expand...
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3730457,00.html
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']I'd like to know one thing. Why did Mousavi claim victory before the ballots were counted? Then, when the ballots were counted, he says it was rigged. Plus there is no real evidence of vote fraud. It may be possible Ahmadinajhad really did win.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3730457,00.html[/QUOTE]

Cause he probably assumed that if it was a fair election , that most people would have voted for him? I don't know , that's the first I've heard of him claiming victory before the votes were counted.
 
I don't think a politician declaring they won as the polls close is indicative of much of anything but good old fashioned politicking.
 
[quote name='speedracer']I don't think a politician declaring they won as the polls close is indicative of much of anything but good old fashioned politicking.[/QUOTE]

See, he just seems to much like a kid who didn't get something he wanted, to me right now. Example: Kid wants a Wii for Christmas, and thinks he is going to get one. He tells everyone at school that he's getting one for Christmas, but then on Christmas he gets some clothes instead, while his cousin gets a Wii. The kid gets mad, and says it isn't fair, the presents got mixed up, and he should have gotten the Wii. There isn't any evidence right now that the vote was rigged, although from the numbers, it likely was.
 
this isn't about mousavi dude.. mousavi isn't some politician.. he's already martyred himself for the cause.. you know nothing, stfu, "like a kid who didn't get what he wanted", you disgust me man, just stfu

and for the record, three of the four candidates contested the results (guess who didnt), not just mousavi.. everyone knows its a sham
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']there is no real evidence of vote fraud.[/QUOTE]
you could've just said "i don't know anything" and saved everyone some time. couldn't be further from the truth..

these are the two funniest pieces of evidence:

"Statistics provided by Mohsen Rezaei in which he claims more than 100% of those eligible have cast their ballot in 170 cities are not accurate -- the incident has happened in only 50 cities," Kadkhodaei said.
Click to expand...
http://www.presstv.com/detail/98711.htm?sectionid=351020101
"only 50 cities" is LOLable

excel spreadsheets released by iranian government didn't even add up (invalid + valid != total):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw5qJa4NJ-8

this is without even touching the unfunny stuff, like mousavi losing his home turf, uniform results across rural & urban, abnormally low turnout in some areas and over 100% in others (and overall turnout inconsistent with reform elections).. it's ridiculously obvious. it's the most transparent election fraud i've ever heard of.

edit: before you respond, cure your ignorance http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=iran+vote+fraud
 
[quote name='Koggit']elaborate? if you honestly believe that i'd love to hear why. i couldn't disagree more and i haven't heard anyone who has been 'following this closely' express that sentiment. i'm confident they will succeed and, in many ways, they already have.[/QUOTE]


I'm sure on some level, no matter the turn out they have succeeded. My thoughts that they won't succeed are baseless. Its rather frustating not knowing what is going on. First, I haven't seen solid numbers on the size of protesters each day. Are they growing? Are they becoming more organized? Which leads me to my Second reasoning, this seems to be like a leaderless protest. Musavi has turned into a symbol, not a leader of the protests. Lastly, the Iranian gov't has used force to breakup protests before (1999), so they could do it again.

I wish I knew more of the political landscape of Iran and how wide spread the protests are. I've heard they are protesting just as much in other cities but, that was some Iranian-American and I really don't trust ex-pats (see American-Iraqi dissident groups pre-war)

If they do succeed it'll be interesting to see what Iran will turn into. Considering the protesters were originally asking for a revote, not an upheavel of the political system. Would they just replace The supreme leader with a moderate one?


Also since information is sparse, where is everyone getting their info from? News sites? Twitter feeds?
 
[quote name='Koggit']this isn't about mousavi dude.. mousavi isn't some politician.. he's already martyred himself for the cause.. you know nothing, stfu, "like a kid who didn't get what he wanted", you disgust me man, just stfu

and for the record, three of the four candidates contested the results (guess who didnt), not just mousavi.. everyone knows its a sham

you could've just said "i don't know anything" and saved everyone some time. couldn't be further from the truth..

these are the two funniest pieces of evidence:


http://www.presstv.com/detail/98711.htm?sectionid=351020101
"only 50 cities" is LOLable

excel spreadsheets released by iranian government didn't even add up (invalid + valid != total):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw5qJa4NJ-8

this is without even touching the unfunny stuff, like mousavi losing his home turf, uniform results across rural & urban, abnormally low turnout in some areas and over 100% in others (and overall turnout inconsistent with reform elections).. it's ridiculously obvious. it's the most transparent election fraud i've ever heard of.

edit: before you respond, cure your ignorance http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=iran+vote+fraud[/QUOTE]

Oh, so now he's a martyr. Seriously? Even if Mousavi became president, he wouldn't change much, as he doesn't have the power to, and any canidate that would bring major change would not be allowed on the ballot by the Guardian Council. Which brings the question, why rig the election, when you could just stop someone from running?
 
fullmetal, i'm done with you. if you don't know anything, don't say anything. thanks.

[quote name='homeland']I'm sure on some level, no matter the turn out they have succeeded. My thoughts that they won't succeed are baseless. Its rather frustating not knowing what is going on. First, I haven't seen solid numbers on the size of protesters each day. Are they growing? Are they becoming more organized? Which leads me to my Second reasoning, this seems to be like a leaderless protest. Musavi has turned into a symbol, not a leader of the protests. Lastly, the Iranian gov't has used force to breakup protests before (1999), so they could do it again.

I wish I knew more of the political landscape of Iran and how wide spread the protests are. I've heard they are protesting just as much in other cities but, that was some Iranian-American and I really don't trust ex-pats (see American-Iraqi dissident groups pre-war)

If they do succeed it'll be interesting to see what Iran will turn into. Considering the protesters were originally asking for a revote, not an upheavel of the political system. Would they just replace The supreme leader with a moderate one?


Also since information is sparse, where is everyone getting their info from? News sites? Twitter feeds?[/QUOTE]
organization is primarily through posters, they need nothing more and need no leader, Mousavi has been nothing but a symbol since Khomeini's prayer on Friday (which is when this escalated beyond a sham election and into the push for the removal of a dictator), protests have continued and it has pressured other leaders (leaders with the power to remove Khomeini, http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/06/21/76567.html) to publicly state their support of the people, condemning Khomeini's oppression, it is now pretty much impossible for Khomeini to stomp this out, i really cannot imagine any scenario in which he remains in power
 
[quote name='Koggit']fullmetal, i'm done with you. if you don't know anything, don't say anything. thanks.


organization is primarily through posters, they need nothing more and need no leader, Mousavi has been nothing but a symbol since Khomeini's prayer on Friday (which is when this escalated beyond a sham election and into the push for the removal of a dictator), protests have continued and it has pressured other leaders (leaders with the power to remove Khomeini, http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/06/21/76567.html) to publicly state their support of the people, condemning Khomeini's oppression, it is now pretty much impossible for Khomeini to stomp this out, i really cannot imagine any scenario in which he remains in power[/QUOTE]
Answer my question, instead of running away.
Which brings the question, why rig the election, when you could just stop someone from running?
Click to expand...
While there are irregularities in the vote totals, it just seems so weird that they would rig the election, instead of kicking Mousavi off the ballot.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Answer my question, instead of running away. While there are irregularities in the vote totals, it just seems so weird that they would rig the election, instead of kicking Mousavi off the ballot.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Koggit']fullmetal, i'm done with you. if you don't know anything, don't say anything. thanks.[/QUOTE]

i ranted for 3 paragraphs about how little you understood, but erased it, this will suffice (more cordially than you deserve): if you seriously wanted to know, you'd frame your question differently.

that's it.

until you show some semblance of understanding of the events or a true desire to objectively understand them, i will not respond to any of your posts in this thread. end.
 
One of the more interesting parts of all this is how poorly they rigged the election. They made it so fucking obvious. You would think that they would try to be as discreet as possible about it. Ahmadinejad obviously keeps idiots as company and that may well be the straw that broke the camel's back.
 
I am excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran and obviously, after my post here on CAG, I tried to send a clear message that we think there’s a possibility of change and, ultimately, the election is for the Iranians to decide but just as what has been true in America, what can be true in Iran as well, is that you’re seeing people looking at new possibilities, and whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact that there’s been a robust debate hopefully will help advance our ability to engage them in new ways.
 
I am excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran and obviously, after the posts that I've made here on CAG, I've tried to send a clear message that I think there’s a possibility of change and, ultimately, the election is for the Iranians to decide but just as what has been true in America, what can be true in Iran as well, is that you’re seeing people looking at new possibilities, and whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact that there’s been a robust debate hopefully will help advance our ability to engage them in new ways.
 
I just hope we don't have one group of tyrants replaced by another. I feel like Ahmadinejad wanted this to go really poorly so he could seize ultimate authority instead of just a figurehead post.
 
Various news outlets are reporting that vote audits in a number of cities exceed the number of eligible voters by 3 million.

So that's 3 million more votes than available - if the turnout rate is 100%.

Yikes.
 
I think the consensus is that the EU and USA will not be going into Iran and will continue to only condemn violence in the protests. While this is the least confrontational and will limit Iran's ability to place too much blame/corruption on us, I would like for us to go in there on the grounds of human rights, allow new voting, and discretely dismantle their nuclear program - but that's a dream. My prediction is that more protests, arrests, and deaths/injuries will occur for at least another week until another election is planned for sometime in early Q4 of this yr.
 
[quote name='tivo']I think the consensus is that the EU and USA will not be going into Iran and will continue to only condemn violence in the protests. While this is the least confrontational and will limit Iran's ability to place too much blame/corruption on us, I would like for us to go in there on the grounds of human rights, allow new voting, and discretely dismantle their nuclear program - but that's a dream. My prediction is that more protests, arrests, and deaths/injuries will occur for at least another week until another election is planned for sometime in early Q4 of this yr.[/QUOTE]

Please no - haven't we learned from the last two countries we went into that we're not able to do this?
 
[quote name='tivo']I think the consensus is that the EU and USA will not be going into Iran and will continue to only condemn violence in the protests. While this is the least confrontational and will limit Iran's ability to place too much blame/corruption on us, I would like for us to go in there on the grounds of human rights, allow new voting, and discretely dismantle their nuclear program - but that's a dream. My prediction is that more protests, arrests, and deaths/injuries will occur for at least another week until another election is planned for sometime in early Q4 of this yr.[/QUOTE]
Oh, yeah. Go invade Iran. Then, we can put in another Shah, and see the human rights violations skyrocket! Yeah, go team America!
 
Fresh Air on NPR had an EXCELLENT interview with a guy from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (if I recall the name right). Highly recommended.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']Fresh Air on NPR had an EXCELLENT interview with a guy from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (if I recall the name right). Highly recommended.[/QUOTE]

What did he talk about?
 
Are you being sarcastic, myke? I would've figured you for the kind of person who listened to NPR every morning and was legit proud of it (not to mention the bumper sticker(s) I imagine you have).

[quote name='fullmetalfan720']What did he talk about?[/QUOTE]

I only caught the tail end of it, but he was talking about the relationship between Rafsjani (DEFINITELY spelled that wrong) and the Khameni families, what he thought would happen should the protest movement fail, etc.
 
I have a few roller derby bumper stickers.

And I listen to NPR like a motherfucker. Of course I'm being sarcastic. It's some of the finest broadcast programming imaginable.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I have a few roller derby bumper stickers.

And I listen to NPR like a motherfucker. Of course I'm being sarcastic. It's some of the finest broadcast programming imaginable.[/QUOTE]


Your the sucker who buys the 2 dozen roses with a box of chocolates for $200 that they sell during their valentines day donation drive, aren't you?



This Iran situation is too confusing. No one knows wtf is going to happen. One minute I hear they are voting to over throw the supreme leader, now I hear Mousavi is under house arrest and the head of the Rev. Guard is being arrested for not moving on the protesters. I'm starting to realize we won't know shit until it happens. Its not the protesters that are going to make a change its the behind the scenes politicing.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I have a few roller derby bumper stickers.

And I listen to NPR like a motherfucker. Of course I'm being sarcastic. It's some of the finest broadcast programming imaginable.[/QUOTE]

See, Myke - we can agree on several things. Faithful NPR listener and member of two stations (one east of me, one south of me). If I'm in the car, it's either NPR, Neal Boortz or the radio is off. :)
 
I don't see a topic for this so here it is.
signature_Sign.jpg
:)
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Oh, yeah. Go invade Iran. Then, we can put in another Shah, and see the human rights violations skyrocket! Yeah, go team America![/QUOTE]

not invade... "help" and "repair wounds" is what I would call it. replace the nuclear power/bomb factories with wind turbines or solar power plants (even though they're sitting on 200 000+ GWh/yr). And then allow diplomatic voting. Afterwards we'll just leave.

Either that or 1 night of tactical air strikes. All in all, the lunatics in power over there think its their sovereign right to have a nuclear bomb and will not stop working for it. We (the EU, USA, Israel) have to keep them in check.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Not that I think Iran having a nuclear bomb is a good thing, but......what gives any nation a sovereign right to own one?[/QUOTE]

Oh, you're just asking questions because you have no argument!

Anyway, I have to agree with the point that depascal is making - why is it perfectly okay for the US to have nuclear weapons, but not okay for Iran to have them?

And before you answer that - think - what is the only country in the history of the world to use atomic weaponry in warfare?
 
Dude. You just bombed my statement and then asked the same fucking question.

I already made my point with the last post on page 1 of this thread. I think Ahmadinejad is secretly screwing up these elections so bad that the people will overthrow the mullahs and allow him to become supreme leader instead of just some figurehead puppet.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Not that I think Iran having a nuclear bomb is a good thing, but......what gives any nation a sovereign right to own one?[/QUOTE]

exactly, its not a right. Its just that Iran, being the crazy people they are, treat it as one. They know that Israel, (their mortal enemy, scapegoat to all problems, and inferior nation) has an atomic bomb and they do not. As a result, they will forever attempt to reclaim their former glory and stand as a superpower in the world by creating nuclear bombs - at which point, Israel/USA will be their immediate target. Hell, they still think they're a superpower.


I think everyone here is in agreement-- Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. Maybe our difference is in the diplomatic vs. military approach to prevent such nuclear proliferation. I was just saying that now would be a good time to push back their program another 5 years, but then you and UncleBob decide to tag-team some underdeveloped question.
 
The turmoil going on right now isn't about nuclear bombs though. The Iranian people probably don't give a damn about them one way or the other. What they do want is to live in a true democracy or at least one like ours.

Iran doesn't want to become a superpower again. They want payback for the chemical weapons Saddam used on them. For decades, we've kept nuclear weapons like some sort of trump card and given them to our friends. It's lead to a dangerous instability throughout the world. It became an issue where countries either bowed to our will or bowed to the Russian's. If you did neither, you were stuck in the Thirld World which was economic death for many many countries. The attempt to get nuclear weapons is about the respect that comes along with them. The same respect we used like a billy club to keep countries in check.
 
I'm really shocked by how bad the violence was yesterday, it's disheartening, I didn't think the Basij would go so far.. my understanding was that the Rev. Guard vehemently opposed violence against the protestors, and that they & Khamenei are in joint control of the Basij.. so it seems like it must be Khamenei who ordered the bloodshed.. in which case, I really hope Rafsanjani is taking the proper against Khamenei right now.. I don't understand why they're meeting in secret, you would think publicizing any support/condemnation would help quell at least one side.. demoralizing either side would certainly help prevent the more brazen acts.
 
[quote name='tivo']not invade... "help" and "repair wounds" is what I would call it. replace the nuclear power/bomb factories with wind turbines or solar power plants (even though they're sitting on 200 000+ GWh/yr). And then allow diplomatic voting. Afterwards we'll just leave.

Either that or 1 night of tactical air strikes. All in all, the lunatics in power over there think its their sovereign right to have a nuclear bomb and will not stop working for it. We (the EU, USA, Israel) have to keep them in check.[/QUOTE]
Yeah! Go Anglo-American World Empire! If we don't like you we're going to fuck you up! We can do to Iran the same we did to Iraq. Who cares if a couple million die? Spread democracy all over the world!
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdH_wbEOdF0
What's that flag? Why its the flag Iran had during the time when the Shah ruled. Huh. Why's that there?

Also, Iran's interior minister says the CIA is involved in Iran.
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's interior minister on Wednesday accused U.S. spy agency the CIA of helping to fund "rioters," stepping up accusations of Western involvement in street unrest following the country's disputed election.
"Britain, America and the Zionist regime (Israel) were behind the recent unrest in Tehran," Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli was quoted as saying by the semi-official Fars News Agency.
"Many of the rioters were in contact with America, CIA and the MKO and are being fed by their financial resources," he said. The MKO (Mujahideen Khalq Organization) is an exiled Iranian opposition group.
Click to expand...
http://www.reuters.com/article/gc08/idUSTRE55N27920090624
 
One part of me is inspired by the demonstrators, and hurting for their losses.

But let's not forget that there definitely is more to this. I think it was on the Financial Times that I recently read an article on this that caused me to rethink. Who are the ones protesting, videotaping, and putting it on the internet? I don't think it's the poor farmer majority that's this loud, rather the new middle class. Is there a chance that the election was actually won fairly?

Then again I know too little to judge, just trying to avoid crowdthinking...
 
[quote name='homeland']
I really doubt the protesters will succeed but, I think it shows that the situation in Iran will eventually change as the majority younger generation eventually takes control of the country.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's my main take on it as well. The violence and oppression is awful, but it does show tha tthe country is ripe for change.

Something like 75% of the population is under 30.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdH_wbEOdF0
What's that flag? Why its the flag Iran had during the time when the Shah ruled. Huh. Why's that there?

Also, Iran's interior minister says the CIA is involved in Iran.

http://www.reuters.com/article/gc08/idUSTRE55N27920090624[/QUOTE]

It should come as no surprise to ANYONE that CIA is involved with sabotaging regimes against the United States.

I had a really nice link before from NYTimes.com's archives from 1999. It was a telegraph reporting that the CIA had donated x amount of millions to help Dalai Lama in his struggle to separate Tibet from China. A Google search will give you some mentions, but the real source I was looking for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top