Voting Underway in Iran

[Hot Mega]

Pretty interesting to see the possibility of Ahmadinejad being ousted by his countrymen instead our countrymen intervening, expending indeterminable amounts of lives and money to do so.

Oddly enough some conservatives are concerned their boogyman Ahmadinejad might get voted out.

Obama's speech was perfectly timed and his triangulation in squeezing Islamic extremists is masterful IMO.

His one dimensional critics have missed the big picture in all of their shrill fill-in-the-blank mongering.

What they miss is Obama is seizing the opportunity to help moderates and reformers drown out the extremists in Lebanon and Iran by his actions and his increased pressure on Pakistan to confront the Taliban and AQ.

Obama made clear that he wouldn't tolerate bombing whole blocks or villages of innocent people (as these circumstances hurt our cause with moderates) to get one or two terror suspects. That's why as unfortunate as it was that Gen. McKiernan was replaced shortly after that bombing incident in Iran. Gates didn't say so but that was the reality.

We've just deployed appx. 7k of our great and brave Marines in the south of Afghanistan and with the increased assaults on the Taliban and AQ in Pakistan it shouldn't be long now that were actually going after the people who want to kill us instead of trying to fashion Iraq in our image.

"This is where the fight is, in Afghanistan," 1st Sgt. Christopher Watson, who like many here has also served in Iraq, said Monday. "We are here to get the job done."

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/national_world&id=6853636

Obama has symbolically announced the closing of GTMO, gotten Pakistan to confront the Taliban and AQ where they are, deployed much needed troops against AQ and Taliban forces in Afghanistan, replaced a General as soon as it was confirmed we bombed a village of people instead of going in and getting the targets, spoke directly to the Muslim people in Cairo as he promised...likely directly affecting the political revolutions in Lebanon and potentially in Iran and showed the world how to deal with pirates while bringing the Capt. of the vessel home safely...coincidentialy interdiction of these pirate clans has been on the rise since.

And but for these to airhead bimbos taking it upon themselves to invade North Korea, Obama was seemingly ready to line Kimmy's little ass up in the cross hairs too.

I must say, Obama has done as good a job in foreign policy in 5 months as I have ever heard of. The guy has been a virtuoso so far...and I haven't even discussed what he's done to bring Europe back into the fold for us.:2 cents:

He's doing all this without making a big huh-bub about it.

 

[Hot Mega]

Pretty interesting to see the possibility of Ahmadinejad being ousted by his countrymen instead our countrymen intervening, expending indeterminable amounts of lives and money to do so.

Oddly enough some conservatives are concerned their boogyman Ahmadinejad might get voted out.

Obama's speech was perfectly timed and his triangulation in squeezing Islamic extremists is masterful IMO.

His one dimensional critics have missed the big picture in all of their shrill fill-in-the-blank mongering.

What they miss is Obama is seizing the opportunity to help moderates and reformers drown out the extremists in Lebanon and Iran by his actions and his increased pressure on Pakistan to confront the Taliban and AQ.

Obama made clear that he wouldn't tolerate bombing whole blocks or villages of innocent people (as these circumstances hurt our cause with moderates) to get one or two terror suspects. That's why as unfortunate as it was that Gen. McKiernan was replaced shortly after that bombing incident in Iran. Gates didn't say so but that was the reality.

We've just deployed appx. 7k of our great and brave Marines in the south of Afghanistan and with the increased assaults on the Taliban and AQ in Pakistan it shouldn't be long now that were actually going after the people who want to kill us instead of trying to fashion Iraq in our image.



http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/national_world&id=6853636

Obama has symbolically announced the closing of GTMO, gotten Pakistan to confront the Taliban and AQ where they are, deployed much needed troops against AQ and Taliban forces in Afghanistan, replaced a General as soon as it was confirmed we bombed a village of people instead of going in and getting the targets, spoke directly to the Muslim people in Cairo as he promised...likely directly affecting the political revolutions in Lebanon and potentially in Iran and showed the world how to deal with pirates while bringing the Capt. of the vessel home safely...coincidentialy interdiction of these pirate clans has been on the rise since.

And but for these to airhead bimbos taking it upon themselves to invade North Korea, Obama was seemingly ready to line Kimmy's little ass up in the cross hairs too.

I must say, Obama has done as good a job in foreign policy in 5 months as I have ever heard of. The guy has been a virtuoso so far...and I haven't even discussed what he's done to bring Europe back into the fold for us.:2 cents:

He's doing all this without making a big huh-bub about it.

"bombing incident in Iran." HUH??? I meant Afghanistan.

 

[Baill Inneraora]

Damn, you beat me to it on this thread.

So, two weeks ago everyone thought that the election was a forgone conclusion then President Obama gives a speech reaching out to Muslim moderates. Now it’s neck and neck in Iran. If Ahmadinejad loses, the Iranian nuclear weapons policy will eventually be disbanded. (With out going to war)

So where are Stampede, Factious, and Philbert etc apologizing for their paranoid, lunatic rants about President Obama's foreign policy?

 

[Neutron66]

Regardless of who wins you know the other side will scream fraud.

I'd expect it to get very ugly.

 

[Hot Mega]

Damn, you beat me to it on this thread.

So, two weeks ago everyone thought that the election was a forgone conclusion then President Obama gives a speech reaching out to Muslim moderates. Now it’s neck and neck in Iran. If Ahmadinejad loses, the Iranian nuclear weapons policy will eventually be disbanded. (With out going to war)

So where are Stampede, Factious, and Philbert etc apologizing for their paranoid, lunatic rants about President Obama's foreign policy?

BEIRUT (Reuters) – A surprise victory in Lebanon by an anti-Syrian coalition against the Iranian-backed Hezbollah and its allies should be confirmed on Monday with the release of official results of the country's parliamentary election.

Officials from rival camps estimated the bloc won around 70 seats in the 128-member assembly in Sunday's vote. Interior Minister Ziad Baroud was set to announce the final results later in the day, officials said.

Supporters of the coalition celebrated into the early hours after voters renewed their majority in parliament four years after the "Cedar Revolution" that helped drive Syria's army out of Lebanon and wrest control of the government.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090608/wl_nm/us_lebanon_election_18

If Ahmadinejad lose, then Obama will have helped to accomplish more with words and a few strokes of a pen in 5 months than 8 years under Bush...

Certainly getting Lebanon on our side and helping to roll an extremist out in Iran after 30 years of hostilities towards the US and Isreal is a far greater accomplishment than knocking over two fairly defenseless regimes with the greatest military might on the planet IMO.

 

[sproing99]

The Iranian president is something of a figurehead (although the chosen person does indicate public sentiment). Real power lies with the imams and mullahs. While there may be changes in Iranian policy, sadly I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[Hot Mega]

The Iranian president is something of a figurehead (although the chosen person does indicate public sentiment). Real power lies with the imams and mullahs. While there may be changes in Iranian policy, sadly I wouldn't hold my breath.

True but at least there will be someone who speaks to the Mullahs more sensibly than Ahmadinejad and someone with whom serious discussions are possible IMO.

Crawling not walking yet.:2 cents:

 

[sproing99]

I was interested in the reports that in remote rural areas, Ahmadinejad is viewed almost as a prophet, people hope that he'll cure their children with his touch.

I realise this could just be propoganda (ours - how stupid are the Iranians; theirs - how great is Ahmadinejad) but it does mean that there's a limit to how rational elements of the electorate are.

 

[BlueBalls]

True but at least there will be someone who speaks to the Mullahs more sensibly than Ahmadinejad and someone with whom serious discussions are possible IMO.

Crawling not walking yet.:2 cents:

I dont think thats how it works. The President does not speak to the Mullahs, the Mullahs speak to the president and he in turn speaks on behalf of the Mullahs to the people.

Iran has had so called "reformers" before, the last president (Mohammad Khatami) was supposedly a moderate who was lambasted by the religious sections of the country and was ousted for the far more conservative Ahmadinejad in 05.

I really cannot see any change whatsoever in that country. Even if they elect a moderate candidate. They'll still live under sharia law and the clerics will be supreme leaders.

I was interested in the reports that in remote rural areas, Ahmadinejad is viewed almost as a prophet, people hope that he'll cure their children with his touch.

I realise this could just be propoganda (ours - how stupid are the Iranians; theirs - how great is Ahmadinejad) but it does mean that there's a limit to how rational elements of the electorate are.

Can you really expect anything different from people who are probably barred from proper education, who's lives are run by spirituality?

 

[sproing99]

Can you really expect anything different from people who are probably barred from proper education, who's lives are run by spirituality?

I could see them acting that way towards a Mullah, but a politician ?

I guess here in the UK, soapstars and footballers elicit a similarly bizarre reaction

 

[BlueBalls]

I could see them acting that way towards a Mullah, but a politician ?

Well, he is their public face :dunno:.

I guess here in the UK, soapstars and footballers elicit a similarly bizarre reaction

Probably more so, the way some pathetic fools follow, dress and act like Victoria Beckham for example (I could have chosen anyone), makes you wonder whether we are so different.

We might actually be worse because at least they have the choice of following these people like sheep, they arent so lucky in Iran.

 

[Hot Mega]

I dont think thats how it works. The President does not speak to the Mullahs, the Mullahs speak to the president and he in turn speaks on behalf of the Mullahs to the people.

It's a two way conversation and while the Supreme Leader has ultimate authority technically (and rubber stamps approval in so far as decisions don't contradict Sharia Law), they are largely not a decision making factor to policy changes the President has control over. The position hasn't been merely figurehead in quite a while.

The irony here is many around the world who are critics of America feel the same way about us...not matter who we elect our policies will largely be the same...Until a guy like Obama comes along and asks, what we have been doing is failing us for decades, why are we still doing them?

He says in effect, it's okay to openly talk about bombing a rival but somehow taboo to talk about talking to them???

The effect of change is only limited by our willingness to change.

 

[BlueBalls]

It's a two way conversation and while the Supreme Leader has ultimate authority technically (and rubber stamps approval in so far as decisions don't contradict Sharia Law), they are largely not a decision making factor to policy changes the President has control over. The position hasn't been merely figurehead in quite a while.

I believe the Ayatollah still take up the main position and overall control when it comes to maters of military and security, but yes I do believe you are correct.

The irony here is many around the world who are critics of America feel the same way about us...not matter who we elect our policies will largely be the same...Until a guy like Obama comes along and asks, what we have been doing is failing us for decades, why are we still doing them?

He says in effect, it's okay to openly talk about bombing a rival but somehow taboo to talk about talking to them???

The effect of change is only limited by our willingness to change.

Completely agree with that.

I've always felt diplomacy is the best way for nations to come to terms with one another. We've been through times when force and threats of force have been used, none of which have ever made the world any safer than it was before, in many examples actually worse than it was before. And in times such as these when, fundermentalism is on the rise and the threat of nuclear proliferation is on the lips of all of those nations who right now would be called "enemies" - who I believe are only carryout such action due to threats of violence, although there actions dont help them at all. Diplomatic relations are the only way forward because at the end of the day whats the difference in the end if two leaders sit down and have a conversation? If force is used in the end as a last resource then at least one nation will have tried its best to stop that from happening.

Which you cannot say is the case of the last couple administrations. . .

 

[Hot Mega]

If force is used in the end as a last resource then at least one nation will have tried its best to stop that from happening.

Which you cannot say is the case of the last couple administrations. . .

What I don't understand is this upside down logic which says it's embarrassing as a nation to talk to an enemy without preconditions (or with them for that matter) and end a discussion that doesn't produce the dialog you strive for but it's but it's not embarrassing to bomb a country back into the stone age, kill a bunch of innocent people, re-build it on the backs of your own taxpayer then realize they were no threat to begin with chicken little.

I don't know why one of these talking heads doesn't just simply make that case..

You can't talk with an enemy because it will be used as propaganda?? Uh, like the failures in the war with Iraq were??:dunno:

 

[BlueBalls]

What I don't understand is this upside down logic which says it's embarrassing as a nation to talk to an enemy without preconditions (or with them for that matter) and end a discussion that doesn't produce the dialog you strive for but it's but it's not embarrassing to bomb a country back into the stone age, kill a bunch of innocent people, re-build it on the backs of your own taxpayer then realize they were no threat to begin with chicken little.

I don't know why one of these talking heads doesn't just simply make that case..

You can't talk with an enemy because it will be used as propaganda.....uh, like the failures in the war with Iraq were??:dunno:

It's a male dominated world, testosterone is king.

I'm sure when you get down to it the use of force is the manly thing to do. We were all cave men once and although we like to think we have evolved to be persons of a higher intellegence of which we have indeed done, but that fundermental male characteristic is still within us, we have to fight to gain dominance to gain advantage over others.

Now talking thats far more a feminine trait which of course as powerful men we can neve stoop to that level. Which of course is ridiculous. But there are still people out there who have that mindset, and I doubt it'll change any time soon.

Plus it also brings in one hell of a lot of business.

 

[Hot Mega]

It's a male dominated world, testosterone is king.

I'm sure when you get down to it the use of force is the manly thing to do. We were all cave men once and although we like to think we have evolved to be persons of a higher intellegence of which we have indeed done, but that fundermental male characteristic is still within us, we have to fight to gain dominance to gain advantage over others.

Now talking thats far more a feminine trait which of course as powerful men we can neve stoop to that level. Which of course is ridiculous. But there are still people out there who have that mindset, and I doubt it'll change any time soon.

Plus it also brings in one hell of a lot of business.

I can understand that if it's me and some jackass I have to put in check..but when you're responsible to and for others you can't have the temperament of a schoolyard bully anymore. It's called maturity.

I agree with the money thing though.

 

[BlueBalls]

I can understand that if it's me and some jackass I have to put in check..but when you're responsible to and for others you can't have the temperament of a schoolyard bully anymore. It's called maturity.

I agree with the money thing though.

Maturity in politics ... thats an oxymoron isnt it? :1orglaugh

 

[busenbust]

Maybe after this...Women getting their Rights...next stop Dubai ???

 

[ajitpd]

Let me hijack this thread for a moment.

How many of you believe that Iran has some kind of democracy? And if you don't believe so then what is the reason and what is the right path to bring democracy to that country?

I am not very sympathetic to Iran's ambitions; however, I just don't like demonizing of Iran by the West. I simply cannot believe that Iran is that big a threat or any threat to world peace for that matter.

 

[Red Spyder]

If Ahmadinejad loses, the Iranian nuclear weapons policy will eventually be disbanded. (With out going to war)

Are you sure? Two big IF's there. Okay, let's make a bet, if I'm-on-a-jihad loses and Iran still goes nuclear, you and everyone who agrees with you will accept that you are all wrong and don't know what the heck you're talking about.

If he loses and the new guy pulls a South Africa and asks UN inspectors to go in and supervise the dismantling of their nuke program, I'll agree with everything you all say from then on.

When it comes to that election, like the movie Alien vs. Predator, whoever wins, we loose.